UK

7° London Hi 10°C / Lo 6°C

Queen to request £7m more from the Civil List

Royal expenditure increased to record £41.5m last year

By Robert Verkaik, Home Affairs Editor

The Queen is expected to ask the Government to double the income she receives from the Civil List after accounts published yesterday showed she was living millions of pounds beyond her means.

Figures released by Buckingham Palace revealed that royal expenditure rose to a record £41.5m during the last financial year, an increase of £1.5m.

To settle her bills the Queen has been forced to dip into the royal reserves which have been built up over the past 19 years. These are expected to run out by 2012 during the Queen's Diamond Jubilee year.

Palace aides have told ministers they need extra money to offset the cost of maintaining the Royal Estate of palaces and pay for increased fuel, food and staffing costs.

But the Government is refusing to increase the £15m it pays for the upkeep of the Queen's occupied palaces and is fending off demands for a large rise in the £7.9m Civil List which pays for the monarch's household. Ministers argue that, in the present economic climate, Whitehall budgets are already overstretched. Royal aides counter that Parliament has a constitutional duty to ensure the Queen is financially secure.

Yesterday's financial report showed that next year the Queen will need to find an additional £7m to balance her books, almost twice the value of the Civil List.

The financial crisis is made worse by a massive property maintenance backlog which the Palace said has now reached £40m, an increase of £8m, for work which has to be completed in the next 10 years. Some of the most pressing maintenance includes the £13m renewal of the lead and slate roofs at Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. A further £2.8m is needed for conservation work at the Victorian and Albert Mausoleum which has been placed on English Heritage's buildings at risk register. There is also urgent need for funds to pay for the removal of asbestos in some of the palaces.

The Palace says that the total £41.5m cost of the Queen amounts to 69p per taxpayer per year. But this does not take into account the bill for security provided by the police and the Army and ceremonial duties performed by the Armed Forces.

The amount spent on royal travel – which comes from the taxpayer through grants-in-aid payments – increased by £300,000 to £6.5m. The most expensive journeys were the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall's long-haul overseas tours, which were mentioned in Charles's annual review published last week. Yesterday's accounts revealed the actual figures, showing that the cost came to £1,310,669 including staff reconnaissance trips.

Their charter flights to the Far East cost £655,675, a train ride from Tokyo cost £2,596, their flights to South America came to £645,127 and the charter yachts cost £7,271. In addition, a staff reconnaissance ahead of the trip to the Far East cost £35,810 in flights, while the one to South America was £41,423.

A trip taken by the Queen's cousin to islands in the South Pacific cost the taxpayer nearly £150,000. The Duke of Gloucester – 19th in line to the throne – and his wife, the Duchess of Gloucester, flew to Tonga and the Solomon Islands in August last year. Their scheduled flights from London to New Zealand and back from Australia came to £35,413, while charter flights to the islands came to £114,000 – a total of £149,413.

The Gloucesters were attending the Coronation of King George Tupou V during the trip, undertaken at the request of the Foreign Office.

The accounts showed that £9.9m from the Civil List was spent on the rising cost of the salaries of the Queen's staff. Administration cost £1.5m, housekeeping and furnishings came in at £700,000, ceremonial functions totalled £400,000, £1.1m was spent on catering and hospitality and £300,000 was used for other unnamed costs. Garden parties cost £600,000 and the bill for food and the royal kitchens came to £500,000. Computers and IT systems cost £400,000 – double the figure for 2007 following the launch of a British monarchy website and new personnel, payroll and online recruitment systems.

A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said: "There are no formal discussions with the Government about the Civil List. Nothing has been agreed and agreement is not needed until December 2010. But we are always in communication with the relevant government departments." She added that discussions over an increase in the grant-in-aid payments for the maintenance of the Royal Palaces did not need to be settled until 2011.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Monarchy in the UK!
[info]ironspiderzero wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 06:20 am (UTC)
Just as a personal reflection, but I think it's long passed due that we scrapped the monarchy, or at least stopped paying out public money for this un-elected hierarchy (even worse than MPs). While we're at it, why not demolish the Lords and get rid of them as well!

As I said, just a thought.
Elect our Head of State
[info]neil639 wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 06:56 am (UTC)
It is a nonsense that we should keep in the lap of luxury a whole family just because one member of that family is an hereditary Head of State. These is nothing democratic about one very mediocre member of one family inheriting the job for life and then passing it to another, very mediocre, member of that family. It is a nonsense. Surely the British people are quite capable of choosing a Head of State, with a fixed term of office. It is an insult to the people of Britain to even suggest that we have democracy in this country. (House of Commons = 27 per cent of vote to form Government: House of Lords = totally unelected: Head of State = totally unelected - not very much democracy there).
Just the monarch
[info]richardjeff wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 07:53 am (UTC)
I am very tempted by a republic but not until we've reformed parliament enough to have confidence in our elected bodies. In the meantime we should only support the Queen and her immediate family, i.e. children and children's children. Everyone else "Royal" should fund themselves unless performing a specific task for the government, like attending an event to represent the Queen. Let's be a bit nice and let them keep the estates and investments they already have but from 2010 no more public money.
Brass neck
[info]brinksman wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 08:26 am (UTC)
She has to have the biggest brass neck going. What a cheek from this arrogant woman. Shouldn't she be giving money back, not taking?
www.millarcrime.com
More money a formal request by her Majesty!
[info]engchina wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 10:31 am (UTC)
Millions out of work,and she wants more!!!
The awful class system in Britain is a direct result of privilege,from which the Queen and her family continue to defend.
The French at the end of the 18th century seem to have had a good idea, when they charged the Bastille in Paris, and we all know what happened next!
I hope,as the British Monarchy falls further out of favor with its subjects,that we don't have to witness a similar event at Buckingham Palace.
The Windsors need to be accountable for their spending just like any family, and during this economic debacle, the Windsors should be "cutting back and economizing,"
As leading figure heads of this nation, the Windsor's should set a tone, or example during these harsh economic times.
(With worse to come if you believe today's headlines).
They the Windsor's should not be clamouring for a pay raise, and they the Windsor's should have to learn to live within their means.
After all, "Her Majesty's," minions are having to do just that.
Any pay raise request by the Winsors at this time should be refused.
So it goes!
Engchina.
High on the Hog
[info]leonore35 wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 11:50 am (UTC)
As on of the world's ricest women ( and Prince Charles is wealthy too) the Queen must learn to live within her means like the rest of us. She could sell off some of her ill gotten gains for start. Post of the royal wealth was won with the blood of ordinary English, Welsh and Scottish men, who were regularly rounded up to fight in battles that they had nothing to do with.
The taxpayer should not be paying out for the luxury weddings and trips overseas for her vast extended family.
Obviously cost cutting does not come into the Queen's vocabulary and as long as we the taxpayer keep handing her money it never will
High on the Hog II
[info]leonore35 wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 01:00 pm (UTC)
My apologies for the typos above
As one of the world's richest women ( and Prince Charles is very wealthy too) the Queen must learn to live within her means like the rest of us. She could sell off some of her ill gotten gains for start. Most of the royal wealth was won with the blood of ordinary English, Welsh and Scottish men, who were regularly rounded up by her ancestors to fight in battles with which they had nothing to do. More of it was stolen from the Imperial Colonies or slaved for by enslaved people.
The taxpayer should not be paying out for the luxury weddings, lavish life styles and trips overseas for her vast extended family.
Obviously cost cutting does not come into the Queen's vocabulary and as long as we the taxpayer keep obsequiously handing her money it never will.
HRH should look around at her fellow monarchs in EU and see how they live today, she might then get a little closer to understanding the lives of her subjects. I wonder how often she calls to seek their advice or asks them over for tea
Queen to request £7m more from the Civil List
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 01:47 pm (UTC)
AND who are these The TAX payers who pay the treasury in the end the politicians
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
Thq Queen is OK
[info]geo32 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:32 am (UTC)
The Queen should be allowed cash for her personal use but regarding the multitude of scroungers and hangers on who bleed her for all they can get rid of them and let them fend for themselves.

Charlie boy earns enough out of his vast estates (remember he collects thousands in subsidies from the EU) to pay for all his junkets abroad and live the life of Riley. He has hundreds of staff to pander his every whim that WE pay for. Let him pay them out of his own pocket. He would soon be issuing P45s out then.

Andy Pandy along with his other brother Steady Eddie are both a complete wastes of space and a drain on Mumsies resources. If Andy wants to go play golf I a sure there is a train or bus stop nearby, even a chauffer driven limo is far cheaper than a helicopter, so let him find his own way to his shindigs. By the way what do they both do all day?

Regarding all the magnificent homes scattered around the UK Why not turn them into 5* hotels and the profits they generate would help subsidise Queenie

I have always been a great admirer of Princess Anne she is the second best royal after her Ma
Recession
[info]brazierdv wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 10:36 am (UTC)

With the economy predicted to be going into a double dip recession - and with even more hardship for many people - now is not the time for the Queen to be putting additional demands on the taxpayers.
Queen's request for 7 miilion pounds
[info]tristao wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 11:42 am (UTC)
While thousands of ordinary folks are desperately trying to make ends meet here we have 'royals' living in the lap of luxury, at the cost to the tax-payer....how do these folks go to bed and sleep peacefully?
The royal household expenses
[info]maxim02 wrote:
Sunday, 5 July 2009 at 04:41 pm (UTC)
Quite a difficult and touchy subject.
May we just know how much does the Royal Household received in benefits from the European Union as subsidies for her vast properties devoted to agriculture ?
With my best regards.
Maximiliean

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date