Princess Eugenie today married Jack Brooksbank, a “tequila
ambassador,” whatever that may be, in Windsor. The lavish wedding was replete
with carriage drawn by four white horses, and is estimated to have cost the
public purse around £2 million, in security, policing and road closure costs,
although it has probably cost UK tax payers a great deal more. Princess Eugenie
is the daughter of the Andrew and Sarah, the Duke and Duchess of York, and
ninth in line to the throne.
Eugenie, who is employed as a director at the London art
gallery Hauser & Wirth, does not receive any money from the sovereign
grant, which replaced the civil list, but is supported from her father’s
private income. But who pays what for Royal marriages is a somewhat murky area.
Campaign group Republic,
whose petition for no taxpayers money to be used has attracted almost £50,000
signatures, says that the cost to tax payers could well be considerably higher
than the £2 million official ‘estimate.’ The wedding appears to be of similar
scale as Harry and Meghan’s (Duke and Duchess of Cambridge) wedding earlier
this year, a wedding that they say cost taxpayers over £35 million, and was
officially estimated at £2 million. A spokesperson for the group added:
“Taxpayers deserve to know exactly how much money is being
spent and which of our public services are being diverted to make the wedding
possible. The government should make transparency the priority and publish a
report of all costs to taxpayers.”
Eugenie doesn’t receive any money directly from the ‘Sovereign
Grant’ but her father does, although I’ve been unable to find out how much
exactly he does get. It is likely that he also gets money from his mother too, the
Queen. Funding for the Sovereign Grant also comes from a percentage of the
profits of the Crown Estate revenue (initially set at 15%) and will be reviewed
every five years. Last year these profits totalled £304 million. This property
though was in some way plundered in the past from whoever owned the buildings and
land.
The Queen also generates income from her land and property
portfolio. These assets are known as the Duchy of Lancaster and are held in
trust for the sovereign. The Duchy is managed and run for the Queen and she
receives all the net profits – about £12.5 million a year at the last count.
This income is referred to as the Privy Purse. Again this land was plundered at
some stage in history by the Royals ancestors.
The Duchy of Lancaster is one of two royal duchies, the
other being the Duchy of Cornwall which provides income to the Prince of Wales.
The Prince of Wales is entitled to the annual net revenue surplus of the Duchy,
which was worth £20.8 million last year. Prince Charles also receives money
from the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy.
All of which leads to staggeringly
casual wasteful spending on the part of the Royals, Prince Andrew, for
example, squandered £14,692 on a round trip to see the golf at Muirfield. His
younger brother, Prince Edward, meanwhile, took a £46,198 charter flight to
Sofia, Bucharest and Ljubljana.
Although, Republic’s petition has attracted almost 50,000
signatures, which is pretty modest by on-line petition proportions, I noticed from television footage and reports, that there was only a sparse crowd that came out to watch proceedings,
despite free tickets being offered to the public.
Personally, I don’t know anyone who is remotely interested
in this wedding, of what is a fairly minor member of the Royal family. I’d bet
most people didn’t even know who Eugenie was, until this wedding story broke. I
do sense a growing ambivalence from the British public to the monarchy
generally these days, if not outright hostility.
Some have tried to compare the policing costs of this
wedding to that of public demonstrations, but organisers do provide their own
stewarding and protest is a fundamental part of our democracy. The Monarchy and
assorted hangers on are merely a reminder of our undemocratic constitution and
practices.
It doesn’t seem to me to be right, when the population at large are being asked to tighten their belts further after eight years of austerity, with benefits cut for the poorest in the country, leading to a rising number of suicides, that such largesse with public funds should be permitted, when it comes to royal weddings.
No comments:
Post a Comment