Londoners Magazine Penny pinching royals
By Kate Livesey • Jun 27th, 2008 • Category: NewsThe Queen will feel the tug at her sizable purse strings, as the Royal budget has been frozen.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, confirmed that the aid money for the maintenance of the palaces would remain at £15 million per annum for at least the next three years.
This isn’t the best news for the Royal family, as official accounts disclosed today that the cost of running the monarchy rose by 6.1 per cent last year to £40 million.
Essential repairs to Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle and other royal buildings will have to be delayed because the Queen can not raise the extra funding necessary.
The squeeze is proof positive the British economy is receding as quickly as Prince William’s hairline.
It has been said that the Queen has taken a personal interest in keeping costs down by enacting simple measures such as turning off lights at night.
The monarchy now costs each person in Britain the equivalent of 66p a year - up from 62p last year. Palace officials described the cost of the monarchy as less than the price of two pints of milk or a download for an MP3 player.
Kate Livesey is our premier brain on vodcasting. She's a tough talking New Yorker, with knee high boots and enormous sunglasses. She finds English men "intriguing".
Favourite place in London: The Great Court at the British Museum.
Email this author | All posts by Kate Livesey
I believe this report to be highly misleading. The Royals have always had a stipend which comes from the government. Consider it a salary. What should have been included in this report is how many hours a year the Royals put in at personal appearances, fundraisers. economic summits and with foundations to bring money and other benefits back to the nation. The amount of money raised by tourism associated with the fascination and reverence for the Royal Family and the history of England alone bring in multi-millions of pounds to Britain. This story is short sighted journaliism and typically what we can expect from the contemporary media. Unless the story has an edge that will insight fear, envy, jealousy, anger or any other number of negative responses, it doesn’t seem any news agency finds it worth reporting. The Queen has committed her entire life to the interests of her nation. Most of her family have done the same. Perhaps a little honest bookeeping should have been employed here. Add up how much their presence has brought into the British economy then subtract the yearly expenses and the number will show a far greater surplus than deficit to the nation.
Richard, I make several “personal appearances” to the toilet each day. It doesn’t mean I should get paid for them. And how is this report negative? It’s just noting that the Queen’s stipend has been frozen, and the toll this is taking on the Royal Family. The report even states that the Queen has reacted positively by saving electricity and that the Royal Family’s cost to taxpayers is relatively small. So what are you talking about? Is this just the paragraph you plonk on to the end of every Royal story you find?