New legislation may change the way the British Royal Family is funded, a proposal signalling the discontinuation of the Civil List in place since 1760. The Sovereign Grant Bill presented to Parliament on 30 June is designed to “make provision for the honour and dignity of the Crown and the Royal Family”, shifting financing from the almost “depleted” reserve of public funds to a system whereby funding is provided “in line with growth in the economy”.
The current system was introduced as George III surrendered his full income from the Crown Estate to the Government in return for a Civil List, the annual grant given to the Royal Family. This arrangement has been respected ever since as each new reign is met with a new Civil List to serve its duration. As inflation affected its value, a decision was made in 1972 to set a fixed amount of money for ten year periods in order to adapt to any changes in the economy. This method too became undesirable as the Civil List was overly generous at the beginning of the ten year period and “too meagre” at the end, mainly due to the difficulty in forecasting inflation.
This changed in 1990, when the annual Civil List was set at £7.9million, paying for the Queen’s entertaining of state visitors and Prince Charles’s personal toothpaste squeezer , as well as everything in between. Alongside the Civil List are two grants-in-aid. The Department of Transport annually funding Royal travels, such as the Duke of Kent’s £11,668 visit to Canada to Prince Charles and Camilla’s £17,248 trip from London to Crewe. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport then pays for maintenance costs of Royal residences.
Chancellor George Osborne described the current system as “very inflexible” and believes this new legislation will allow “proper accountability and value for money” for the tax payer.
The new system, beginning in 2013, would tie the Royal family to the aforementioned Crown Estate, a property portfolio worth £6.6billion, whereby 15% of its annual profits (an estimated £35 million) will go directly to the Monarch, with further clauses restricting excessive earnings.
The Crown Estate is rather difficult to understand in terms of ownership. It is listed as “the property of the Sovereign “in right of the Crown””, and was in direct ownership of the Monarchy before George III passed control to the Government. Since then the business has grown enormously, possessing “Almost all of the property in London’s Regent Street” and “almost all of the seabed within the 12 nautical miles limit” of British shores. In short, a limited amount of the Monarch’s rights over the Crown Estate will be handed back.
Alongside this proposal, changes will be made to the current arrangement by which the Duke of Cornwall receives revenue from the Duchy of Cornwall. The Duchy of Cornwall is an estate created in 1337 intended to provide the eldest son of the Monarch with in an income from its assets. This means, as things stand, that any daughter or younger son cannot be awarded the title. The Grant will correct this “anomaly”, ensuring the revenue from the Duchy will be received by the heir, regardless of whether they are the Duke of Cornwall. The proposal would also mean that the Royal Household’s business will be audited by the National Audit Office, unlike previous years where the areas open to scrutiny were limited.
Criticism of the potential changes has come from both sides of the political spectrum. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP, believes demanding value for money in the Monarchy “makes Her Majesty sound like she’s something to be bought off the shop shelf at Tesco”.
The group Republic, who aim to eventually abolish the Monarchy, have challenged every aspect of the proposals, attacking both the Windsor family’s claim to the Duchy of Cornwall and their right to benefit from the profits of the Crown Estate. A recent report published by the group, entitled ‘The ‘Value for Monarchy’ Myth’, has argued that the “Queen is not entitled to receive any monies” from the Crown Estate, while allowing such a move will likely lead to “greater expenditure with less accountability” within the Monarchy.
Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls has warned that the Bill will be scrutinised to ensure its measures were “robust”. The Bill will be debated at second reading on the 14 July, with George Osborne hoping it will receive “all-party support”.
