Latest news with #SovereignGrant
West Australian
13 hours ago
- Politics
- West Australian
Royal Lodge standoff: Why Prince Andrew won't ‘downgrade' to Prince Harry, Meghan Markle's former cottage
Prince Andrew is reportedly embroiled in a long-running dispute over his future at Royal Lodge, the 30-room Windsor estate he has called home since 2004. According to UK media reports, King Charles has been encouraging his younger brother to vacate the property in favour of Frogmore Cottage — the former residence of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — as part of efforts to slim down royal expenses. The smaller home would be a significant downgrade from Prince Andrew's current residence, but the Duke of York has refused to budge. The 64-year-old royal holds a 75-year lease on Royal Lodge, signed in 2003, and is said to have spent more than £7.5 million (A$15.5 million) on renovations. He currently lives there with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson. However, a fresh disagreement has emerged over who is responsible for the estate's costly external repairs. While Prince Andrew is believed to have maintained the interior of the property, Daily Mail columnist Ephraim Hardcastle reports there is a 'rumbling dispute' about funding major upkeep on the mansion's exterior. Prince Andrew isn't the only royal to pour millions into maintaining and renovating royal residences. Reports suggest Prince Harry and Meghan were never reimbursed for the personal funds they spent on modernising the Grade-II listed property Frogmore was originally intended as a long-term base for the couple, but just months after completing major renovations in 2019, initially funded in part by a Sovereign Grant and later fully reimbursed by the Sussexes, they stepped back from royal duties and relocated to California. That includes everything from an eco-friendly boiler system delivering low-carbon heat and endless hot water to top-tier security features, now lost to the Crown Estate. The couple had previously reimbursed £2.4 million in public funds used for the initial renovations after facing public criticism. Prince Andrew, once a dashing naval officer who served in the military during the Falklands War with Argentina in the early 1980s, has now become a royal pariah over his friendship with the late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He was forced to step down from a roving UK trade ambassador role in 2011, before quitting all royal duties in 2019 and then being stripped of his military links and royal patronages in 2022 amid allegations of sexual misconduct, which he has always denied. British media have reported that King Charles had cut off his allowance and wanted to oust the duke from his Royal Lodge. Despite mounting pressure, Prince Andrew is expected to remain at Royal Lodge until at least 2028. Under the terms of his lease, he may be entitled to a partial rebate on expenses if asked to vacate the property after 25 years of occupancy.
Perth Now
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Perth Now
Prince Andrew in heated stand-off over $57m Royal Lodge
Prince Andrew is reportedly embroiled in a long-running dispute over his future at Royal Lodge, the 30-room Windsor estate he has called home since 2004. According to UK media reports, King Charles has been encouraging his younger brother to vacate the property in favour of Frogmore Cottage — the former residence of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — as part of efforts to slim down royal expenses. The smaller home would be a significant downgrade from Prince Andrew's current residence, but the Duke of York has refused to budge. The 64-year-old royal holds a 75-year lease on Royal Lodge, signed in 2003, and is said to have spent more than £7.5 million (A$15.5 million) on renovations. The Royal Lodge Credit: The Royal Lodge / He currently lives there with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson. However, a fresh disagreement has emerged over who is responsible for the estate's costly external repairs. While Prince Andrew is believed to have maintained the interior of the property, Daily Mail columnist Ephraim Hardcastle reports there is a 'rumbling dispute' about funding major upkeep on the mansion's exterior. Prince Andrew is in an ongoing dispute over Royal Lodge. Credit: AAP Prince Andrew isn't the only royal to pour millions into maintaining and renovating royal residences. Reports suggest Prince Harry and Meghan were never reimbursed for the personal funds they spent on modernising the Grade-II listed property Frogmore was originally intended as a long-term base for the couple, but just months after completing major renovations in 2019, initially funded in part by a Sovereign Grant and later fully reimbursed by the Sussexes, they stepped back from royal duties and relocated to California. That includes everything from an eco-friendly boiler system delivering low-carbon heat and endless hot water to top-tier security features, now lost to the Crown Estate. The couple had previously reimbursed £2.4 million in public funds used for the initial renovations after facing public criticism. Prince Andrew, once a dashing naval officer who served in the military during the Falklands War with Argentina in the early 1980s, has now become a royal pariah over his friendship with the late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He was forced to step down from a roving UK trade ambassador role in 2011, before quitting all royal duties in 2019 and then being stripped of his military links and royal patronages in 2022 amid allegations of sexual misconduct, which he has always denied. British media have reported that King Charles had cut off his allowance and wanted to oust the duke from his Royal Lodge. Despite mounting pressure, Prince Andrew is expected to remain at Royal Lodge until at least 2028. Under the terms of his lease, he may be entitled to a partial rebate on expenses if asked to vacate the property after 25 years of occupancy.
New York Post
14-05-2025
- Business
- New York Post
King Charles has banned two household items from Buckingham Palace
King Charles and Queen Camilla have strict rules regarding what is and isn't allowed in the royal palace. Cleaner Anne Simmons, who previously worked as a royal cleaner for over a decade, has shed light on how tightly the royals run their households. According to the cleaner, one item in particular has been included on the banned list for years; so-called disposable wet wipes. 'Despite being advertised as 'flushable', they don't break down in the system like toilet paper does,' Simmons told Plumbworld. It turns out they have been causing issues with the aging plumbing for years. King Charles III and Queen Camilla watch a flypast from the balcony of Buckingham Palace after the military procession to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day on May 5, 2025 in London, England. UK Press via Getty Images 'This led to repeated blockages and costly plumbing repairs. It became clear that they simply weren't worth the trouble.' 'Not only did this prevent plumbing issues, but it also saved money in the long term by reducing the need for frequent repairs,' Simmons explained. It turns out disposable wipes aren't the only household item Charles has banned from any of his royal homes. Scented candles are also banished due to the 'toxins' they release into the air. 'Many people don't realise that scented candles release toxins into the air,' Simmons shared previously. 'In a place like Buckingham Palace, where air quality is strictly controlled, they are completely off-limits.' Meanwhile, it comes after it emerged that the UK's royal family had received a staggeringly large raise despite the cost of living crisis impacting many around the world. 'Despite being advertised as 'flushable', they don't break down in the system like toilet paper does,' Simmons told Plumbworld. Adam Radosavljevic – From April, the amount they receive via the Sovereign Grant – funded by the UK's public purse – will jump by a whopping £45 million ($60 million USD), to £132 million ($180 million USD). 'This is public money, all of this money comes from the government, at a time when the government is not able to properly fund schools, hospitals police … It is scandalous,' CEO of Republic Graham Smith told Town & Country. 'Not only should it not be going up at all, it should be going down.' However, when the increase was first announced last year, Buckingham Palace officials made it clear that a huge chunk of that extra cash will be put towards the £369 million ($492 million USD) bill for long-planned, necessary Palace renovations. The exact amount that is being allocated from this year's Grant for the work has not been made public.
Yahoo
11-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Public funding for royals triples since 2012 because of Palace works
Public funding for the Royal Household has tripled in real terms since 2012, official figures show, with the rise driven largely by repairs and building work at Buckingham Palace. The Sovereign Grant, which provides taxpayer support for the monarchy, was introduced in 2012 at £31m per year. That has now risen to £132m, data from the House of Commons Library shows, and once inflation has been taken into account, that represents about a threefold increase. The grant rose 53% in April, from £86.3m to £132.1m. Royal aides say this was because of a Buckingham Palace building project and the grant will come down again, adding that the monarchy represents good value. Lord Turnbull, a crossbench peer and a former Cabinet Secretary, called the way the grant was calculated "complete and utter nonsense" but said that the budget isn't high compared with other presidential heads of state. The Sovereign Grant provides funding for the official duties of the monarchy. In the most recent figures, for 2023-24, the biggest items were property maintenance and staff payroll, with smaller amounts for travel and hospitality and housekeeping. The analysis by the House of Commons Library shows how much the Sovereign Grant has risen over time - using a measure that takes into account inflation, with comparisons using 2023-24 values as a benchmark. Using that measure, the Sovereign Grant in 2012-13 was worth £41.5m – which rose to almost £100m in 2018-19, to cover renovations in Buckingham Palace, and then rose in 2025-26 to being worth £129.3m, again for work on Buckingham Palace. A Bank of England inflation calculation also shows the grant's value having trebled since 2012, although Buckingham Palace uses a separate figure which is slightly below a threefold real-terms increase. Buckingham Palace says the current figures are higher because of a 10-year, £369m project to modernise facilities in the Palace, including cabling, plumbing, wiring and lifts. It's a project that the National Audit Office says has been well-run and delivers "good value for money". The Palace says it's misleading to compare this year's figures with earlier levels of grants. They say the big increase is due to the element of the grant that pays for Buckingham Palace building works, rather than the "core" grant for other running costs. "The Sovereign Grant remained virtually flat for five years from 2020, during a period of high inflation. The majority of the increase in this year's Sovereign Grant is to fund the Buckingham Palace Reservicing Programme, which is ensuring that the Palace, a national asset, is accessible and protected from fire and flood," said a Palace spokesperson. "A temporary increase in the grant across two years was approved to provide the remainder of the funding agreed in 2016 for this reservicing work. It has always been anticipated that the level of the Sovereign Grant will drop once the project is completed," said the spokesperson. This could mean taxpayer funding reducing after 2027. The sharp increase over the past decade has been during difficult years for public finances, including periods of austerity and tight controls over budgets. For example, a report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed that public spending on education in England went down by 11% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2023-24, although the IFS says that it is difficult to compare such big multi-billion budgets with changes in relatively smaller amounts such as the Sovereign Grant. Before the Sovereign Grant was introduced, state funding for the monarchy came through a mix of grants, government department spending and a "civil list" payment. Figures from the House of Commons Library, going back to 1995, show the pre-Sovereign Grant totals as lower than than they are today - for instance, using 2023-24 values, it was worth £67m in 2000 and £56m in 2005. What does King Charles do? King sends heartfelt message to fellow cancer patients The Sovereign Grant was introduced as a more "modern, transparent" way of bringing together royal funding, presented to MPs in 2011 as being likely to reduce the royal income. The grant is based on a percentage of the profits of the independent property and landowning business, the Crown Estate. The grant is not from the Crown Estate, it comes from the Treasury, but the Crown Estate is used as a benchmark. Sovereign Grant was initially set at 15% of Crown Estate profits, which rose to 25% to cover the cost of renovating Buckingham Palace. It's now being reduced to 12%. But because of increased profits for the Crown Estate from selling leases for offshore wind farms, the actual cash amount has risen sharply, because it's a percentage based on a much bigger total. The increase in the Sovereign Grant's value is blamed by former Lib Dem Home Office minister Norman Baker, a prominent critic of royal finances, on what he calls the "completely absurd" way it's calculated and "weak-kneed" governments that don't want to challenge it. "The Royal Family has been very efficient in persuading the public purse to keep coughing up more money," he says. "Buckingham Palace has been used again and again to justify the increases. "We're told public finances are tight, we can't afford a winter fuel allowance, but we can pay for an increase for the Royal Family. It's completely wrong." Lord Turnbull, a former Cabinet Secretary and Permanent Secretary at the Treasury in the 1990s and 2000s, is also critical of the way the grant is calculated. He says successive governments have used the Crown Estate calculation as a convenient way of avoiding debate and stopping a "lot of bolshy backbenchers moaning about the cost of the monarchy". He says it would be much better to have a straightforward grant to pay for the monarchy, which could be debated on its own merits. But he also says it's a "red herring" to focus on the headline increase in the Sovereign Grant, when that figure has been driven by work to preserve Buckingham Palace, rather than underlying running costs. He says that if you have a monarchy it has to be properly funded. "You either have one or you don't," says Lord Turnbull. Pauline Maclaran, a royal commentator from Royal Holloway, University of London, says the monarchy "generates a great deal of money and goodwill." This is often seen in terms of boosting tourism and promoting business links, but Prof Maclaran says increasingly it needs to recognise the impact of royal "soft power". US President Trump is a self-professed fan of King Charles and if those warm feelings helped with UK and US trade and tariff negotiations the benefits would hugely outweigh any annual costs of the monarchy, says Prof Maclaran. But the royals can't be immune to questions about finances, she says: "The public wants to know if they're of value." Royal expert Richard Palmer says this year's increase has "raised eyebrows". "Of course the head of state and those who support him need to be funded properly, but so do other parts of the state - the health service, schools, the military, for example," says Mr Palmer. Royal sources say there is transparency and funding is subject to the approval of Parliament. The Royal Trustees overseeing the grant are the prime minister, chancellor and the keeper of the privy purse, who looks after the monarch's finances. You can dig into the accounts and see from 2023-24 that the royals spent over £1m on helicopter flights, there was an electricity bill of £2.2m and that travel for the Duke of Kent over three days to attend regimental events in Scotland cost more than £23,000. There are also details of what the monarchy provides in a year – including hosting 400 events, inviting 105,000 guests to receptions, garden parties and official lunches. There were also 2,300 public engagements, supporting charities and good causes. There are national and international events, including state visits which help to promote UK trade. There's a constitutional role, such as the state opening of Parliament and regular meetings with the prime minister. Republic, a group campaigning for an elected head of state, have argued that other costs need to be included, such as security, which is not covered by the Sovereign Grant. They also want the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall to count as public funding, rather than private incomes for the King and Prince of Wales. A report from the group claims that the total cost of the monarchy is about £510m per year. Opinion polls suggest the monarchy remains popular, with a YouGov survey in February 2025 suggesting 55% viewed the monarchy positively compared with 36% who saw it negatively. But there is less certainty about funding. Another YouGov survey in December 2024 suggested strong public opposition to government money being spent on Buckingham Palace – by 56% to 29%. And there are divisions by age groups – with 74% of the over-65s thinking the royals are good value for money, compared with 44% of 25 to 49 year olds. Harry and Meghan call for stronger social media protections for children Princess Charlotte photo released to mark 10th birthday King and Queen to host VE Day tea party for war veterans Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can sign up here.
BBC News
11-05-2025
- Business
- BBC News
xxx
Public funding for the Royal Household has tripled in real terms since 2012, official figures show, with the rise driven largely by repairs and building work at Buckingham Sovereign Grant, which provides taxpayer support for the monarchy, was introduced in 2012 at £31m per year. That has now risen to £132m, data from the House of Commons Library shows, and once inflation has been taken into account, that represents about a threefold grant rose 53% in April, from £86.3m to £132.1m. Royal aides say this was because of a Buckingham Palace building project and the grant will come down again, adding that the monarchy represents good value. Lord Turnbull, a crossbench peer and a former Cabinet Secretary, called the way the grant was calculated "complete and utter nonsense" but said that the budget isn't high compared with other presidential heads of Sovereign Grant provides funding for the official duties of the monarchy. In the most recent figures, for 2023-24, the biggest items were property maintenance and staff payroll, with smaller amounts for travel and hospitality and analysis by the House of Commons Library shows how much the Sovereign Grant has risen over time - using a measure that takes into account inflation, with comparisons using 2023-24 values as a that measure, the Sovereign Grant in 2012-13 was worth £41.5m – which rose to almost £100m in 2018-19, to cover renovations in Buckingham Palace, and then rose in 2025-26 to being worth £129.3m, again for work on Buckingham Palace.A Bank of England inflation calculation also shows the grant's value having trebled since 2012, although Buckingham Palace uses a separate figure which is slightly below a threefold real-terms increase. Buckingham Palace says the current figures are higher because of a 10-year, £369m project to modernise facilities in the Palace, including cabling, plumbing, wiring and lifts. It's a project that the National Audit Office says has been well-run and delivers "good value for money".The Palace says it's misleading to compare this year's figures with earlier levels of grants. They say the big increase is due to the element of the grant that pays for Buckingham Palace building works, rather than the "core" grant for other running costs."The Sovereign Grant remained virtually flat for five years from 2020, during a period of high inflation. The majority of the increase in this year's Sovereign Grant is to fund the Buckingham Palace Reservicing Programme, which is ensuring that the Palace, a national asset, is accessible and protected from fire and flood," said a Palace spokesperson. "A temporary increase in the grant across two years was approved to provide the remainder of the funding agreed in 2016 for this reservicing work. It has always been anticipated that the level of the Sovereign Grant will drop once the project is completed," said the could mean taxpayer funding reducing after 2027. The sharp increase over the past decade has been during difficult years for public finances, including periods of austerity and tight controls over example, a report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed that public spending on education in England went down by 11% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2023-24, although the IFS says that it is difficult to compare such big multi-billion budgets with changes in relatively smaller amounts such as the Sovereign the Sovereign Grant was introduced, state funding for the monarchy came through a mix of grants, government department spending and a "civil list" from the House of Commons Library, going back to 1995, show the pre-Sovereign Grant totals as lower than than they are today - for instance, using 2023-24 values, it was worth £67m in 2000 and £56m in 2005. The Sovereign Grant was introduced as a more "modern, transparent" way of bringing together royal funding, presented to MPs in 2011 as being likely to reduce the royal grant is based on a percentage of the profits of the independent property and landowning business, the Crown Estate. The grant is not from the Crown Estate, it comes from the Treasury, but the Crown Estate is used as a Grant was initially set at 15% of Crown Estate profits, which rose to 25% to cover the cost of renovating Buckingham now being reduced to 12%. But because of increased profits for the Crown Estate from selling leases for offshore wind farms, the actual cash amount has risen sharply, because it's a percentage based on a much bigger increase in the Sovereign Grant's value is blamed by former Lib Dem Home Office minister Norman Baker, a prominent critic of royal finances, on what he calls the "completely absurd" way it's calculated and "weak-kneed" governments that don't want to challenge it."The Royal Family has been very efficient in persuading the public purse to keep coughing up more money," he says."Buckingham Palace has been used again and again to justify the increases."We're told public finances are tight, we can't afford a winter fuel allowance, but we can pay for an increase for the Royal Family. It's completely wrong." Lord Turnbull, a former Cabinet Secretary and Permanent Secretary at the Treasury in the 1990s and 2000s, is also critical of the way the grant is calculated. He says successive governments have used the Crown Estate calculation as a convenient way of avoiding debate and stopping a "lot of bolshy backbenchers moaning about the cost of the monarchy".He says it would be much better to have a straightforward grant to pay for the monarchy, which could be debated on its own he also says it's a "red herring" to focus on the headline increase in the Sovereign Grant, when that figure has been driven by work to preserve Buckingham Palace, rather than underlying running costs. He says that if you have a monarchy it has to be properly funded. "You either have one or you don't," says Lord Maclaran, a royal commentator from Royal Holloway, University of London, says the monarchy "generates a great deal of money and goodwill."This is often seen in terms of boosting tourism and promoting business links, but Prof Maclaran says increasingly it needs to recognise the impact of royal "soft power".US President Trump is a self-professed fan of King Charles and if those warm feelings helped with UK and US trade and tariff negotiations the benefits would hugely outweigh any annual costs of the monarchy, says Prof Maclaran. But the royals can't be immune to questions about finances, she says: "The public wants to know if they're of value."Royal expert Richard Palmer says this year's increase has "raised eyebrows"."Of course the head of state and those who support him need to be funded properly, but so do other parts of the state - the health service, schools, the military, for example," says Mr sources say there is transparency and funding is subject to the approval of Parliament. The Royal Trustees overseeing the grant are the prime minister, chancellor and the keeper of the privy purse, who looks after the monarch's can dig into the accounts and see from 2023-24 that the royals spent over £1m on helicopter flights, there was an electricity bill of £2.2m and that travel for the Duke of Kent over three days to attend regimental events in Scotland cost more than £23, are also details of what the monarchy provides in a year – including hosting 400 events, inviting 105,000 guests to receptions, garden parties and official lunches. There were also 2,300 public engagements, supporting charities and good are national and international events, including state visits which help to promote UK trade. There's a constitutional role, such as the state opening of Parliament and regular meetings with the prime a group campaigning for an elected head of state, have argued that other costs need to be included, such as security, which is not covered by the Sovereign also want the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall to count as public funding, rather than private incomes for the King and Prince of Wales. A report from the group claims that the total cost of the monarchy is about £510m per polls suggest the monarchy remains popular, with a YouGov survey in February 2025 suggesting 55% viewed the monarchy positively compared with 36% who saw it there is less certainty about funding. Another YouGov survey in December 2024 suggested strong public opposition to government money being spent on Buckingham Palace – by 56% to 29%.And there are divisions by age groups – with 74% of the over-65s thinking the royals are good value for money, compared with 44% of 25 to 49 year olds. Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can sign up here.
