Courtiers the release !

[jeffgoldblum]

In preparation for the books release , and with permission from randompenguin , I thought it would be good to start this thread now !

I find it incredible that some seem to believe that the Royal Family don't have two pennies to rub together, and rely on 'our money'.

Family money in many cases comes from dubious sources (talking the aristocracy), but no-one suggests going through the historic account of the Duke of Westminster et al.

ajandjjmum · Today 16:59
I find it incredible that some seem to believe that the Royal Family don't have two pennies to rub together, and rely on 'our money'.
Family money in many cases comes from dubious sources (talking the aristocracy), but no-one suggests going through the historic account of the Duke of Westminster et al.

Was just about to say the same. No one (well, maybe some Revolutionaries) suggests we should go through every land-rich family's history to determine whether they should give it back to "us"

I find it incredible that some seem to believe that the Royal Family don't have two pennies to rub together, and rely on 'our money'

Nothing to stop them turning down the SG and paying their own way like any other aristo.

no-one suggests going through the historic account of the Duke of Westminster et al

Maybe because we're not paying for his security, luxury travel and knees-ups.

The Sovereign Grant is 25% of the funds they have generated from the running of the Crown Estate. The remaining 75% is handed over to 'us'.

no-one suggests going through the historic account of the Duke of Westminster et al
Maybe because we're not paying for his security, luxury travel and knees-ups.

Neither are we paying for the security, luxury travel and knees-ups of members of the Royal Family, except when they are working. There are very few members who have permanent security - and that is only because they are at risk from the job they do.

I'd suggest reading Norman Baker's book 'And What Do You Do?' in answer to those who suggest the royals work.

It's an engaging and eye-opening read although there are plenty who prefer their blinkers.

The problem with most books is they're written with the the authors prejudices (not sure that's the correct word) and so are often biased, unconsciously so or not. Norman Baker is a staunch republican so he's always going to see it from a certain angle.

The sovereign grant is 15% but has been temporarily uplifted to 25% to cover the repairs to Buckingham Palace. It'll revert to 15% when the repairs are finished.

The SG is also guaranteed never to reduce hence the taxpayer topping up the royal purse when income from the Crown Estate was hammered during the pandemic:

inews.co.uk/news/queen-to-receive-30m-bonus-from-public-purse-thanks-to-obscure-rule-barring-a-drop-in-royal-income-1714566

It'll be interesting to see if Charles voluntarily reduces the amount he receives as he implements his slimmed down monarchy.

The French presidency costs €100m. There will always be costs for a head of state.

The sovereign grant is 15% but has been temporarily uplifted to 25% to cover the repairs to Buckingham Palace. It'll revert to 15% when the repairs are finished

I've often wondered about this, Marsha, given that the Sovereign Grant can go up but never down. Admittedly the repair uplift's supposed to be a special, one-off case, but I'll be amazed if it isn't waved through into permanence - probably while major news offers a distraction and with some new "study" to prove what an amazing bargain it all is

Interesting about the 100 million for the French presidency too; I'm not aware how it's done there, but do you happen to know if that includes security?

Neither are we paying for the security, luxury travel and knees-ups of members of the Royal Family, except when they are working

This is something else that's true in theory but fritters a bit in reality, with a known history of some RF members tacking a very brief "engagement" onto a much longer prrivate visit in order to get the travel and security paid

Lets not forget the late Queen oversaw an attempt to dip into a poverty fund to pay for palace heating, and that with an example like this it's little wonder if others try their arm

Exactly, they need to pay staff out the SG too.

When they host state banquets, does that come out the SG or another pot? 🤔

they need to pay staff out the SG too

They already do, Dinoteeth; there's a handy guide to a lot of it here: www.insider.com/where-does-the-royal-family-get-money-2017-1

You'll notice that the three sources of the sovereign's wealth are the Sovereign Grant, the Duchies and private wealth, but what's usually missed is why the two Duchies (Cornwall and Lancaster) weren't handed over with the rest in return for the original Civil List
I believe the usual flannel is that they just weren't thought about because they were worth much less then, which seems a bit thin to put it mildly, but anyway the chances of remedying that now are probably nil

Exactly, they need to pay staff out the SG too

Less of them though since a number were informed they were out before the queen was cold.

It also seems staff numbers have been routinely culled and overtime (but not work) cut which does leave us to wonder where the savings go:

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-axes-number-long-serving-royal-5746118

Funny isn't it. People complain about the cost of the RF, and then when steps are taken to reduce the costs, well, they complain again!

Can't win!

When they host state banquets, does that come out the SG or another pot? 🤔

No, the SG covers all the costs of staffing, banquets, hosting foreign dignitaries, upkeep of the Royal palaces such as St James, etc. The money covers a lot. If we had no monarch, we'd still have to pay for all these things but we'd lose the soft power of having a king or queen known to the world. And let's face it, if I went to, say, Sweden, I'd much rather meet and chat with the King than with a grey suit I'd never heard of.

I've often wondered about this, Marsha, given that the Sovereign Grant can go up but never down. Admittedly the repair uplift's supposed to be a special, one-off case, but I'll be amazed if it isn't waved through into permanence

They haven't just uplifted the Sovereign Grant from 15% to 25%, though. It's actually awarded as two sums. It's something like 52m for royal duties and 35m for BP. They just give it as one sum on payment, but the reservicing of BP is a dedicated amount so it won't go on indefinitely.

Neither are we paying for the security, luxury travel and knees-ups of members of the Royal Family, except when they are working

Well....that's not true is it? Given we pay for Andrew's security to the tune of £3M a year and he doesn't work. And security for C&C, W&K and children is round the clock anywhere they choose to be at any time. And that includes holidays anywhere they decide to go in the world.

Up to 200 SAS trained officers are on permanent employment to protect key members of the RF.
We are not allowed to know how much this costs. It's all funded by the Treasury an thought to be up to £100million

You missed the second sentence when I wrote 'There are very few members who have permanent security - and that is only because they are at risk from the job they do.' I always try and tell the full truth, and not doctor the meaning by missing out half a paragraph!

HM paid for Andrew's security privately, and it will be interesting to see what happens in future. However, 'we' don't pay £3 million for it, unless the King decides that is the way forward - I doubt he will.

Interesting what you say about 200 trained SAS servicement on permanent standby for the RF. Where have you found this information from, as I know from a friend (cringey!) who works for the SAS that they are pretty busy at present, so am surprised that they can have 200 people twiddling their thumbs incase they're needed.

I'm not doctoring any meaning! Yes you carried on to say about permanent security for some as they are at risk with the job they do. They have security for who they are even when not at a job.

Of course we are paying for Andrew's security whether that's directly or indirectly, he's not paying for it himself is he...

The SAS I googled.

“It is thought “ and “ up to “ ………. so 200 personnel are not sitting twiddling their thumbs !?

Security is provided by the Specialist Operations branch of the Met Police.

Those officers train with SF. It's not 185 SAS personnel deployed to the Met.

Who said they are sat twiddling their thumbs? Not me.
On standby I imagine.

aj's friend will know more than me, I just provided a source when asked.

The cost of round the clock security is well protected from the public's eyes, that much I do know

Good. I don't want any of the royal family to be killed. Not even Andrew.

Well....that's not true is it? Given we pay for Andrew's security to the tune of £3M a year

How do you know what his security arrangements are or how much they cost?
I saw they were about £400,000. So 7.5 times less that you're saying.
I thought they never commented on security because that would be a security risk which would probably lead to higher security costs!

Presuming that Andrew has 2 full time security members with him 24/7 that’s 8 members of FT staff even rounding up for holidays/sick leave to 10 FT to cover those requirements - which is very generous.

how do they cost the 3m that a poster has claimed, surely that would mean 300,000 each per year ?

Various estimates up to and including £3m. Privileged information we are not party to.
Last I read he had 24 hour protection and 3 PPOs.

I don't want any of the royal family to be killed. Not even Andrew

No sane person does surely?