Gosh , they don't look well.

[fedup33]

With the exection of Sophis in blue and B's husband, I'm sorry but the Royals look ill and sad. It's a shame.

Surely that's when you need your faith and your personal spiritual practice the most?

It's a gun in disguise.

Why?

Genuine question.

The amount received under the Civil List system was the same (and sometimes higher in real terms) and the accounts were much more confusing as there were 4 separate elements (the main List plus the grants in-aid for travel, comms&info, and maintenance of the Palaces)

The expenses for working royals are handled in the same way on both systems - how many are working depends on the Monarch. And given that 3 people who would otherwise have been expected to be working royals are not in that role (2 by choice, 1 by disgrace) then the numbers are slimmer (perhaps even more than intended.

The amount received under the Civil List system was the same (and sometimes higher in real terms)

Do you have a link to these figures?

Why?

Because it would entail proper parliamentary scrutiny and debate rather than being linked to profits which may fluctuate wildly while guaranteeing the sum paid will never fall.
This meant the royals were cushioned from the Covid related hits to income everyone else was expected to suck up. It also means the obscene profits generated from sales of licences to windfarms situated on seabeds claimed as royal property some 60 years ago could have ended up entirely in royal pockets rather than benefitting the nation.
King has offered some back (gracious) but he's still trousering £45m on the deal:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c880mg120jjo

This explains a little more. Note even Cameron who cut the deal rather understatedly admits it was good for the royals:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/05/how-tory-royal-funding-deal-gave-rise-to-king-charless-potential-cash-windfall

I think that the King's well-publicised 'cash windfalls' also explain much of Harry's and Andrew's behaviours. They know damn well that papa / brother is good for tens and tens of millions of pounds annually - and then some.

They (a) want a cut of the loot (and William's thereafter); and (b) want the lifestyle in which they were brought up to continue forever; and (c) will consequently never, ever let go of the titles or their spending habits.

And if they have to behave badly in the meantime to raise their own money through grifty means, well Charles only has himself to blame, really, doesn't he (in their minds), for not funding the Spares to live their accustomed lives of unfettered wealth, authority and privilege?

It's all about money.

It's not remotely fair.

It's confusing something the RF has been doing in public since approx the 1930s and which has become a regular, predictable feature which attracts onlookers (and which gets press coverage), with calling the paps to take a "stolen photo" of someone in their private life.

I think it's a comment intended to diminish the RF. And I can see why people in the US might fall for it, because they wouldn't realise that this isn't a recent thing done for attention, but rather something that's been done for several generations and which has, over time, attracted attention.

The amount received under the Civil List system was the same (and sometimes higher in real terms)
Do you have a link to these figures?

Not to hand
(not least because I haven't got the time to hunt out the 3 other elements that they received in addition to Civil List but which are now part of the Sovereign Grant, so which need to be included to at least have some passable "like for like" - it's the omission of those elements that makes the Civil List look smaller)

This is a useful tool for comparing prices over time
UK Inflation Calculator - MoneyMarvel

@wordler "Surely that's when you need your faith and your personal spiritual practice the most?"

What, when you have been complicit in a systematic cover up of child abuse?

The amount under the civil list was far less.

In 2010 the Civil List gave £7.9 million. This is equivalent to £11.9 million today.
In 2022/3 the sovereign grant was £86.3 million, plus £31.2 million that year for repairs to Buckingham Palace.
Costs have spiralled out of control

You don’t think it’s time to talk to God when you are being accused of serious moral failings?

To compare, you need consider the 3 grants in aid - either increasing the Civil List by their value, or by reducing the Sovereign Grant to exclude those elements.

Just the Civil List isn’t comparing like with like, as the Sovereign Grant is Civil List plus the 3 grants in aid that were merged in to it. What were those 3 grants worth in 2010?

Also, what proportion were staff costs, and did you apply the same formula to that to bring prices in to line, or did you use RPI or CPI across the board?

Also, are those two years typical of the ones a few either side of them?

The civil list cost was frozen for a few years, so in real terms the civil list grant is worth less in 2011/2, the last year it was in operation. I quoted the amount in real terms in 2010, so I was being very even handed. I could have used 2012s amount which would have been less in real terms.

I used the Bank of England's inflation calculator. For this period of time, they use the consumer price index. This does not pretend to be 100% accurate with every item of expenditure, but we are talking about nearly £75 million extra, rather than a few thousand pounds.

I have no idea what other grants you are referring to? Perhaps you can be less vague? But the monarchy also receive on top of both the civil list and sovereign grant paid for security, and substantial funding for repairs to Buckingham Palace as mentioned in my original post.

The civil list payment covered salaries of royal staff, other expenses and some payments directly to named working royals. In the 1990s, Elizabeth agreed to meet some expenses directly from her own wealth.

Just the Civil List isn’t comparing like with like, as the Sovereign Grant is Civil List plus the 3 grants in aid that were merged in to it. What were those 3 grants worth in 2010?

Please can you provide the grant in aid figures you're referring to?

I described what they covered in a previous post.

And as I said, I don't have figures to hand, but I'm going to try to have a poke around for them when I have time (probably not before the weekend)
I thought perhaps those confidently asserting comparisons (whilst omitting the grants-in-aid) might be able to add them in as they've already started looking stuff up.

@Xag I can't find anything where you say what these other 3 grants are for. Could you repost this?

This thread Yesterday 07:19

Okay you are right separate grants were given In 2010/11 they totalled £33.9 million. Using the Bank of England inflation calculator this is equivalent to £51,230,991 today.

In 2022/3 the sovereign grant was £86.3 million, plus £31.2 million that year for repairs to Buckingham Palace.

By any measure costs have significantly increased.

https://www.royal.uk/financial-reports-2010-11

Thanks for taking the time to find those figures, MerryMaker.

SG is demonstrably and unsurprisingly a better deal for the royals.

But isn’t the main difference that when on the civil list you actually got a lump sum as an individual. So effectively you were being paid to do royal work and you got to spend it however you wanted no matter how much work you did - or keep it and bank it if you wanted to.

Whereas with the sovereign grant - no royal is getting a wage for simply being a ‘working royal’ - they get expenses for their staff and engagements which all have to be accounted for and is monitored by a government agency. Any money left at the end of the year not spent goes into a surplus pot monitored by the government. And if the surplus gets too big then the government can reduce the grant the next year.

So no one is getting paid for being royal by the tax payer - if they aren’t doing engagements then the Sovereign Grant gets used less and money goes back into the pot. They don’t get to keep the excess and use it for themselves.

@wordler the difference is the monarch decides how much you get for official costs. Before William had the Duchy, we know Catherine had a clothes allowance for engagements. Living expenses will be met by the Monarch, which again gives the Monarch more control over the family. Although the Heir has his own Duchy for income.
Even though the Monarch overall gets more, its possible minor working Royals get less. I suspect Sophie and Edward do not get much given that Edward still wears his suits too big after he lost weight and Louise has worn some of Sophie's old clothes.

But talking specifically about the Sovereign Grant - I don’t think any of them get ‘paid’ living expenses out of that.

When Charles was PoW all living and clothes etc expenses for W&K and H&M came from the Duchy of Cornwall.

The Queen was funding any extra family members out of the Duchy of Lancaster plus any private trust funds they have.

The Sovereign Grant pays specifically for expenses related to engagements, some staffing costs related to engagements and upkeep and restoration work for Crown buildings.

Whereas the old Civil List was giving specific family members a ‘wage’ to do with as they wished.

This is in direct response to comparing the SG to the civil list. I definitely think the SG is better as it’s a lot more transparent and there are set guidelines for managing the grant - it’s not just handed over and given no oversight.

@wordler under the old civil list Elizabeth had agreed to meet some of the costs from her own wealth.
Charles may be giving other working royals some money from the Duchy or his own wealth. But he is still getting way more than the Civil List used to provide, whilst the number of engagements has fallen.

@wordler it depends what you mean by living expenses. It pays for clothes utilities and catering. And there is a large amount spent under other in the accounts.

But again if engagements are less, then less money of the SG gets spent and that money goes back into the pot.

Charles doesn’t get to keep any SG not spent on official duties.

Unlike when members were paid a ‘wage’ on the civil list - they got their money no matter what they did.

Now Charles funds the working royals living expenses from his Duchy pot, not the SG pot.

We don’t know if he lets them have a lump sum no matter what, or whether he gives them a performance bonus.

But we do know that does not come out of the SG which had government oversight.

So anything left unspent in the SG goes into the reserve - Charles doesn’t get to pocket it.