Yes. The financial set up is imho deliberately and strategically baffling. I don’t understand why the royals can’t have a straightforward payment from the Treasury for services rendered in alignment with how many engagements they do and the expenses incurred.
It doesn’t have to be as convoluted as it is now. And it would allow for much more straightforward accounting.
(I also think it’s possible for the public to be more informed about security costs without comprising safety. Atm we receive a rough figure that’s not very informative. For example, Peter Phillips and Harriet Sperling are apparently covering security costs for their wedding today themselves. In the press pictures, you can see policeman placed strategically along the street where the guests are walking to church. I’d love to know a little more detail about how these rough rounded up figures are arrived at!)
And all royal finances should be subject to proper Parliamentary oversight and scrutiny (which is why imho the honours system is problematic for MPS, ministers and civil servants but that’s for another thread.)
The public and private wealth of the RF should be entirely separate.
Andrew Lownie and Norman Baker are apparently about to jointly launch a transparency campaign proposing some simple measures that would ensure much more openness about royal finances and improve parliamentary effectiveness in this area:
** that Parliament should be able to ask questions about royal finances without deference or fear
(Of course that process has begun with the public accounts committee looking at the Crown Estates.)
** but there should also be a review of the sovereign grant (which was effectively pushed through by three people one of whom was George Osborne who was then appointed as a Companion of Honour for that and his wider political and public service).
** Parliament should be able to ask questions about AMW’s time as a trade envoy, which happened briefly, but subsequent questions submitted by George Foulkes and Rosie Boycott have been responded to evasively.
** the appointment of a parliamentary spokesperson for the royal family who is accountable and responds to questions on the royal family’s behalf
** the establishment of a royal register similar to that which exists for MPs
** Parliament could amend the FOI Act so that the royal family are no longer exempt
**Parliament could amend the legislation governing the sealing of royal wills which has only been in place since 1911
**the financial management of the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall could be moved to be under the control of the Treasury
** and as the British taxpayer has just paid £386 million for the renovation of Buckingham Palace, this could now be opened up further for public use including the vast gardens. No member of the RF is living there so the security risk is minimal.
Imho the legislation surrounding King’s Consent should be looked at too.
None of the above needs to be unnecessarily complicated or time-consuming and I think Lownie and Baker have come up with an excellent and reasonable strategy. In fact, I cannot for the life of me understand why these measures haven’t been instigated long before now.