Author and former Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker has criticised the government for approving a £100million-a-year Sovereign Grant for the Royal Family, writing in The Mirror that the increase comes as household bills for heating, food and fuel are soaring.
The Sovereign Grant settlement handed to the Royal Family will be £99.7million next year. Baker notes that this follows £359million spent on a no-expense-spared upgrade of Buckingham Palace, despite King Charles deciding not to live there.
Cost of the monarchy
Baker points out that the last year of the Civil List, the predecessor to the current Sovereign Grant, was held in check by Gordon Brown and gave the royals £7.9million in 2011. He says the royals are now costing about half a billion pounds a year.
He argues that successive governments have tried to stop MPs debating royal matters, and that MPs are restricted by parliamentary procedure from criticising the royals. Each MP, when elected, must swear an oath of true allegiance to the monarch, and their heirs and successors, before taking their seat. These heirs and successors, Baker notes, include in the top ten the disgraced Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and the opted-out Prince Harry.
Scrutiny of royal finances
Earlier this month, for the first time in 15 years, MPs were given a chance to scrutinise royal finances. By law the government had to introduce an amendment to push through this big increase, but did its best to smother it as much as possible, scheduling the debate at short notice for the first day back after the recess, and as late towards midnight as possible.
Very few MPs showed up and almost no questions were asked. Baker suggests that MPs might have tried to put a brake on this royal gravy train, even if the chancellor was prepared to wave it on, and that the Tories, keen to cut benefits for the poorest, might have had something to say about the huge benefit bill for the royals. He says MPs have backbones like chocolate eclairs when it comes to the monarchy.
Limited role for the Lords
Baker looks to the Lords, who tend to show rather more independence and will have their chance to have a say on the matter next week. But the government has decided that the amendment to the law is a “money Bill,” meaning the Lords are unable to vote to reduce the massive increase. They can only express their views, which the government will then ignore.
