‘Theirs to use and ours to pay for’ – anger at palace revamp
With the bill for essential work on Buckingham Palace having doubled, some Brits are asking whether it’s worth the cost.
The Queen has been dragged into a funding row after British opposition parties warned that they could vote against a £369 million (NZ$650m) refurbishment of Buckingham Palace.
The royal household has insisted that the work is essential to avoid a catastrophic failure, but the bill is more than twice the original estimates.
Prime Minister Theresa May and Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond have approved £369m of taxpayers’ money for the 10-year refit, which must be agreed by a House of Commons vote before April, when the most critical work is due to begin.
Labour and the Scottish National Party have refused to commit to supporting the funds at a time when public sector services are facing cuts and pay freezes.
Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, an avowed republican, is said to be considering the party’s position as his frontbenchers line up to criticise the repair works.
‘‘Ultimately it has to be weighed up against what is happening in the economy,’’ Andrew Gwynne, a shadow cabinet office minister, said.
‘‘Clearly on one level we have to upgrade our national heritage. But when people are struggling, they will want to know how the government can find the money to refurbish Buckingham Palace.
‘‘We have austerity for the many but there appears to be money for other things. The government has got to get its priorities in order.’’
Another Labour frontbencher, Alex Cunningham, the party’s pensions spokesman, said the funds would pay for a new hospital or thousands of homes in Stockton North, his constituency.
‘‘I have always respected the fact that we have a royal family, but I know they also have vast wealth and I don’t know what sort of contributions they will be making towards this project,’’ he said.
Alex Salmond, the former SNP leader and MP for Gordon, said: ‘‘I think people won’t just be raising one eyebrow at this but two.’’
The cost of the refurbishment also prompted dissent from antiroyal campaign group Republic.
‘‘Royal attitude always the same: it’s theirs to use and ours to pay for,’’ the group said on its Twitter feed. ‘‘Time we took the palace back and turned it into world class museum.’’
The renovations will be funded by increasing the sovereign grant – the royal family’s annual payment from the Treasury. Since 2012-13 this has been set at 15 per cent of the profits from the Crown Estate – land owned by the British monarch. Royal Trustees have approved an increase to 25 per cent for the next 10 years, which would effectively raise the grant from about £40m to about £70m a year.
Essential work required at Buckingham Palace includes replacing
When people are struggling, they will want to know how the government can find the money to refurbish Buckingham Palace. Andrew Gwynne, Labour MP
electrical wiring, water pipes and the heating system. The palace also intends to build a visitor centre and improve public access, making it more accessible for the disabled, for example.
Critics questioned why the bill had more than doubled from a £150m estimate last year, in plans that would have led to the Queen moving out during the work.
Yesterday the palace said its most cost-effective strategy would be to keep the royal household in place and redecorate the building wing by wing.
Tony Johnstone-Burt, master of the Queen’s household, said this would ‘‘minimise a risk of catastrophic building failure’’.
‘‘It is the best value for money, [the building] remains fully operational . . . and maximises public access.’’
Although the parliamentary vote is almost certain to pass, the prospect of months of political wrangling against a backdrop of gathering economic uncertainty will not be welcomed by the palace.
It will be the first time that MPs have been asked to change the amount that the royal household receives from public funds since the sovereign grant replaced the civil list five years ago.
Hannah Bardell, SNP MP for Livingston, said: ‘‘While steps should be taken to maintain such buildings, I’m sure many will find it hard to grasp the millions available to restore Buckingham Palace when Tory cuts are leaving the poorest in our society to suffer.’’
An SNP spokeswoman said it would demand more information on the proposed refurbishment before deciding how to vote on the funds.
Paul Duffree, the royal household’s director of property, said: ‘‘The surveys that led to this programme were some of the most detailed work ever undertaken here. The data revealed a number of high-risk areas which we need to address as a priority.’’
Palace officials claimed that within 50 years the net cost of the work – taking into account efficiency savings and increased income from higher visitor numbers – would drop to £222m.
If the work goes as planned, the palace won’t need another renovation until 2067, when Prince William would be 85, or five years younger than the current monarch.
The scale of the project is enormous – though it deals with the parts of the palace the public would not see in a building that boasts 775 rooms, including 78 bathrooms and 19 state rooms. Some 30,000 square metres of floorboards, for example, will need to be lifted to fix cabling.
In a nod to the environmentally minded Prince Charles, solar panels will be installed.
The Queen will be able to remain at home during the works, though she will have to move to another part of the palace when her private apartments are renovated.
The palace is one of Britain’s most recognisable buildings. More than half a million people visit during its summer opening, together with some 90,000 annually who attend state receptions, garden parties and official events.
‘‘Tourists are drawn to this country because of our culture, heritage and royal legacy, and when they visit they spend billions of pounds and support thousands of jobs,’’ said David Gauke, the chief secretary to the Treasury. ‘‘We must ensure that the special architectural and historic natures of some of our greatest buildings are protected for future generations.’’
Architect John Nash developed the building into a palace between 1825 and 1840. Queen Victoria added the balcony and built a wing to extend accommodation and entertaining.
After the palace was bombed during World War II, restoration work began in 1950. At the initiative of the Duke of Edinburgh, a new public gallery to display works from the Royal Collection was created on the site of a bombed chapel.
Britain’s royal family need not look far into the past to see the devastating consequences that fire can have on structures that are hundreds of years old.
A spotlight left too close to a curtain started a fire that raged for hours at Windsor Castle – the Queen’s favourite palace – in 1992, a year the monarch described as her ‘‘annus horribilis’’. Similar damage to a single wing at Buckingham Palace would cost an estimated £250m.