Should the Civil List be increased? In my view the answer to that is no. Today the Government has just published details of civil servants earning more than the Prime Minister. It seems to me that the civil list needs a thorough review and analysis of its expenditure and costs and also on the value that it brings to the country. If the monarchy is to maintain its public support then in an an age of open government and accountability the public need a full understanding of its costs. Why, for instance does the monarchy have so many estates and homes around the country and how are these used when not being used as residences? I am sure a lot of extra revenue could be generated without asking for tax revenue first.
Below is the email I have just written to George Osborne and Danny Alexandar at:- ministers@hm-treasury.gov.uk
Attention George Osborne MP and Danny Alexander MP
Dear Mr Osborne and Mr Alexander
According to the papers the Queen is asking for a big rise in the Civil List and stating that the civil list has not increased in several years.
I would like to make the following points for your consideration:-
1. There should be no increase in the Civil List while public services are being cut
At a time of austerity it is completely innapropriate to be considering a rise in this area of spending
2. The royal household’s finances must be open to scrutiny like every other government department
For several years Local Government has been subjected to rigourous scrutinty and accountability over its use of money. The Civil List must now be subjected to much greater scrutiny and accountability.
3. The royal household needs to be able to justify its large property protfolio and justify the cost and use of a number of properties.
In a time when the environmental issue is at the top of the agenda why does the state keep so many large properties for what seems like so little use. If the royal family needs houses in all parts of the country, what work is being done to increase useage when they are not in them.
4. And finally there must be a full inquiry into the cost of the monarchy.
If the civil list is to be increased it can only come after a full debate on the cost and benefit analysis of the role. This should include full disclosure of where the current money goes and also where the stated shortfall comes from and how this is financed.
Many thanks
Paul
Perhaps the royal family should be reduced to immediate members only, why do the Kents and Gloucesters need to receive money from the queen, money should be accounted for with receipts published
Paul,
“Queen Elizabeth II the largest landowner on Earth.”
Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface.
She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc.
The value of her land holding. £17,600,000,000,000 (approx).
This makes her the richest individual on earth. However, there is no way easily to value her real estate. There is no current market in the land of entire countries. At a rough estimate of $5,000 an acre, and based on the sale of Alaska to the USA by the Tsar, and of Louisiana to the USA by France, the Queen’s land holding is worth a notional $33,000,000,000,000 (Thirty three trillion dollars or about £17,600,000,000,000). Her holding is based on the laws of the countries she owns and her land title is valid in all the countries she owns. Her main holdings are Canada, the 2nd largest country on earth, with 2,467 million acres, Australia, the 7th largest country on earth with 1,900 million acres, the Papua New Guinea with114 million acres, New Zealand with 66 million acres and the UK with 60 million acres.
She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin. The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres.
If the Queen owns this land then it is a nonsense for the taxpayer to fund her lifestyle. If she doesn’t then we own it.
Either way, we should sell the odd trillion to wipe out the budget deficit and avoid years of misery for the public and provide a surplus for the next 100 years or so to the benefit of the nation our future global competitiveness, prosperity and security.
Best Regards
Barrie