Britain's "Poor" Queen: Income "Drops" in 2011 to "Just" 61 Million!

Does the input from royals justify the expense of maintaining them?

Charles lectures 1500 of Britain's poor about a new, "Green Utopia."  Some see Utopia as a Britain without the huge expense of the royals.
Charles lectures 1500 of Britain's poor about a new, "Green Utopia." Some see Utopia as a Britain without the huge expense of the royals.

"Pomp and Circumstance" But can Britain's circumstances still afford the excess?

This news is bound to aflame anew those who see Britain’s monarchy as nothing more than a disgusting rip-off and something the country could do well without in times of recession, belt-tightening and depression (the last felt by about 90% of the population).

It’s hard to get absolutely up-to-date and penny-accurate figures of what the queen and all the other royals are accountable for each and every year. But the amounts are astronomical and cries from the supporters of the queen and the monarchy are rapidly falling on ever-more-deaf ears.

Here’s a taste of what arrives in the royal coffers every year, much of which would go to this beleaguered state if one family and its many tentacles were not hoovering it up and using it for luxury life-styles with the pretext they are “working” for the country.

The queen is worth close to 2 billion pounds personally. She also owns outright the castles and estates of Sandringham and Balmoral. Many of her properties are actually owned by the Crown, which means she has the use of them in perpetuity and they are passed on in the royal line, but she may not dispose of them by private sale. An example is the huge land making up the Duchy of Lancaster from which crown land she receives another 20 million pounds a year which is hers to spend. This is money that should go to the public purse in the opinion of many people to help ease our intolerable tax burden.

She has uncountable other assets and investments from which she enjoys millions more in income.

She also receives, currently, about 8 million from the state to do her “job” (yes, that’s the “bankrupt” British exchequer which manages to pay for the monarchy, bail out the worthy bankers, conduct expensive foreign wars and part with billions in aid to poorer countries, along with propping up half the EU, but has none left to help the suffering electorate!).

That’s not the end of it: she also receives another 30 million from us for “gift to aid” payments! From this the dinosaur-like duke, her consort, gets 350,000 a year to do practically nothing except bumble around, offer a trembling leg-up into the royal coach, and look affable, (easy when you got this situation!). She also pays for her staff of hundreds all over the country, but principally in the palaces, and in her lavish entertaining and the royal larder (a list from there would be illuminating I’m sure! “Another slice of swan, darling!?”

Various royals receive salaries or money for some service of other. Andrew as a trade envoy enjoyed a salary last year of 620,000 from the taxpayer to promote British business. His contribution was condemned in some circles; lauded in others.

It’s no wonder “commoner” Kate Middleton walks around with a lovely smile plastered to her face. It may be engendered more by the fact the rabbity William has a personal fortune of more than 40 million pounds, as does his fag-addict brother, Harry…no wonder the other Middleton lass has her eyes on him after the wedding!

Lat year, the approximate cost to all of us to maintain this collection of privileged A, plus, listers was approaching 200 million pounds!

The queen, of course, has wealth she enjoys which is the property of the state and of the crown which might be valued in the billions of pounds, such as the crown jewels, etc., And hundreds of other farms, estates and trust buildings which she enjoys as she feels like it, or banks the income.

Despite this, many British people defend the queen, saying she brings more into the country in tourism than she ever costs the country. Funny Italy, France and the USA all generate considerable more tourism each than Britain yet they have no monarchy at all. In many countries where there is a monarchy, such as Spain or the Netherlands, etc., the royal family live far more frugally than do our lot. Of course.

Maybe once - a long time ago - kings and queens could be justified as being warriors in time of warfare, or actually being involved on the day-to-day running of the country.

This is no longer true: they are a luxury Britain cannot afford and an insult thrown in the face of millions living on the margins of society.

They are indeed a rip-off, and, in the opinion of many, THEY SHOULD GO!!

More by this Author

Comments 32 comments

Modibas profile image

Modibas 5 years ago from Vilnius, Lithuania, Europe

Way better than all that rubbish masses are used to.

someonewhoknows profile image

someonewhoknows 5 years ago from south and west of canada,north of ohio

This is only the Queen's pocket money.

Sophia Angelique 5 years ago

Life is @!x!!@ unfair. And there are far too many people who are interested in upholding this kind of thing.

spdarkstar profile image

spdarkstar 5 years ago from Benijofar, Alicante, Spain

Is she also one of the unknown stockholders of the Bank England of whom we are not allowed to know about via the official secrets act. It was something about National security

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Thanks for comments, guys. I am sure what we see and hear is just the tip of the iceberg. I am sure ordinary citizens, hearing she is "strapped" are sending in checks! I have no animus towards her as a person, she is just part of this absurd system which allows us to live in a sort of "Alice through the looking glass" world. Bob

amwalsh profile image

amwalsh 5 years ago from Georgia

Wow! really, how much does a queen actually need? I'm with you, some of that money should go back to the population to ease tax burdens or just reduce tax to the people.

writeronline 5 years ago

One is distressed to learn of the parlous state of Her Majesty ERII's financial affairs. If one could assist, one would. Alas, not oneself.. but someone, surely.


Oh, well.

Perhaps the answer lies in more engaging Palace tours, especially whilst public interest is running hot, rekindled by the nuptials of Will and Kate. One wonders at the potentially huge elevation of palace visitor numbers, were the happy couple, who no doubt are still busily consummating said event (you mentioned rabbity..)on a nightly basis, were available for 'in situ' ('in flagrante'?) observation, on a pay per view basis. One assumes that significant numbers of Royal Watchers would pay handsomely for the right to brag to their descendants that they were on hand, as it were, to witness for themselves the rise of the heir to the throne of England.

BobbiRant profile image

BobbiRant 5 years ago from New York

Wow! Is there a charity where we can send her more money to lift her from poverty or at least not to let her slip to 'commoner status?':0)

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Hi Bobbi: Have a whip around for a contract hit-man might be more appropriate...Bob

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Hi WOL: Wouldn't mind a crack at Kate myself; not much for watching, though, but many would...Bob

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Amwalsh. Commenting is just mental masturbation really. these things never change: all down to man's inhumanity to man I suppose...Bob

Kenneth Ray profile image

Kenneth Ray 5 years ago from Maple Ridge, BC

Amen to that! The monarchy needs to go. At the state should stop funding the monarchy. Let the Royals live on something other than tax dollars. The queen is still the head of state here in Canada.

WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

You have royalty and we have the entitlement class. Both are costing us a fortune.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Kenneth: Why on earth are Canadians fawning over this damned royal couple? It's OK, I know the answer; there's idiots like this everywhere.

Hi Will. It's hard to think of something to write about now. You have your cowpokes, etc. I suppose I could write about wankers waiting in the drizzle outside carbolic smelling public toilets for little boys!


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

LOL @ Bob!

Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi :)


Actually, I think that it is quite a good thing to have a monarch as the country's head-of-state, but, based on the figures that you provide, I agree that the income of the royal family does seem excessive.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Thanks baby cakes. Thanks for nice comment on HP You might enjoy my latest hub on the weather. Bob

Alladream74 profile image

Alladream74 5 years ago from Oakland, California

I am indeed a passerby and thus being have no say in your affairs,but might I say as one who has known the end of your whip and seizing hand,thou livest beyond honourable modesty and the price is that which you pay with the moaning of your conscience.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

I don't understand your comment...a bit esoteric for me, but thanks, I guess Bob

PS Do you have mental problems?

Alladream74 profile image

Alladream74 5 years ago from Oakland, California

@diogenes. Mental problems? Sometimes. Comment rephrased: I am not British but coming from a former British colony,Zimbabwe, I know the effects of the rule under the crown.I think that Royalty live in luxury beyond the means of the people to support .

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

I apologise, Alladream: It seemed as if your remarks were directed at me rather than at the royal drone. "...your whip and seizing hand..." Instead of "her whip and seizing hand." My bad...Bob

Alladream74 profile image

Alladream74 5 years ago from Oakland, California

@Bob. No worries,should have been clearer myself.

Kenneth Ray profile image

Kenneth Ray 5 years ago from Maple Ridge, BC

This an excellent topic for discission! Great hub.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Cheers Ken: The problem is all the forelock-touching, bum-kissing masochists who see something superior in this lot of Oxbridge blood-suckers with their fangs in our jugulars! Bob

Peter Geekie profile image

Peter Geekie 4 years ago from Sittingbourne

Well diogenes

Your crude turn of phrase I think says more about you and your views than the actual content. As you find Great Britain such an awful place to live perhaps you would do us all a favour and move permanently to Mexico, if they will have you.

I notice you have adopted your pen name from one of the founders of cynic philosophy and therefore your life should follow their aim that "philosophy was that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature". Regrettably I see little sign of that.

You and I will never agree and consequently I have no intention of entering into any dialogue with you.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 4 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

Peter Geekie: The real Diogenese and I thank you for your comment showing you know nothing about him, and even less about me. Diogenese was not in the least "cynical," as you say, rather he was a humanist as we use the word today and enjoyed tilting at the sacred cows of his day and exposing poseurs for what they really are. Having entered in"dialogue with me," despite expressing distaste in doing so, let me tell you that Great (Ha!) Britain only enjoys my company because of the pension it pays me and its NHS that sustains me...Now THAT'S Cynical.

Hasta luego Roberto

diogenes profile image

diogenes 2 years ago from UK and Mexico Author

You may be the subject of HRH, the Head Pirate, but not me. I would rather show the lot of them my bare behind. "A bad moon rising"

Cheers, stiff uppah lip and all that!


limpet profile image

limpet 22 months ago from London England

Don't like such disrespect toward our Royal Family. If the Queen is privileged to be wealthy then so be it, that is not our concern. Anyone can peruse the Court circulars promulgated each day listing the Monarchy's engagements for the day. For those not bothered about it, well it is not compulsory.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 22 months ago from UK and Mexico Author

Another "Ragged Trousered Philanthropist!" Stick to these hidebound views, Limpet...let the poor eat cake!


agvulpes profile image

agvulpes 22 months ago from Australia

Ah and what lovely cake it is 'kind sir' :)

We out here in the Antipodes are not amused when the royal , sorry Royal Family wish to visit our lovely shores and have to pick up the 'tab'.

And to think that we had an opportunity to be a Republic to?

I just cannot envisage old 'Cam' being our Queen... Oh please say it wont be so ???

limpet profile image

limpet 14 months ago from London England

She turns 90 next year and the preparations for the event have already began.

diogenes profile image

diogenes 14 months ago from UK and Mexico Author

Hi Limpet et al: I see Wales has passed a law allowing the NHS to harvest organs even if the deceased has not given permission. If this also gets passed in England, I wonder if some might enjoy the kudos of a Royal Liver or Heart should a royal die before its time!!

I wouldn't mind Harry's gonads, would you?

Surprised this old article is still attracting interest

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article