King Charles III's coronation was not just a memorable event filled with tradition and pageantry; it also came with eye-popping expenses. Recently released government accounts revealed the total cost was £72 million, sparking discussions about the appropriateness of such spending during challenging economic times for many citizens.
According to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), the actual expense broke down to £50.3 million dedicated to directly staging the coronation, which took place on May 6, 2023. The remaining £21.7 million accounted for the extensive policing necessary to manage the event, ensuring the safety of attendees and the public.
This £72 million price tag marks quite the understatement compared to the last high-profile royal event—the funeral of the late Queen Elizabeth II—which cost approximately £162 million. Critics of the coronation's spending have been vocal, especially considering the current cost-of-living crisis plaguing many Britons.
Republic, the campaign group advocating for the abolition of the monarchy, claims the true cost of the coronation likely surpassed £100 million when factoring additional expenses such as those borne by the Ministry of Defence, local councils, and other emergency services. Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, criticized the event as unnecessarily extravagant, particularly when financial resources could have been allocated to more pressing matters.
Smith's comments reflect growing discontent surrounding royal expenditures. "The coronation was a pointless, archaic parade," he remarked, insisting there was no need for such opulence, especially when polls indicated only 9% of citizens had any real interest. He suggested these funds could have been redirected to provide 27 million free school meals to struggling families.
The royal event was celebrated as “a once-in-a-generation moment” by DCMS, showcasing the UK to billions around the globe. The department emphasized the event's ability to unify the nation and boost national identity, bolstered by the global coverage it received. An estimated two billion viewers from 125 countries tuned in, and the coronation generated over 100,000 news stories worldwide.
Leading up to the ceremony, Buckingham Palace reassured the public of its intent for the coronation to resonate with contemporary sensibilities. It was smaller than those of Charles's predecessors, reflecting the current economic climate and acknowledging Britain's financial hardships. Nonetheless, the intention was to create lasting memories and cultural significance.
Despite the reported costs, King Charles III and Queen Camilla’s coronation was described by the DCMS as successfully delivered and enjoyed by millions both locally and internationally. The ceremony included traditional elements mixed with modern touches, aimed at appealing to younger generations.
Interestingly, Prince William, during this period, has also expressed wishes to redefine royal duties, emphasizing “impact philanthropy” over traditional expectations. His sentiments reflect perhaps the shifting values and expectations of the royal family amid modern challenges.
The coronation drew mixed reviews, reminiscent of the fiscal scrutiny surrounding royal spending. Proponents of the monarchy herald the event as progressive and forward-thinking, balancing tradition with the necessity to reflect modern values. Critics, on the other hand, view it as yet another example of extravagant spending at the expense of taxpayers, particularly during times of financial strain.
Beyond the political and financial discussions, the coronation served its purpose of reinforcing Charles's position as king and invigorated some citizens' interest in the royal family. The pageantry, the music, the ceremonial aspects—all of this contributed to the larger narrative of British culture on the world stage.
With the coronation now behind them, many wonder how the royal family will navigate future engagements and the corresponding expenses involved. The public's appetite for royal celebrations, especially those funded by taxpayer money, remains unclear, and the monarchy’s financial responsibility will undoubtedly continue to be under scrutiny.
