312 words
✨✨✨
Last weekend’s media-obsessed coronation of British king and Defender of the COE Faith, Charles III, cost the UK taxpayer (according to ABC News) a staggering $125 million. What makes this especially galling for Royal critics is that this extravagance has occurred in the midst of Britain’s woeful current economic climate – characterised by double digit inflation and one of Europe’s worst cost-of-living crises.
Add this to all the other government hand-outs that comes the Windsors’ way – such as the Sovereign Grant, £86 Million per annum by the most recent count…the Royal family uses this generous sum of dosh to maintain their lavish lifestyle, to pay their staff, and to maintain their “modest” properties like Buck Palace and the Duchy of Cornwall.
Supporters of the Windsor institution will be quick to point out that, au contraire, “the Firm” more than pays its own way. The Windsors, they will remind you, add to the coffers of the UK economy through generating tourism revenue – visits to the Crown estates (official residences and the like) and the Royal collection. Brand Finance estimates that the monarchy’s brand contributes £2.5bn to the British economy annually. Thus, on numbers alone this somewhat negates the income vs expenditure argument for scraping the monarchy.
Widespread public outrage over the extravagance of the coronation sideshow did hit home and result in some political casualties in of all places, Papua New Guinea! In a developing country with high levels of poverty, the PNG’s government’s unwise decision to send a large delegation of 30 persons to the London shindig (handsome expense allowances, lavish spending junkets on the way home) has met with widespread condemnation within PNG. Compounding Port Moresby’s headaches re the controversial trip was an ill-chosen response from the foreign minister, insulting the spending spree’s detractors, for which he was compelled to resign.
🇵🇬 🇬🇧 🇵🇬 🇬🇧 🇵🇬 🇬🇧
No comments:
Post a Comment