反君主主義者稱，王室成員確實花費了 5.1 億英鎊

According to a group that opposes the monarchy, the Royal Family costs taxpayers much more than the official figures suggest. They claim that the actual cost is around £510 million each year, which is nearly six times the £86 million provided by the Sovereign Grant, the annual funding from the government. The Republic group argues that their higher total includes additional expenses, such as security, which they estimate to be about £150 million. Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, raised a critical question: 'How can we talk about cutting the winter fuel allowance while wasting half a billion pounds on the royals? ' This statement highlights their belief that the funds allocated to the monarchy could be better spent on essential services. Sir Michael Stevens, who oversees the financial matters of the King, has previously emphasized the commitment to ensuring value for money in royal finances. The Republic group's report on royal finances contends that the state funding known as the Sovereign Grant represents only a small portion of the true cost to taxpayers. They argue that in discussions about public spending and financial constraints, it is crucial to recognize the complete picture of royal funding. The most significant additional cost identified by Republic is the security expenses for the royals, which are not included in the Sovereign Grant calculations. The Sovereign Grant covers various expenditures, including staffing, travel, and the maintenance of royal properties. The anti-monarchy campaigners assert that the government should provide a precise figure for the cost of royal security. However, in the absence of an official estimate, the report suggests that £150 million is a reasonable approximation based on media reports regarding security expenses. Furthermore, the Republic group's total of £510 million also accounts for 'lost income' to taxpayers. This includes £99 million from the property businesses of the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, which the report argues should benefit the public rather than fund the King and the Prince of Wales. Additionally, they claim that £96 million could be generated from royal residences if they were utilized for commercial purposes. The report also points out other hidden costs, such as expenses incurred by local authorities during royal visits. The Republic group criticizes the current funding model for the royals as opaque and secretive, labeling it a 'scandalous abuse of public money. ' They propose that a head of state should have annual running costs between £5 million and £10 million, and they suggest that the King should receive a salary of £189,000, with increases aligned with the Prime Minister's salary. Buckingham Palace has chosen not to comment on the report. However, the latest accounts for the Sovereign Grant, released in July, indicate that state funding for the Royal Household will remain at £86. 3 million for the fiscal year 2024-25 and will rise to £132 million in 2025-26. This funding level is determined based on the profits generated by the Crown Estate, with the upcoming increase reflecting higher income from offshore wind farms. Sir Michael Stevens noted that this marks the third consecutive year in which the Sovereign Grant has not increased, despite the additional costs associated with the transition of reign and the inflationary pressures affecting goods and services across all sectors. He stated, 'What has remained constant is the determination to deliver value for money in ensuring the Royal Family are able to serve our communities to the best of their abilities, even in difficult personal circumstances.