A Labour MP has said it would be "inappropriate" to pay "vast sums of additional money" to the royal household in the current climate.

Ian Davidson's comments come after the Sunday Telegraph said the Queen has asked for an increase in the amount of money she receives from the taxpayer.

The annual Civil List has been set at £7.9m for 20 years.

The paper also says the Queen's expenditure is running at about £7m more than the annual allowance.

The shortfall is currently being covered by an emergency reserve, but this is due to run out in 2012 - the Queen's Diamond Jubilee year.

Mr Davidson, who is also a former member of the public accounts committee, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that any increase should not be made "without full disclosure" of the Queen's expenditure.
Continue reading the main story

Ian Davidson Labour MP

"These are difficult economic times, the government's said we're all in this together and I think it would be inappropriate in these circumstances for the Queen to be handed vast sums of additional money," he said.

"When I was on the public accounts committee we were always seeking more information to justify the amount of money that the royals got.

"Every time we had an examination - for example, of royal travel, for upkeep of the royal palaces - they made changes which resulted in substantial savings to the public purse.

"So I think the price of any consideration of the royals getting more money should be that they have to be open about where the money goes, about the link between the Queen's private fortune and the public purse, because there's a deliberate blurring of the edges between what is private and what is public."
Funding surplus

The Civil List sum, which pays for the running of the Royal household, is negotiated every decade and the last increase was agreed in 1990.

The £7.9m figure that is granted by the government was frozen in 2000, to compensate for 10 years of over-generous payments. Negotiations are currently under way for a new annual sum.

Mr Davidson also said this previous settlement was "so generous" that the Royal Family was unable to spend the annual sum.

As a result, the surplus was placed into an emergency fund, which has recently been drawn on and is now reported to be reaching its limit.

Mr Davidson said that cabinet ministers had taken a 5% pay cut and that "we can't have money just being sloshed out to the Royal Family".

He added: "Let's see whether or not there are economies that can be made, whether or not we could get rid of some of the flunkies that surround the monarchy, whether or not everything is being done in the most cost effective way."

£7.9million doesn't sound like that much when you consider the upkeep of their many historical buildings.

I wonder what the true value / cost of the royals is? All those huge building would require maintenance anyway, and they would lose much of their tourist appeal if it wasn't for the royal pomp and ceremony. I don't think the National Trust exactly makes huge profits from such things?

Though the solution is to abandon the civil list and return all the proceeds of the Duchy of Lancaster to the Royal family. As that is considerably more than the civil list the Queen will not object.

No one seems to have noticed that she's not had an increase in 20 years according to the article. Just inflation alone over that time is going to make a staggering difference to expenditure.

All those huge building would require maintenance anyway, and they would lose much of their tourist appeal if it wasn't for the royal pomp and ceremony.

Yes but would you prefer President Blair, Brown or Cameron?

At least you can get rid of a president.

How about a Solar Lottery.