Today, it’s as closely linked a symbol to the British monarchy as the crown jewels or “God Save the King,” but since its first designation as a principal royal residence, the country’s most famous family has had a love-hate relationship with Buckingham Palace.
The home of every monarch since Queen Victoria, the private residence at the palace stands vacant today as the new King Charles III lives five minutes down the road at Clarence House, his home since 2003.
As the entire palace is mid-way through a 10-year reservicing project costing an estimated ÂŁ369 million ($466 million), a royal spokesperson announced in June that Charles and Queen Camilla do intend on eventually making the iconic London building their “principal residence.”
The problem Charles faces though, is whether he wants to make the move from his comfortable home at Clarence House to the grandiose surroundings of the vastly expensive and conspicuous palace. As two prominent royal experts have told Newsweek, he may do so grudgingly.
LEON NEAL/POOL/AFP via Getty Images/Carl Court/Getty Images
Ten Years and $466 Million
In 2016, the year of Queen Elizabeth II‘s 90th birthday, it was announced that an entire overhaul of Buckingham Palace’s infrastructure, including wiring, plumbing and heating, was needed to ensure the building remained in use for decades to come.
The last time such large-scale works had been undertaken in the building was after it sustained direct bomb damage during World War II, with much of the fireproofing and cabling not meeting modern-day safety standards.
The project commenced in 2017 and was scheduled to last 10 years with an estimated cost of ÂŁ369 million ($466 million). To cover this, the British government factored in increases to the annual sovereign grant, the amount of money given to the monarch each year by parliament to cover their official expenses as head of state.
According to new data released in June, the monarchy received ÂŁ86.3 million ($109 million) for the financial year 2022 to 2023, ÂŁ34.5 million ($43.8 million) of which was designated for the Buckingham Palace project.
Over the course of the project, the monarchy has had to dip into its reserve funds to keep up with the cost of the reservicing, with the COVID pandemic and rising cost of living in the United Kingdom putting financial pressure on all public and private institutions.
Bearing in mind the high cost of the project, questions have been raised over the justification of renovating a palace with public funds for one of the wealthiest families in the world, especially if the members of that family ultimately decide they don’t wish to live there anyway.
Others have suggested that with the injection of public cash, the building be opened year-round so that the public has access to their investment. CEO of the Republic anti-monarchy group in Britain, Graham Smith previously told Newsweek of Charles: “It’s time that he gave up Buckingham Palace and it was opened up all year round and turned into a world-class museum and art gallery because he clearly doesn’t need it and, given the amount of money being thrown at renovating it, it’s time it was made to pay for itself.”
Charles, the Reluctant Tenant?
When Queen Elizabeth II died in September 2022, her eldest son inherited more than just her crown. He also obtained her vast property portfolio which includes privately-owned residences like Balmoral Castle in Scotland and Sandringham in Norfolk, England, but also properties he only holds as a custodian.
These properties, such as Windsor Castle, the Tower of London, Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace, cannot be sold because they are property of the state. Charles, as monarch and head of state, is simply a caretaker for his life until they are passed to his descendants.
Prior to his accession, Charles made his home at Clarence Houseâthe 19th-century white stucco building located on The Mall a few hundred yards from Buckingham Palace. It had formerly been the home of his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, and Charles lovingly restored its interiors after her death in 2001, finally moving in two years later.
Christopher Furlong/Getty Images/Victoria Jones-WPA Pool/Getty Images
Charles’ love for Clarence House is not unique. Queen Elizabeth II lived at the house with Prince Philip and an infant Charles before she acceded to the throne. The young queen told Prime Minister Winston Churchill she wanted to stay at the house with her family, only using Buckingham Palace as an office and entertainment space. She was advised against this and was moved in soon after.
The house’s first occupant, King William IV (then Duke of Clarence) decided he disliked Buckingham Palace so much he offered to give it to the government as a new place for Parliament to sit. This was refused, but William stayed at Clarence House anyway.
Queen Victoria was the first monarch to live at the palace after its transformation from Buckingham House in the nineteenth century. By the end of her 63-year reign, the palace had become a national symbol, and as such, every monarch since has occupied the property.
With Charles firmly ensconced at Clarence House though, speculation arose at the time of his accession that he could break with tradition and simply use the palace as an office and party venue.
Of the new king and queen’s reluctance to move into the palace, Ingrid Seward, the author of Prince Philip Revealed, told Newsweek: “They would much rather stay at Clarence House. None of the royals liked living at BP. It’s vast and impersonal. It is an official residence, not a home.
“It is the official residence of the Head of State so they will always use it for official business but they don’t have to live there,” she continued. “It is far more economical to live at Clarence House as they don’t have to spend millions on decorations of the private apartments if they are not used. Just need to keep heating to a minimum which Charles is very keen on!”
With the reservicing project due to end in 2027, after which Charles and Camilla would be potentially making the move, Seward added: “We also don’t know how long his reign will be. He is 75 this year and will not want to spend a fortune on renovating something he may not use for very long.”
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams offered another view, highlighting the significance of having the monarch in residence at the palace.
“It makes total sense that the king and queen should occupy the late queen’s apartments there,” he told Newsweek.
“Reports have indicated that the king and queen would be reluctant to leave Clarence House, but after the refurbishment is complete it does seem likely,” he said. “William IV didn’t but that was nearly 200 years ago. It is unclear what is planned for Clarence House, but using royal properties so they bring in income to supplement the Sovereign Grant will be important for the monarchy in the future.”
CARL COURT/AFP via Getty Images
Solving the Palace Problem
Currently, the state rooms of the palace are only open for the summer months to paying visitors with an adult ticket price of ÂŁ33 ($41).
This may change with the new reign and the expensive reservicing, with some suggesting that Charles could open up the state rooms year-round. This would still allow the monarch to live in the private north wing undisturbed and host official events during scheduled closures.
“I think it highly likely that, after works are complete, Buckingham Palace will be open to the public for longer periods. It would be expected,” Fitzwilliams noted, with Seward adding:
“I am sure [Charles] will do this as it also brings in much-needed income which takes the weight off the taxpayer.”
As money continues to be spent on the fabric of the building, more questions about its future continue to be asked.
However Charles wishes to approach the problem of Buckingham Palace as a home, office block and visitor attraction, to justify the millions spent on it, the issue will be approached taking the two overarching concerns of any modern monarch into accountâcost and public perception.
James Crawford-Smith is Newsweek’s royal reporter based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jrcrawfordsmith and read his stories on Newsweek’s The Royals Facebook page.
Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you.
