Heath wanted free vote in Commons on any pay rise for the Royal Family
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Edward Heath wanted to allow backbenchers to decide if the Queen should have a pay rise in 1970 by handing control of the Civil List to MPs. As Prime Minister, he wanted to give the Commons a free vote on whether the Royal Family should receive more money and believed MPs would vote for only a modest rise.
Sir Edward proposed dem-ocratising the procedure, till then decided by the Chancellor, whose decision would be rubber-stamped by the Commons. Documents from the Public Record Office show that shortly after winning the 1970 general election, Sir Edward was visited by the head of the Royal Household, who pressed him for a quick decision on the new level of the Civil List, fixed since 1952 and devalued by the effect of inflation.
The decision had been delayed by Sir Edward's predecessor, Harold Wilson, who wanted the Queen and the Prince of Wales to use money from their lands to meet any increase. Sir Edward proposed a senior backbencher, Selwyn Lloyd, to take control of the issue, rather than his Chancellor, Anthony Barber.
In a note to senior cabinet ministers, he said the arguments for the Chancellor being in charge were powerful but he was considering a distinguished backbencher. "What is really in my mind ... is whether the time has not now arrived when the structure and size of the Civil List should become purely a House of Commons matter, with a free vote all the way through and without the Government trying to dominate the House," he wrote. "If there were a danger this would involve the Government in a large unjustifiable expenditure this would be a dangerous innovation, but I do not believe this would be the case.
"In the present climate of opinion I doubt whether it is an attractive proposition either to the public or Parliament to increase the Civil List beyond what is immediately required."
Sir Edward's proposal was not taken up, and the Treasury continued to decide the level of the list. Two years ago it was frozen for 10 years at £7.9m a year. It had been set at that in 1991 assuming inflation would be 7.5 per cent but, when the inflation rate slowed in the Nineties, the Royals built up a surplus of £30m.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments