How much did the tour by Duke & Duchess of Cambridge to Australia cost?

[Canuck]

They were invited by the governments of Australia and New Zealand, so those officials must have thought it would benefit their countries somehow (of course, there will be debate as to whether they were right).

It seems like there was a tourism benefit:  Prince William and Kate Middleton?s Australian royal tour sees huge flood of inquiries from UK tourists

Then, they should have picked up the total cost.  What was the benefit to us here in the UK?

SophieChloe, those costs *were* paid by the Australian and New Zealand governments.  The first line of the article you posted is:

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's Australian tour earlier this year cost Australian taxpayers a fraction of what it cost for the Queen to visit in 2011.

[Canuck]

I think people see what they want to see, as to who looks "serene" or "graceful" or "greedy".  But Adrienne is correct that the type of events that Will and Kate did are very similar to the type of events that other Royals do on tours.

[SophieChloe]

^Well if that's the best they have to offer - I say get rid.  Any old Joe could do that.  Let's have Simon Cowell, Katie Price....?

@Canuck - You really need to allow other people to have opinions instead of trying to browbeat them down.

[Canuck]

I'm not really sure what you mean, SophieChloe -- I'm just expressing my opinion, like you and other posters do. 

[SophieChloe]

Sure.  It's the attack approach I do not appreciate.  Perhaps it's just me.

I still remain convinced this trip down under was a waste of money.  Unless I see facts and figures that it helped the people of the Country and not just the RF and a chosen few. 

[SophieChloe]

@SophieChloe   You really need to allow other people to have opinions instead of trying to browbeat them down

@PrincessOfPeace.  I find this copying of my previous post to another member quite silly and argumentative.  There really is no need for such.  Please stop  :flower:

[HistoryGirl]

Question: It said that it cost the Queen about 2.7 million and W&K about 500,000, but up thread SophieChloe quoted that the half a million didn't include security; so did the Queen's 2.7 million include security?

[Lady Adams]

So, according to the agenda posted above, HM and DoE did 27 engagements in Australia. While even the most charitable assessment of Will and Kate's tally puts them at 17. (I love it when 30 year olds are outworked by their grandparents, don't you?)

Also, I know we're talking about Australia, but if they were willing to accept freebies in Australia, my guess is they did it an Australia-- that's helpful to lower the costs:

Prince William and Kate's £6,500-a-night luxury hideaway | Daily Mail Online

Fortunately for New Zealand taxpayers, who are footing much of the bill for the tour, the lodge has been secured for a massively discounted rate of only a few hundred pounds for the night.

[SophieChloe]

If the Prime Minsters of Australia and New Zealand didn't want the Royal couple there they simply wouldn't have extended an invitation to them through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. They are independent countries and in charge of their own affairs.

Sure enough, but what the hell was the point of it?  Who did it help? 

[Lady Adams]

Question: It said that it cost the Queen about 2.7 million and W&K about 500,000, but up thread SophieChloe quoted that the half a million didn't include security; so did the Queen's 2.7 million include security?

It didn't include security either. However: "The Queen's visit in 2011 cost more than $2.6 million, not including security, largely due to a $1.8 million transport bill because the royals chartered an airliner for their trip to and from the UK."

I believe that heads of state are often required to take a charter (ie Air Force One)-- so really, we're comparing $800k to $500k.

[SophieChloe]

Thanks @Lady Adams.  Either way, far too much money is being wasted on these visits.  IMO there really is no need other than to make the RF relevant to the people.  It's time we put them out to pastures new. 

[Lady Adams]

^ And, ignoring flight costs, if you look at cost per engagement, you come up with:
$800k/27= $21,600
$500k/17= $29,411

So I'd say the costs for Will and Kate, and Queen and DoE, are pretty even.

If you look at the hours on engagement I kept track of by monitoring Twitter (recap here), Will and Kate were in public 39.25 hours during their time-- making their rate roughly $12,000/hour. Obviously I don't know the Queen and DoE's  ;)

However-- who pays for security and transport? Transport, in the country, is paid by the country but who pays for the cost to get there?

[SophieChloe]

Thanks @Curryong.  However, IMO this trip was done for one reason and one reason alone, to shore up the RF.  No matter the cost.  Shameful - IMO, Shameful.

[Lady Adams]

It does seem odd that this trip only cost $500k when "Based on estimates of the cost of chartering a RAAF jet, at $17,000 per hour of flying time, Crikey calculates the royal party's flights alone will cost the Australian taxpayer at least $272,000."

From: Royal visit, Will and Kate to Australia: what will it cost? | Crikey

[SophieChloe]

@TLLK Why say the people wanted the visit then?  Was the visit in the manifesto?  I doubt it.  Obviously, they had no choice in the matter.  Are you saying the people can vote them out *after* the invite and thousands of dollars spent?  What's the point of that?     

I disagree. Royal visits have happened for decades even after the end of the empire and the beginning of the Commonwealth.

If they have been going on for decades perhaps it's time to cease with such wasteful visits.  Who's it serving? 

[Limabeany]

^^No, they aren't on the same level at all, but in a way they (Will and Kate) represent the same thing. They are all representing their monarch. Will and Kate may be only third in line and wife (and you know what I think of their work ethic) but they represent, by their presence, Queen Elizabeth.

As the Queen is the Queen of Great Britain as well as Queen of Australia separately, William and Kate also represent the link between the UK and Australia (and countries in the Commonwealth of Nations like Australia). Our populations are linked not only through having a sovereign in common, but because we are two Commonwealth countries with historical and strong current bonds.

Goodwill between nations is not to be underestimated. Tourism between Britain and Australia still earns considerable income for both countries. Britain and Australia are also still significant trade partners

Then, the UK did not need to waste this amount of money because a) the relationship exists, b) it is good c) both parties are earning considerable revenues from this relationship already. The trip is even more wasteful for the UK then. Just a Monarchical PR exercise...

[sandy]

"only" second line"  after Charles.Well if the ages of the seniors are looked at they should be stepping up and helping out. The Queen is 88 Philip is in his 90s and Charles will turn 66. They both are 32. And if they get the perks and privileges of being third in line they should do the work to earn t heir keep and privileges. And William can't become a career pilot this is something IMO for him to postpone full time duties and playing at being normal.

[KaTerina Montague]

Taxpayer bill for Duchess Kate and Prince William's trip down under costs $500k | Daily Mail Online

Who did this trip benefit other than the RF?..... :hmm:

The RF have been doing things like this for decades. Did Charles and Diana do one there first years of marriage? This is part of their job and unfortunately it costs money to do it, perhaps the excuse that there isn't enough money to have WKnH full time is true.

[DaisyMeRollin]

^^ @Adrienne, even if all your events were counted (and I wouldn't count the investiture since it wasn't public, but it's entirely your prerogative to do so)-- what is your argument? Is it simply that you disagree with my numbers?

Because my arguement, which is still true even using your math, is: HM and DoE's tour and Will and Kate's tour were approximately the same cost per engagement.

Looks like arguing over a 10.5% discrepancy, and yes, I'm rounding that decimal up (if only to appease Adrienne's side of the deal). Either way, I agree with you that it's minimal.  :thumbsup:

[SophieChloe]

^ Pathetically so!

[SophieChloe]

^ I didn't at first, no.  However, when I was corrected, I posted this :

Royal treatment: Wills and Kate's whirlwind trip Down Under comes in at $500,000

And, I stand by every word. 
Double post auto-merged: October 16, 2014, 09:31:10 PM

Are there no poor people there that could have benefitted from the money that was spent on shoring up the RF?