Has grace-and-favour accommodation now fallen from grace – and favour, too? In recent days, we have learned that both our head of state and our (likely) head of government are giving up the free homes that come with the job. The King has said he will not live at Buckingham Palace once major refurbishment works are completed next year. His heir has let it be known that he won’t live there either. The monarch is very happy living at Clarence House, just as his mother was when she became Queen in 1952. Back then, Winston Churchill formally advised the Sovereign that she had to move into the Palace. No modern prime minister would dream of telling the Sovereign where to sleep, least of all one who plans to follow his example. Andy Burnham has said that he will not live at No. 10 (or 11) Downing Street. What’s good enough for the King is good enough for the ‘King of the North’. So, Burnham will keep a few clean T-shirts in London but the family home will remain his Victorian semi outside Wigan, just down the road from his new office at ‘No. 10 North’. The entire public sector will rejoice at this ringing endorsement of its cherished ‘working from home’ orthodoxy.
We are supposed to regard these housing decisions as practical and relatable. That may be true. But a residence with no resident has no persona and no soul. It becomes an office or a museum. Both the Palace and No. 10 will be diminished.
We have one royal who says he does want to stay at the Palace. Prince Harry originally declined the offer of a room there during this week’s visit to the UK, citing security issues. Then he changed his mind at the weekend, only to find that the Palace offer had expired. An aide spoke of Harry’s ‘disappointment’. We can only imagine his dismay the very next day as the High Court rejected his case against the Daily Mail on every single count (leaving a £50 million bill on the table). What a trip it’s turning out to be. At this rate, he’ll lose his luggage on the way home. Harry, let us remember, is also the first royal to enter the travel industry, having co-founded an eco-friendly agency called Travalyst. After this tour, I’m not sure it would be my first choice when booking a holiday.
The King will continue to use his country residences. But what about Burnham? If he dislikes Downing Street, he’ll hardly want to spend his weekends at a Tudor pile in the Chilterns, some 200 miles from his usual Saturday haunt of Everton FC. On the other hand, all PMs (and their families) come to love Chequers once they have experienced its oak-panelled quirkiness, its indoor pool and the unobtrusive staff. The Starmers have become deeply attached to the place. Even staunch lefties can admire the extensive collection of Cromwelliana. When David Lloyd George resigned in 1922, the instant response of his daughter Megan was: ‘Damn, there goes Chequers.’
Committed to defending all faiths, the King now prepares to appoint his first Catholic prime minister. He has previously appointed a professed atheist and a Hindu, while also inheriting a ‘non-practising Christian’ (Liz Truss) from his mother. The Supreme Governor of the Church of England has yet to appoint one of his own.
The photograph of the Queen welcoming J.K. Rowling to Holyroodhouse this week is, as a close friend tells me, ‘pure Camilla’. It was ostensibly to celebrate a shared love of literacy. The Queen supports more book charities than anyone in royal history and Rowling is the Taylor Swift of print. Both women are also energetically involved in campaigning for the victims of sexual violence. The Court Circular was a masterclass in understatement: ‘Her Majesty this afternoon received Ms Joanne Rowling (Author).’ Read into it what you like (and the Queen knows that you will) but this is the polar opposite of cancellation. It reminds me of Queen Camilla’s speech at her literary reception in 2023. That same week, it had been revealed that Roald Dahl’s publishers were due to censor hurty words like ‘fat’ and ‘ugly’ from his books. ‘Please remain true to your calling,’ she urged us writers, ‘unimpeded by those who may wish to curb the freedom of your expression.’ Cue roars of ‘Hear! Hear!’ The Queen paused, gave a knowing smile and added simply: ‘Enough said.’ She did not even mention Dahl by name. The very next day, Penguin backed down. Pure Camilla indeed.
Another striking royal image is that of tennis fans queuing for this year’s Wimbledon championships only to find the Princess of Wales, patron of the All England Club, on duty in the box office. This year marks the centenary of another Wimbledon first – the only royal appearance on court. In 1926, the Duke of York (the future King George VI) and his former equerry Louis Greig entered the men’s doubles, having previously been RAF champions. As Greig’s grandson Geordie Greig writes in The King Maker, Wimbledon allocated this royal debut to centre court until the Duke asked for a less prominent slot. So Bertie and Louis were moved to court two. Not that it helped much. The Duke was off-form from the start and grew worse as the crowd shouted useless tips like ‘Try the other hand, Sir!’ The pair lost in straight sets. Little wonder the Palace has been keener to focus on another 1926 landmark: the birth of Queen Elizabeth II.
Comments