Royals Face Fresh Pressure Over $650K Taxpayer Staff Bill

The royal family is facing fresh pressure from anti-monarchists as it has been revealed that the U.K. government’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) spent over £500,000 ($650,000) in 2023 providing the royal household with “equerries.”

An equerry is a member of the armed forces who is seconded to a member of the royal family to act as a senior member of staff for a limited number of years. Often they accompany their principals to official ceremonies and duties, as well as playing an organizational and administrative role.

The position has existed within the royal household for centuries but has recently taken on greater prominence through social media, with users praising the current cohort’s good looks.

King Charles III’s former equerry, Major Johnathan Thompson, who became a recognizable fixture at events during the monarch’s accession and coronation, was dubbed by fans the “Hot Equerry,” a nickname soon picked up by the popular press.

Though conspicuous in the performance of their roles, little is generally known about how equerries are chosen or how they are remunerated.

However, a newly granted freedom of information request submitted by anti-monarchy group, Republic, has revealed that the taxpayer-funded MOD (the government branch responsible for protecting the U.K. and its interests at home and overseas) foots the bill for the royal equerries, despite a recent cut to their budget.

“Military personnel are deployed as royal equerries funded and paid by the MOD,” the Defence People Secretariat told Republic CEO, Graham Smith, in a letter dated March 4, 2024.

“These costs are not fully reimbursed by the Royal Household. The total expenditure of equerries by MOD in 2023 was £506,681.18.”

This figure equates to $650,315.16.

They added: “You may find it helpful to note that the vast majority of costs come from fixed staff costs, which would still be incurred by the MOD regardless of where these personnel were employed.”

Despite this, Smith notes that the large sum of public money, coming at a time where Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt recently announced budget cuts to the MOD, makes for a poor impression on the part of the monarchy.

“It’s a drop in the ocean in the terms of the MOD budget, but it is a lot of money at a time when there was no extra money at all for the military in the budget this week,” Smith told Newsweek. “That the MOD were quite clear that they don’t get that money back from the royal household is shocking.”

“It does beg the question, what else is being paid for by other parts of the government that allows them to keep their costs down,” he said of the monarchy. “It’s probably an awful lot more expensive than we are aware of.”

In a press release, Smith also labeled the diversion of trained military personnel to royal desk duties as “disgraceful.”

“We are often hearing that the military is stretched and under-staffed,” he said. “With its additional commitments to Ukraine, how can the government justify spending any of the country’s defence budget on people to open doors for Charles, Camilla and William?”

Newsweek approached the Ministry of Defence and Buckingham Palace for comment.

Republic have increased their presence at royal events since King Charles’ accession in September 2022, distinguished among crowds by their yellow T-shirts and banners emblazoned with the slogan: “NOT MY KING.”

In January 2024, the organization commissioned a survey of 2,281 U.K. adults by market research company Savanta, asking: “What would you prefer for the U.K., a monarchy or an elected head of state?”

A monarchy was preferred by 48 percent of respondents, while 32 percent said they supported an elected head of state.

James Crawford-Smith is Newsweek‘s royal reporter, based in London. You can find him on X (formerly 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.