A Queen's Ransom

After a short stop in the Bahamas, Queen Elizabeth II, accompanied by Prince Philip, made an official visit to Mexico last week aboard the royal yacht Britannia. Meanwhile, back in Britain, some of her more disgruntled subjects in the House of Commons were wondering how much longer the country can keep her ship of state afloat in the style to which it has become accustomed--upkeep of the Britannia alone averages $19,000 a day. At issue was the Queen's request for an increase, from $2.3 million to $3.3 million, in the Civil List, the government-provided allow ance for the royal household. Although Parliament balked before approving a 50% raise for the Queen in 1972, the traditional spirit of gallant largesse was even more pointedly missing last week.

Despite Prime Minister Harold Wilson's strong-arm tactics, most notably a stiffly worded warning that Labor Cabinet members and junior ministers could lose their jobs by not supporting the bill, 89 Laborites voted against it; 50 others avoided the confrontation by finding pressing business elsewhere. The Tories, however, predictably rallied to Her Maj esty's defense, and the measure passed by a 337- vote margin.

The reason for the requested in crease is Britain's 20% inflation, which has dramatically heightened the cost of maintaining a 463-member royal staff that includes equerries, stable grooms and pot scrubbers, as well as secretaries and clerks. The Civil List, however, is only a part of the estimated $14 million spent annually to maintain the monarchy. The government also picks up the tab for three of the five royal residences, the royal yacht, a seldom used royal train and a royal helicopter fleet.

Newly elected Tory Party Leader Margaret Thatcher defended the expenditures on the grounds that the monarchy is "our most precious asset." Others, though, are beginning to see it differently. Said Labor M.P. James Wellbeloved during the floor debate: "In my household, and in every other, there is another sovereign, the housewife, who is struggling to keep her family afloat in the turbulent sea of inflation. We must prevent people like this from becoming resentful of the institution that leads them." For some M.P.s, however, the reaction of Britain's housewives was of less concern than the reaction of Britain's labor unions, which have been asked to restrain demands for inflationary wage increases voluntarily in keeping with the government's vaunted "social contract." Having postponed voting themselves a salary hike in order to set a good example for the country, many M.P.s had hoped that the monarchy would follow a similar course.

Challenged Prerogatives. Anticipating criticism, the Queen offered to provide $360,000 of the $1 million in crease out of her own income. Rather than appeasing her critics, the offer only raised troublesome questions about the extent of her private fortune, which has traditionally been exempt from both in come tax and estate duties. After last week's acrimony, Parliament is expected to challenge these royal prerogatives later this year.

Thanks to her unique tax exemption, the Queen is undoubtedly Britain's wealthiest woman. From one of her many estates in northern England she receives an annual income of $750,000; any other Briton would have to earn roughly $35 million to keep that much after taxes. The size of Elizabeth's fortune, which includes stockholdings as well as real estate, is a closely guarded secret, but more and more M.P.s are interested in learning how big it really is.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.