King Charles and Queen Camilla have politely declined to unpack their slippers at Buckingham Palace, despite a £369 million glow-up that’s taken a decade. We can’t decide if this is peak “downsizing empty-nesters” or the poshest case of buyer’s remorse we’ve ever seen.
Imagine spending ten years having your entire house ripped apart. New wiring (the old stuff was literally a fire waiting to happen), new pipes (lead-free, very on-trend), new boilers that won’t pack up the first week of December. Builders have been in since 2017. The dust has finally settled. The curtains are hung. And then your other half turns to you and says, “You know what? I’m quite cosy here at Clarence House, actually.”
Sound familiar, anyone? It’s basically every London couple who’ve ever attempted a loft conversion, except multiplied by several hundred million pounds and one very large crown.
Yes, darlings. Charles and Camilla, both pushing 80, both very sensibly fond of their current setup, have decided that moving house at their age is simply not on. Clarence House, that handsome biscuit-coloured pile next to St James’s Palace, has been home since 2003. Camilla moved in after the wedding in 2005. They know which drawer the tin opener lives in. They’ve got the Wi-Fi sorted. Why upset the apple cart?
So what WAS the point of all that scaffolding?
Oh, don’t worry, the Palace isn’t being flogged off to developers. (Can you imagine? “Stunning 775-bed period conversion, original features, walking distance to St James’s Park, parking for several hundred horses.”) It’ll remain the official HQ of Monarchy PLC, state banquets, garden parties, awkward small talk with new prime ministers, the works. The King’s just decided it’s now more of a work palace than a home palace.
Palace sources say Charles retains “huge affection” for the gaff and that it’ll be a “buzzing hive of royal activity.” Which, we gather, is posh-speak for “he’ll pop in, do the necessary, and head back to his actual house.”
Why it might actually be quite clever
Here’s where it gets interesting for us London folk. No monarch living on site means the State Rooms could open for longer stretches. More days out with the kids, more chances to pretend you’re in Bridgerton, more revenue for the Royal Collection Trust. Currently, the place only flings open its gilded doors in summer and on select dates. A longer season could be a proper win for school-holiday entertainment that doesn’t involve soft play.
Naturally, some people are grumbling. Norman Baker, former Lib Dem minister and professional royal-budget eye-roller, reckons ticket money should go straight to the Treasury. Republic, the campaign group that’d quite like an elected head of state, thinks Charles is keeping the palace “under lock and key.” But let’s be honest, a fully public Buckingham Palace year-round would mean considerably fewer chances for the King to pop in for a quick banquet, wouldn’t it?
The numbers bit (because someone has to)
The whole refurbishment was paid for by a temporary uplift to the Sovereign Grant, basically, the monarchy’s state funding. That’s now winding down from £137.9 million to £99.9 million by 2027-28. Before anyone chokes on their oat flat white, the King has also become the first monarch to reveal his tax bill: £12.9 million for 2024-25, putting him in the top 100 UK taxpayers. So there’s that.
But what about the Queen?
Queen Victoria was the first monarch to actually live at Buckingham Palace back in 1837, and she absolutely went to town on it, 775 rooms, family quarters, the lot. After Albert died, though, she pretty much ghosted the place. More recently, the late Queen Elizabeth spent her final night there in March 2020 before decamping to Windsor for lockdown, never to return overnight. The King’s decision, then, isn’t quite as radical as it sounds. Just a bit… awkward in its timing.
And for those of us who remember the absolute chaos of our last house move? The boxes, the lost chargers, the toddler who chose moving day to develop a temperature of 103? Charles and Camilla avoiding all that at nearly 80 is, frankly, a mood.
Bottom line: Buckingham Palace will remain the ceremonial heart of the monarchy, just without anyone actually sleeping there. Which makes it essentially the world’s most expensive office block with really good curtains. And if that means more chances for us London mums to drag the kids round something that doesn’t involve a ball pit or an £8 ice cream? We’ll take it.
What do you think? Is Charles being sensible, or should he just bite the bullet and move in? Tell us in the comments. We’ll be the ones still unpacking boxes from 2019.
Lady Rantingham: The unconventional Voice with a bit of sass
Meet Lady Rantingham, a witty and rebellious spirit who brings a fresh twist to the “Rant” theme. While her name might evoke a touch of aristocracy, she’s anything but conventional. With a playful, humorous tone and a slight air of authority, Lady Runtingham is here to run riot on just about anything – especially the things that bother her.
Whether it’s the little annoyances of everyday life or the larger absurdities of the world around her, Lady Runtingham isn’t afraid to call out what grinds her gears. Her rants are filled with sharp wit, unfiltered thoughts, and an unapologetic perspective that blends rebellion with a dash of humour.
Her commentary goes beyond just mockery; she touches on everything from societal quirks to the frustrating intricacies of modern life, all while maintaining a sense of lighthearted authority. Lady Runtingham isn’t just runting about the monarchy — she’s ranting about anything that makes her roll her eyes.
