Canadian taxpayers spent £506,000 on the Cambridges’ sad Canadian tour

wenn29593225

In the middle of the Cambridges’ royal tour of Canada at the end of September, the Daily Beast’s Tom Sykes wrote a fascinating and somewhat funny story about how badly the tour was going. Sykes didn’t say it was going badly because of gaffes or politics, but because Will and Kate were barely getting any coverage in Canada, in the UK or in the important American markets. Sykes said that interest in the Cambridges has been “going downhill” since the height of royal mania when Prince George was born, and that the general apathy towards the Cambridges specifically these days is mostly their own fault because of their open hatred of the press, their work-shy ways and they’re lives of “almost obsessive reclusiveness at Anmer Hall in Norfolk.” It was a brilliant takedown and assessment by Sykes, and it speaks to what a lot of us have felt about the William and Kate this year in particular, that there’s been a significant shift in how they’re covered and how people have lost interest in them. Well, what is the cost of disinterest and apathy? Quite a lot.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge balled out on Canada’s dime when they visited their former British colony in late September, spending an estimated grand total of £506,000 [$855,600 CAD] on their week-long trip to BC and the Yukon, according to numbers obtained by VICE News through an access to information request. Will and Kate’s last visit to Canada in 2011, just after they got married, cost a total of $1.2 million—about $113,000 per day. A year before that, the Queen embarked on a nine-day tour of the country that totalled $2.79 million—or around $310,000 per day.

During their lavish week on the west coast, Will and Kate spent about $13,000 on hospitality, which included flowers and refreshments, according to numbers provided by Heritage Canada. The budget includes a $500 gift from Justin Trudeau to the Royal family. The list doesn’t say what the gift was. About $2,000 was also spent on a “legacy gift,” though the budget doesn’t specify what it was, or who it was for. Another $100 was dropped on a bouquet at the end of the trip. Trudeau announced on the last day of the tour that the government would give $100,000 as an official gift to mark their tour, to be divided evenly between Prince’s Charities Canada and the Immigrant Services Society of British Columbia.

The royals also spent an estimated $20,000 on media room rentals and travel for the trip. And they shelled out $20,000 on their official photographer, and another $5,000 on a photo album and group photos. While they paid $10,000 to translate the media guide into both official languages, and $30,000 for translation of “program dailies, web etc…” Accommodations for their 16 staff cost $40,000, and accommodations for Department of National Defence drivers cost $10,000. The per diem for the royal household was $16,000.

The couple also rented two float planes in Victoria for $50,000, and a boat in Haida Gwaii for $5,000. And the budget also appears to include a $20,000 royal visit to the Young Vancouver Reception at the Telus Garden building. In the lead-up to the trip, staff for the royals made three preliminary visits to suss out the west coast, spending $39,000, $116,300, and $5,150 on each trip. The royal budget allocated a mere $40 on royal cellphones for the trip.

The Department of National Defence covered their international flights to and from London, although the cost of the flights isn’t listed. The visit to Haida Gwaii on September 30 was covered by British Columbia “and/or organization involved.” It’s not clear whether Haida Gwaii incurred any costs from the trip. The total cost sharing for the provinces was $30,000 — $15,000 each for BC and the Yukon.

According to a government Q&A, the tour is paid for by “cost sharing agreements” between the Government of Canada and the governments of British Columbia and Yukon. But it’s not clear from the ATIP what those arrangements were. The spreadsheet of the royal tour indicates that cost sharing expenses with the province are indicated in green, but the spreadsheet was sent by Heritage Canada in black and white.

[From Vice]

I love these kinds of breakdowns because I’m anal retentive and I love to see what kind of money is being spent and where. So the Canadian government had to pick up the tab for everything from flower bouquets to per diems to the Cambridges’ private photographer, lest some peasant photojournalist take photos of the Cambridges? Yikes. To be fair though, Justin Trudeau made a big deal about inviting the whole Cambridge family to Canada, probably because he hoped that the addition of Charlotte and George would be good for commonwealth relations. He was willing to spend £506,000 of taxpayer money just so Canadians could see Kate and Will waving sullenly interspersed with their “private time” on their Canadian holiday.

wenn29600404

wenn29593188

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

83 Responses to “Canadian taxpayers spent £506,000 on the Cambridges’ sad Canadian tour”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. original kay says:

    UGH

    GAH!!

    #WhatAWaste

  2. Who ARE These People? says:

    I never understood why they were here, though I’m in Ontario. I’m not sure what was accomplished. Trudeau didn’t need them in his first year. Maybe they’re like other tourists who come to Canada because it’s clean, safe, beautiful and they can’t figure out where else to go.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      I always suspected that Trudeau was a little misinformed about how this would turn out. He probably thought he could charm them into lots of photo ops displaying politics and royalty in the 21st century in the form two attactive young families with cute kids. But he is not a stupid man so he should’ve known that wasn’t going to fly and no, he didn’t need it at this point. Or maybe he knows his sh*t and tried to get them before Kate got pregnant again.

      ETA: Let me digress for a sec. Looking at these photos I suddenly want nothing more than for Harry to marry his new girl and have cute af babies. There will be nothing boring about them. I would fangirl them so hard. These two would not be amused.

      • ria says:

        Prince Harry and Princess Meghan sounds really good and way more interessting than Normal Bill and Workshy Kate.

      • TyrantDestroyed says:

        When I see the money spent on this family, I want them all to go away quietly and get real jobs that sustain their lavish lives.

    • Megan says:

      I did not understand the point of the tour. Was it to promote trade, tourism, highlight environmental issues, champion conservation? It seems like the other royals have a mission and purpose when they go on tour. The Cambridge tours seems to be about little more than sight seeing and theme dressing.

    • perplexed says:

      Maybe he thought they’d be interesting like Diana and Charles were when they toured countries (didn’t he meet Diana when he was a kid?), but since he’s a guy didn’t read the preceding royal coverage over the years to realize they’re boring. I guess his wife could have told him, but she’s probably busy and didn’t have the time either to figure out that they’re dull.

  3. JellyBeans says:

    As a Canadian my self, I completely forgot they visited already. Finished watching The Crown yesterday and don’t believe the amount of work that the queen had to do and still does in being a public figure and think it’s silly how unwilling these two are are when it comes to doing the “job” but like access to the privy purse.

    • Lauren says:

      Could you imagine William and Catherine visiting 57 towns in 58 days? I couldn’t stop from comparing Her Majesty to her lazy grandson while watching The Crown.

      • booboocita says:

        I have to believe that the producers’ inclusion of those scenes of the young Queen zipping around Africa and Asia for days on end without a break (and with small children at home!) was a not-so-subtle dig at the Cambridges. It was certainly the first thing I thought when I saw them.

        I’m purely loving The Crown. Claire Foy and John Lithgow in particular are knocking it out of the park.

      • bettyrose says:

        I’m glad I’m not the only one who found that very pointed. It wasn’t just the 57 towns in 58 days; the Queen wouldn’t hear of modifying the itinerary one bit.

      • OTHER RENEE says:

        The Queen had no problem whatsoever leaving her small children at home for months as they were being raised by the nannies anyway. Not everyone feels that way about their children however. Kate may have nanny help but nowhere near the level employed by the Queen. Unfair comparison.

      • LAK says:

        Other Renee: different times, different ways of parenting. Aristos /wealthy people of that era didn’t raise their children. Nannies and boarding school did. No matter their everyday activites from socialite ladies who lunched to heads of state.

        At the time it wasn’t out of bounds for HM to leave her kids for months on end or to leave them with nannies.

        It’s ridiculous to judge her with out new way of doing things when it was very different in her era and a different understanding of childrearing.

        If Kate used the same methods today, we would and should be appalled because we don’t raise kids in the same wsy.

      • Lindsay says:

        That would make more sense if they were some dramatic drop off after having kids. This is a woman that did a quarter of what Prince Philip did in her first full year as a royal even though she is a third of his age and wasn’t hospitalized twice with a serious infection. It was also the Queen’s Jubilee so many of her 111 engagements were standing on a boat or balcony with the Queen and waving. On top of that on one of the Jubilee walk abouts she actually whined to the people there saying she couldn’t wait for this Jubilee to be over so things would wind down from the hectic pace of being out in public for very generously 300 hours per year. She later complained about having to change clothes five times on Christmas Day. Kids or not she would never even imagine doing a tour at half that pace and duration despite much better travel conditions.

    • polonoscopy says:

      Me too. I totally forgot about this visit. I remember the last visit right after they got married, but I have no memory of this on. That’s where they had the creepy kids’ party right?

      Also: this is the line item that got me. $10, 000 to translate the guide books from English to French. FOR REALZ?????? You could get someone in grade 9 to do that! I have a friend who does that for Montreal businesses and she could do it for a ten of the price! GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER GOVERNMENT.

      • dotdotdot says:

        Considering how shitty translators are being paid this shit just makes me angry!

      • Surferrosa says:

        Professional translators come at a cost because translating is time intensive. I can only assume that they used the services of highly qualified translators like myself. We spend years studying languages and specializing in specific fields. We deserve to be remunerated appropriately; depending upon the nature of the texts a translator will charge the equivalent of 30-50 US dollars per hour or about 50 per page (normally translators charge per word). Sure, you can use a 9th grader or google translate, but the quality of the translation would be very poor, I assure you, and it would look bad on the Canadian government. Not that this applies here but wars have been started because of bad translations. Translators deserve a little more respect.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        They visited some Indigenous peoples so I don’t think French was the issue.

      • Ravine says:

        Professional translation does cost a lot of money, particularly if the turnaround time is short; translators often charge must higher rates for “rush” jobs, so that may have factored into the cost as well if the writers/editors of the media guide were behind schedule. And yes, good translators deserve more respect — it’s much harder than it looks!

    • LadyMTL says:

      Same here! I live in Quebec and had actually forgotten that they’d even been to BC. Shows how important they are to my day-to-day life, lol. That said, $855,000 isn’t as high a number as I’d thought it would’ve been (works out to costing roughly 2 cents per Canadian!) but do I think it was worth it? Nope.

      Now, if the Queen ever came back to Canada, that would be a different story! Alas, I know it won’t happen.

    • Lascivious says:

      I live in Vancouver but only knew about the trip from reading CB. The local rag covered it a bit, but otherwise I would have never noticed. (And I live just a few blocks away from one of the venues they used.)
      I did appreciate Kate’s subtle racism and othering when she dressed up in safari clothes. Clearly the preliminary visitors did no due diligence or she would have been properly dressed in goretex and gumboots.
      And who the hell plans a fall visit to this rainforest? Can’t understand why they didn’t come in summer if they wanted the flyovers and photo opps. /rant

    • layla says:

      Alberta here….and also only saw/heard minimal, minimal coverage.

    • LAB says:

      I’m in Alberta and also forgot. I think PM Selfie (TM) hoped people would be so thrilled with the trip they’d forget he was elected.

      I speak basic French and can’t believe they paid that much for a translation! And the $100 bouquet?

      I wish Sophie would have gotten more press when she was in Canada in early summer.

  4. Goats on the Roof says:

    Wow. What a waste of resources.

  5. paolanqar says:

    Surely Canada could have used that money in a better way. Call me crazy but I don’t see the point of monarchies in this time and age especially when they contribute nothing to the former colonies abroad.

    • polonoscopy says:

      Basically the idea behind all constitutional monarchies is to separate the practicality of government with the dignity of statesmanship. I think there is a great argument to be made that the elected lawmakers should not be expected to also take on a ceremonial role as well, because it distracts the public from their policy and puts an undue burden on people who should ultimately be doing one kind of work extremely well. Moreover, the parliamentary systems of government are much more combative, and with traditions like Question Period in the House of Commons, where everyone just yells at the PM for an hour, you can’t really expect anyone to have “respect for the office”. Therefore, the Queen, the Royals or GG can be trotted out to cut ribbons and go to art shows and ballets and make nice to charities without being beholden to an opinion on anything at all. Also, it’s easier to say this as someone from a historically white (well, not actually if you go far enough back, but you know what I mean. commonwealth country that has never had a particularly stringent class system or a rebellion.

      Of course, it doesn’t always work that way. Justin Trudeau is our first legacy PM, and his father was the first tabloid PM, so he kind of has a bit of a “royal family” around him. When I was young, I had no idea who the PM was married too, or if they had any children and I didn’t care. Also, Stephen Harper was a wannabee president – so he forced his wife to change her name to Harper (RIP. Laureen Teskey) and play a role in politics, even though she very clearly hated it. Also, now our royals have opinions, and I don’t personally like that. It’s a system that works on paper but doesn’t always works in real life, especially in the age of television.

      • Angel says:

        Really interesting comment, love some of the points you raised.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        Laureen kind of hates Stephen too, so it works out.

      • addie says:

        Elevating people because of birth is problematic. It confers unearned privilege that I cannot understand. If you need the ceremonial to be separated, the Irish presidential model appears to work well, with a respected person of merit appointed. Less expensive, gets the job done, organizations get publicity.

  6. shewolf says:

    It’s not that Canadians don’t like them. We don’t have the same kind of media that you’d find in America or the UK. Most people are too busy going about their lives to care and that’s not a dislike for the royal couple… I’m sure most of us wish them well… we just aren’t given to sensationalism.

    • original kay says:

      Great post.

    • rosalee says:

      we politely ignore celebrities..I once was in a elevator with a national treasure..I looked straight at the door for the entire ride to the 12th floor not once wavering in my focus. I saw some film crew down the street yesterday the only emotion to filter through my brain was..damn parking is going to be a b***h – as for William and Kate..not my cup of tea..too upper class british..famous for their birth and marriage

      • paolanqar says:

        I have met many celebrities in my life and not once I asked for an autograph or a picture, actually, I love pretending I don’t know who they are. It puzzles them a bit.
        I could never go up to a celebrity and acknowledge them. Never ever.

      • vava says:

        The only celebrity I swoon over is Anthony Bourdain, and I had the opportunity to see him not long ago. It was fantastic. I probably wouldn’t mind meeting the Obamas or Prince Harry, though. 😉 But Kate and William? LOL………..no. I wouldn’t cross the street to see those two.

  7. Lainey says:

    The have a personal photographer??? And are they included in the 16 staff they brought? Although I thought we were told at the time it was 12- who’s the extra 4?

    • Lindsay says:

      Her new assistant/stylist/seamstress is engaged to IIRC an AP photographer who now seems to be “their” photographer.

      • Tourmaline says:

        That’s Natasha Archer engaged to Chris Jack of Getty Images. He was on the tour for Getty tho so it’s gotta be someone else who is on their payroll.

  8. Ghoulish_moose says:

    Love the top pic of her looking at Justin Trudeau. Just like the way she looks at Ben Ainslie too =P

  9. Jesie says:

    My first thought was ‘what Canadian tour’ and I followed the news on it. So yeah, money NOT well spent.

    How much does Kate actually smoke? In that second last picture she’s got worse smokers mouth than my 65yr old, pack a day for 50 years mother.

    • Montréalaise says:

      She probably smokes to keep her weight down. Nicotine revs up your metabolism – similar to cocaine – which is why a lot of people gain weight once they quit smoking.

  10. Louise says:

    She looks beautiful in that last photo though – majah hair goals

  11. TGIF says:

    I saw lots of great coverage in BC and Canadian news. I like the causes they support and seeing them be parents. Love ’em or hate ’em they are a part of Canadian culture. I am Canadian, and not everyone always understands our culture. I was a fan of Diana and I think she would be proud of her kids and grandkids and the positive legacies they will try to create.

  12. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    I think the Fail reported similar figures at the time. Thou the timing of the release of this info is making my tin foil hat twitch, it’ll get buried with all the hubris surrounding Harry and his new lady. And yes I wouldn’t put it past the Cambridges/Mids to leak his relationship to cover up bad news for the Dolittles – they have thrown him and his GF’s under the bus before.

    • Ravine says:

      Allow me to adjust your tinfoil hat. The info was requested and published by VICE, which is about as far from a royal PR outlet as you can get — their brand is very “anti-establishment”. As for the timing, the last day of the tour was October 1, and the VICE article was published on November 6, so 35 days later. The Canadian government is required to comply with ATIP (Access to Information and Privacy) requests within 30 calendar days (https://atip-aiprp.apps.gc.ca/atip/faq.do?caller=/atip/welcome.do#acc_4). So, assuming VICE waited until W&K had completed the trip (i.e. arrived home) before submitting the request, then needed a couple of days to parse through the spreadsheet and write the article, there’s nothing suspicious about the article being published this week.

  13. Sixer says:

    Hey, LAK – are you about?

    Thinking about this. Domestically, local councils are responsible for the costs of royal visits, right? Since local councils have borne a huge proportion of the funding cuts under austerity, are domestic royal visit numbers down? You know, the little hospital wing openings and the like?

    • LAK says:

      Yes. Local councils cover local visits.

      No austerity when it comes to royals.

      Royals still gadding about as busy as ever.

      • Sixer says:

        SIGH. I didn’t want you to say that.

      • LAK says:

        It’s twofold.

        1. Councils have to show that they are spending budget allocated to them. Any dips ie savings due to reduced costs leads to budget cuts. In good and bad years. If funding has to be cut, social programmes are the first to be cut out of the budget. Not these obvious flipperies.

        2. Royals have to maintain their budget/ visibility. It matters not a jot how they do that outside of a few guidelines. Plus they do not necessarily communicate so the ship is ran efficiently which ends up gaving different royals pitch up to the same town/county within weeks, if not days, of each other.

    • Jaded says:

      OK, weighing in here as a citizen of the beautiful city of Victoria. YAWWWNNNN.

      I live right downtown, minutes away from where all the fooferall took place. Couldn’t have cared less although the constant din of news helicopters hovering overhead was annoying as were the traffic jams and incessant sirens as they were limo’d around town.

      A huge waste of taxpayer $$ and I want my money back.

  14. Jess1632 says:

    Ughhh such a waste for two mediocre, bland ppl. Trudeau is lovinn the media though….

  15. Dawn says:

    I’m sure the people sending their kids to subpar schools and who are having to wait ages for basic medical treatment in Canada are thankful that half a million pounds was wasted on a bald man, his vain wife, and their useless children.

  16. Cerys says:

    What a waste of money. The whole trip was another holiday for the Dolittles and a PR stunt by dragging the children along. Compare their pitiful amount of engagements to the ones currently being undertaken by Charles and Camilla, both nearly 70, in the Middle East. I hope Meghan Markle likes royal duties if she marries Harry because both of them will be doing the majority of the work, along with Chas and Cam.

    • Lady D says:

      Could you imagine the holiday you or I could take with that kind of money? I’d be gone for 2 years or more.

      • Cerys says:

        Absolutely. I’d be off in a minute if I had that kind of money to spend on a trip. Just need the lottery numbers to come up first.

  17. Canadian says:

    Perfectly fine with the money spent.

  18. ShinyGrenade says:

    French-canadian here.
    Very pissed off that their visit cost so much, and that our uber Prince is not even able to say two sentence in French.

    Waste of money.

    • Chrissy says:

      It was a ridiculous amount of money spent on what was basically a free holiday for a couple of spoiled layabouts. That money would have been much better spend on taking care of shortages in health care and infrastructure spending. An entourage of 16? WTF. My letter to the Prime Minister’s Office has already been sent.

  19. PHAKSI says:

    The tour was a dud, so not a great return on their investment. It hasn’t quite reached the level where other countries would think twice about hosting them though, the people who complain about them here and on royal blogs are the minority in the royal watching community

  20. Citresse says:

    Waste of taxpayer money.
    W&K probably consider it a hard working tour but then William doesn’t like to be confronted with regard to his laziness. He laughs it off, calling it “a part of the job.” What job William????? You barely work. You claim to want to be a full- time parent but you have loads of help there too.
    The interest in these two has seriously waned since 2011 tour of Canada. Imagine if they hadn’t brought the children? It would be even more dismal.
    William.. here’s a reminder; your grandmother when touring Canada in 1960, suffering morning sickness with Andrew, worked and kept going.

    • Citresse says:

      Sorry – that should read: HM 1959 tour of Canada.

    • Hazel says:

      Speaking of which, is William still flying that air ambulance ‘copter? Haven’t heard much about that lately? Or has he stopped pretending?

  21. mazzie says:

    Yeah, I totally forgot about their tour unless I came here. I don’t really remember how much coverage they go in the papers. I’m going by – not much.

  22. Babs says:

    OT: William lost his looks big time.

  23. me says:

    Big waste of money.

  24. Starlight says:

    Kate could be frugal with her outfit buying – some mentioned up to about 90,000 pounds in clothes outfits – total – for the tour no one can say exactly. It is her perogative but many royals don’t spend half as much. She wears so many outfits now it’s seems all massed into one nothing really standing out.

  25. vava says:

    I think it was money WELL SPENT. The two Cambridges have been exposed for the losers they really are. William can’t be bothered to read his briefing papers, and Kate is a rude bitch. There I said it. Entitled nasty rich jerks, both of them.

  26. Kitty says:

    This tour didn’t even generate lots of interest and publicity. William and Kate are no longer interesting.

  27. Jules says:

    I live in Kelowna and was super jazzed that the royals were coming, I was going to go wave flags and everything, because obviously their events would be in a large, accessible spacious area right? Wrong! The university they visited is way out of town with no visitor parking, there was some vague plan for buses that I never did figure out. They also visited a winery that is located on a narrow residential road, with front gates that look like they come from a Cold War shelter and the event was closed to the public. Boo-urns!

    • Citresse says:

      Thanks for that info. More of W&K’s attempt to do less than the bare minimum and seriously keep the general public away.

  28. Jennifer Jones says:

    Does Kate smoke cigarettes? Her skin never really looks healthy. Now, that being said, I’m honestly not trying to sound like a jerk. My skin isn’t perfection, either, but hers resembles the skin of a smoker.

    • msthang says:

      Jennifer Jones, big time smoker, it helps to keep her rail thin. Boy, sun, booze and ciggies , that is lethal combo for looking light years older than your age !!!

  29. hey-ya says:

    …I’m glad there is so much disinterest & apathy…again…cos thats actually how it used to be…before Diana…suddenly everyone & their dog felt they had an input to the monarchy…but they dont…a half mil tour…peanuts…

  30. Zardi123 says:

    So much disinterest as these two are really duller than dishwater
    plus if MM and PH do make an item …. trouble will brew with Mannequin coathanger peg as the jealousy will eat her up..as she cannot do speeches or be a humanitarian like MM and she also works on her charities not like coat peg cant even speak properly….