The real reason why the King has ditched the royal train

Telegraph

7 hours ago

The loss of another piece of our royal history might feel like cause for sadness – a sign that, in this new order, perhaps it no longer matters how things are done; all that matters is how much they cost. But flick through photographs of the royal train – which, as announced on Monday, will follow the path of the Royal Yacht Britannia and be decommissioned in 2027 – and the decision to shunt it into the sidings starts to seem entirely sensible. To King Charles III, history might be important, but efficiency and usefulness count for an awful lot more.
Take the first royal train, which was commissioned by Queen Victoria and decorated in satinwood, with sofas and easy-chairs upholstered in 'dark green Morocco'. Or the cerulean saloon commissioned by George V in 1912, which is so ornate it resembles a Fabergé egg.
Even the current model – which was often used by the late Queen and Prince Philip for overnight journeys – is said to include a bathroom with a full sized bathtub. A lovely thing, certainly; a piece of our national story. But as the King is happiest motoring around in a car that runs on biofuel, you can see why he approved of the decision to retire the royal train.
It has been taken by many as the latest sign that, at the King's behest (and based on his instinct that gentle but meaningful change is needed), the monarchy is beginning to display rather less pomp and rather more circumstance.
Insiders point to the way the Royal households have opened up in the two years since the King's Coronation, which in itself was a nod to how things would be different, with a simpler ceremony and shorter procession route than there had been for previous monarchs. They signal the shift in the way engagements are conducted, and the decision to share both the King and the Princess of Wales's very private cancer struggles with the public. They also nod to an overarching ambition – said to be shared by both the King and the Prince of Wales – to close the gap between the Royal family and the people.
An early sign that things would be different came less than a year into his reign in April last year, when it was announced the King would allow public tours of Balmoral for the first time in the Scottish castle's history. Royal sources said the move was connected to the King's wish to make the residences more accessible. There was a feeling that, in more ways than one, it was time to open the doors and let people in.
'There seems to be an increased appetite for public accessibility,' says Joe Little, editor of Majesty Magazine. ' A huge amount of work has been done at Balmoral and at Sandringham, both inside and out.'
News of the royal train's retirement was announced by James Chalmers, the Keeper of the Privy Purse, at a briefing on Monday as part of the annual review of royal spending. Many noted how efforts seemed to have been made to ensure the Sovereign Grant is put towards things that directly benefit the public.
'If they're having to make judgments on what to spend money on and what not to, the emphasis now is: 'What is the public getting out of it in a very tangible sense?'' says one insider. 'There does seem to be a bit more of an awareness of: 'what is the actual benefit that people can see and be a part of?''
If the objective is to make people feel they can 'see and be a part of' the monarchy, then opening up the occupied residences (and giving people something worth the cost of a ticket) seems essential. Take the grounds at Windsor Castle.
'The East Terrace at Windsor has been landscaped at a cost of in excess of £600,000,' says Little. 'It was last tackled by the late Duke of Edinburgh in the 1970s. So his elder son clearly felt the time was right to do it in a way that he would like it done. The thinking is seemingly that it would become more accessible to the public than it has been previously. And that has been part of the King's ethos in getting more people into the occupied palaces to see stuff that they weren't able to see previously.'
Six-hundred-thousand pounds might sound like an awful lot to spend on 'a complete re-landscaping of the old rose bed layout', as the report details (it also includes, as you might expect given the King's passion, a new design allowing for 'greatly enhanced biodiversity'). But when you consider that two journeys on the royal train – one to the Bentley headquarters last year and another to the Midlands in February – cost £78,000, it does seem a better use of the grant.
Meanwhile, St James's Palace has recently been added to the visitor route following successful trials last year. 'Tickets sold out really quickly, so there is clearly a demand,' says Little. It's a good start on a path he suspects the royals will continue down, as the sheer number of residences in the royal property portfolio begins to look unwieldy at best, unnecessary at worst. 'It's not a great look in the 21st century, but what the heck do you do about them?'
One observer notes there was a more open tone in the annual report this year. 'They sound very conscious of needing to make a case for the money now,' they say. Meanwhile, to Little's mind, it was 'very much a case of accentuating the positive'.
Indeed, at times, the report – with its emphasis on the unique importance and usefulness of the Royal family's work at home and abroad – reads more like a performance review than a fiscal review. Chalmers talked of the King's resilience in taking on such a wide programme of public duties despite his illness, saying it demonstrated 'not only His Majesty's personal commitment to duty but also the adaptability and resilience of the Royal household in ensuring continuity of service, no matter the personal circumstances'.
The message that comes through loud and clear is value for money, whether in a mention of a royal tour or an update on the essential refurbishments at Buckingham Palace, which we're told continue 'at pace' and include 'a new lift shaft [...] to accommodate two new lifts, further improving the accessibility of the Palace to all'. The report also details how one of the two official Bentleys has been converted to run on biofuel, while helicopter flights are increasingly making use of sustainable aviation fuel.
News that the royal train will be decommissioned, meanwhile, was hailed as 'just one small example of the way in which the Royal household is determined to apply fiscal discipline in all its decision making, in our continued drive to ensure we deliver value for money alongside those global reputational dividends for the UK.'
That 'fiscal discipline' seems to underpin a move to make the most of public engagements. Insiders speak of a subtle shift in the way they are conducted. 'Where once an engagement might have centred around the unveiling of a plaque or planting of a tree, now there is an emphasis (particularly when it comes to the Prince and Princess of Wales) on using the time to make a real impact,' says one.
'When they visit a charity or travel to a city they haven't been to for a while, they make sure there is a legacy to that visit. A new project set up, new connections made. They are less bothered about the picture opportunity, more about being genuinely useful while they're there.'
In May, it was announced that the Wales's Royal Foundation had joined forces with Street Soccer Scotland, funding a project to renovate and enhance Leith Community Centre, while in April, the Prince and Princess announced, during a visit to Mull, that they had funded the refurbishment of a community hall and a new soft play area for young children.
There has been a shortening, too, of the distance between the monarch and the public. While the late Queen knew the importance of visibility (there was, of course, that much quoted line: 'I have to be seen to be believed'), to the King, it seems more important that a personal connection is made when he meets someone.
'There was an invisible forcefield around Queen Elizabeth II,' says Little, 'a line you dared not cross'.
'It worked for her, but in the present era we need someone who is a bit more approachable as Head of State, and that's what we've got.'
In fact, he says, we now have 'a touchy-feely monarch'. The King doesn't seem to mind if someone at a reception goes in for a hug rather than the customary bow or curtsey, as happened in September when he found himself at the centre of a hug that turned into a scrum at a reception for the New Zealand rugby team at Buckingham Palace.
The late Queen would never have embraced a member of the public, but nor would a member of the public have attempted to embrace her. There was a respectful distance, a reverence that was reassuringly consistent. Little can recall that line being crossed just once 'in America, much to her surprise'. 'But Charles III is much more open to it, and seems to enjoy it. We see that with the Prince of Wales as well, and the Princess of Wales.'
Described at the Palace even after her death as having been a 'quasi deity', Queen Elizabeth II was remote but ever present. With Charles, that relationship between monarch and subjects is softening. Deference is giving way to familiarity, curtseys are swapped for selfies. It began early when, in the weeks after the late Queen's death, a woman asked the King outside the gates of Buckingham Palace if she could hug him. 'Of course,' he replied.
Afterwards, Sir Clive Alderton, the King's private secretary, is said to have told Palace staff that the moment encapsulated the 'informal formality' of the new reign. In the three years since, that assessment has repeatedly proven to be astute.