Stéphane Place, edited by Yanis Darras // Photo credit: Gareth Cattermole / GETTY IMAGES EUROPE / Getty Images via AFP
Nearly 2,000 guests from around the world are expected in London this Saturday, on the occasion of the coronation of Charles III. A significant figure, but which is four times lower than during the coronation of his mother, Elizabeth II, in 1953. The new monarch wanted less lavish festivities in the face of the economic crisis which complicates the daily life of the British.
“This is not a problem”
While the full cost of the event is not known, estimates range between £50m and £100m. A large sum, “but it’s not a problem because tourists arrive in the country, they bring in money and the eyes of the world will be on us,” said Steve at the microphone of Europe 1. “There will be positive financial benefits thanks to this event,” says the Londoner.
Yet in the country, the debate rages. One in two Britons believe that the state should not fund the event. But for Eric, a young retiree, that the taxpayer pays for the coronation is nothing shocking. “I can understand that it will cost money, but I guess if we had a president, it would also cost a lot of money,” he said.
Irresponsible funding?
A point of view that is not shared by Terry and Matthew, in their twenties, who find that the bill is far too high. “I think it’s very expensive. But I’m still happy to have a holiday,” says Terry. “I think to be honest, that’s too much money. With the current cost of living, inflation, it’s irresponsible in a country where food prices have jumped 17% in a year” to fund such a project, adds Matthew.
So, across the Channel, many wonder if Charles III should not have put his hand in his pocket himself.