A KING'S RANSOM

A new documentary asks 'What's the Monarchy For?', but Tessa Dunlop feels a more thorough interrogation is needed of how Charles became the UK's first billionaire monarch

- 

In the wake of the Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor furore, the timing feels prescient: a three-part documentary series on royalty, What’s the Monarchy For? These days, about half of Britain’s population is wondering the same thing. Cue a landmark audit of royalty presented by octogenarian David Dimbleby, whose own hereditary broadcasting privilege is flaunted throughout.

Whether it is the magical conjuring tricks achieved by his father Richard during the late Queen's coronation, his brother Jonathan's nip-and-tuck of Charles's image in the then Prince of Wales's face-saving 1990s documentary or David's own inimitable delivery of countless royal occasions, the BBC's Dimbleby dynasty in the 20th century were to royalty what Netflix has been to the Beckhams in the 21st.

But with this latest series, the BBC - royalty's “ringmaster”, according to Dimbleby - is clearly trying to do something a bit different. The former director general Greg Dyke naively suggests that the corporation should reflect public opinion on the royal family, and with their popularity hovering around the 50 per cent mark, that perhaps explains why this series is lukewarm about many of our most venerable institution's attributes - particularly when it comes to royal wealth.

However, the BBC's ability to shine desperately needed light into the thicket of secrets that govern the royal family's finances is hamstrung early on by an editorial decision to make one episode about power and a separate one about money. The first ends up revisiting many of the less edifying political moments in Britain's last 10 years, particularly Boris Johnson's proroguing of parliament in 2019.