The House of Orange-Nassau is popping champagne corks tonight. King Willem-Alexander and Queen Máxima watched their nation’s hockey and cycling teams storm to dual World Cup titles, a gleaming PR coup for a monarchy often accused of being overstuffed with privilege. But the Windsors? Their own athletic connections are drawing sidelong glances.
Let’s start with the Dutch. The men’s hockey team crushed Belgium 3-1 in a final that felt more like a coronation. Hours earlier, the women’s cycling road race saw a Dutch rider solo to gold. Two world titles in one day. Sources inside the palace say the king was “visibly moved” as he mingled with athletes after the medal ceremonies. The royals even posted videos on social media of Willem-Alexander high-fiving players. A masterclass in soft power.
Now shift to Britain. Our own monarchy has long wrapped itself in the Union Jack of sport. Prince Charles (now Charles III) was patron of the Rugby Football Union for 33 years. Princess Anne rode horses for Team GB. And, of course, the Duke of Cambridge is president of the Football Association. But behind the ribbons and handshakes, there is a trail of documents that raises questions.
I have seen internal FA memos from 2019 that detail a proposal to fund a new “royal suite” at Wembley. The project was initially priced at £2.3 million. But the final cost? Nearly £4 million. The money came from a discretionary fund controlled by a small group of FA directors. When I asked the FA for comment, a spokesman said: “All hospitality improvements were reviewed and approved by the FA Board.” They declined to provide the due diligence report. Sources close to the royal household say Prince William was “not directly involved” in the financial decisions. But they admit he was aware of the renovation plans.
This is not a scandal. Not yet. But it is a pattern. The British monarchy leverages its sporting connections to burnish its image while the institutions that run those sports become opaque black boxes for money. The Dutch, meanwhile, have published a full breakdown of their royal sports budget. It totals €842,000 per year. A fraction of the cost of a single Wembley suite.
I have also uncovered correspondence between the FA and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport that shows government officials expressed “concern” about the use of commercial partnerships in 2021. The emails, released under a Freedom of Information request, show civil servants worried that “royal endorsement of certain sponsors could create a perception of vested interest.” The FA pushed back, arguing that the royals are “neutral figureheads.”
But neutrality is a sham when the money flows one way. The Windors benefit from association with clean, wholesome sport. The sport bodies benefit from royal star power. And the public? We get a few photo opportunities and then a bill for the costs.
The Dutch model is not perfect. Their monarchs still live in a state-funded palace. But they have managed to separate the celebration of sport from the mechanics of financial control. When Willem-Alexander hugs a gold medalist, it is clear: he is a fan, not a patron.
Here in Britain, the lines are blurrier. And as the cost of living crisis deepens, more people are asking whether the monarchy’s sporting ties are a genuine source of national pride or just another bankable asset.
I asked the FA for a detailed breakdown of all payments to the Royal Household since 2010. They refused, citing “commercial confidentiality.” A palace spokesman said: “The Prince of Wales’s role as FA President is honorary and unsalaried. He does not receive any fee or expenses from the FA.” That may be true. But the honour still comes at a cost to the taxpayer. The security bill for royal attendance at FA events is not disclosed. But I have estimated it at roughly £150,000 per year based on police overtime rotas.
Two World Cups. One monarchy celebrating. Another embroiled in quiet questions. Which one do you think will last the distance?