As far as big parties go, the Royals did a pretty good job with this one.
The Coronation of King Charles the Third was broadcast to millions of people in every corner
of the globe and the people there on the ground certainly made the most of it.
And it was just a very wonderful moment, in the moment, I just felt really joyful and happy
to see the King because I will probably never see him again, and I just feel really happy.
But while there was plenty of pomp and pageantry, celebrities and celebrations, there were many
people who didn't have a whole lot to celebrate.
It's no secret that right now the world is facing a cost-of-living crisis, and in the
UK, not far from the King's home at Buckingham palace, it's quite a big deal.
People cannot afford to eat and heat.
And it's not just one area now, every area is exactly the same.
Everybody is struggling.
Now, what does the cost of living have to do with the King's coronation?
Well, there's one key word there.
Cost.
It's estimated that the bill for this royal extravaganza was somewhere around 50 to 100
million pounds or about 93 to 186 million Aussie dollars, which was paid for by the
British public and many weren't happy about it.
Sure.
It begs the question: Was this actually worth it?
Or should the money have been spent in some other way?
Traditionally, coronations were a major step in the monarch's journey to becoming King
or Queen.
It's a deeply religious event that takes place at Westminster Abbey in London, conducted
by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
There's a medieval oath, holy oil poured into a 12th century spoon, and a 700-year-old chair
with a huge "Stone of Destiny" that supposedly roared when it recognised the rightful monarch.
[Sound FX Roar]
If it all sounds a little old fashioned, and a little bit magical and mystical that's because
it is.
The ceremony was created around a thousand years ago and the event hasn't really changed
much since.
But society has changed.
A lot.
Once upon a time, the Royal Family were an absolute monarchy, meaning they had control
over everything.
But, in 1688 they became a constitutional monarchy which means the Royals stayed the
Head of State, but an elected Parliament took charge of making laws and other government-y
decisions.
It basically meant that the Royals 'reign, but do not rule', making their role mostly
a symbolic one, which it remains as today.
What doesn't remain today is the same level of public support for the monarchy.
In 2012, 73% of more than 1,700 Brits surveyed said they wanted the monarchy to continue.
A little over a decade later though, it's dropped to 58% and most British people weren't
actually that keen for King Charles' coronation with a survey of more than 3,000 adults revealing
that 35% didn't care very much and 29% didn’t care it all.
I don't give a bee because the Royal Family aren’t doing nothing for us.
The coronation wasn't actually even required by law, since King Charles officially became
King days after the Queen's death last September at the accession council.
So, if the coronation was a symbolic event for a mostly symbolic role that not many people
are really caring about anymore, why did it go ahead?
Well, there are people that say the coronation was an important event because many people
see the Royal Family as a staple of their national identity, that it helped boost the
UK's credibility on the world stage and united the country as a kind of social glue.
Not to mention bringing in a whole lot of tourists who pumped millions of extra pounds
into the local economy.
I came here from America and it's just very exciting to me to be here.
To be, it's just a reminder of the sign of hope through hard times.
It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
King Charles did reportedly request a scaled-back event to reflect the cost-of-living crisis
and it was a smaller event than that held for his predecessor Queen Elizabeth the second
in 1953.
But, despite that some were offended by the scale and expense of the whole thing.
They're spending so much on a coronation.
It just feels like a kick in the teeth.
The Royal Family are sitting on millions and millions of pounds.
If he wants all this ceremony, why isn’t he paying for it?
We are paying for it.
The taxpayers.
At a time when people are really struggling to feed their children.
They're feeding the rich and the poor are getting poorer, so it's all about them.
We don't need to be wasting money giving more of our resources to people who are already
hereditary billionaires.
Why is that a thing that we should be celebrating?
Many people are far more annoyed at the government than they are at their new King.
But nevertheless, it's possible that we may not see a Royal event of this scale ever again.