It’s time for a cap on the cost of weddings. Shall we say £550?
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
How much does the average British wedding cost? Time’s up. It’s £20,700. Although, since these are the esteemed pages of The Telegraph, some of you may scoff and think, “Nonsense! That barely covers the canapé bill.” Still, it’s a fairly large chunk of cash. Especially in these straightened times. Especially when those getting married could put that money towards, say, a house or childcare instead of spending it on one day. A lovely day, you hope. But one day, nevertheless.
How about £550 instead? Could you do a wedding on that? Quick ceremony, then a nearby pub garden where everyone gets a drink and slice of cake – which, my mother always says, is how it used to be. There’d be the wedding itself and afterwards a celebratory tea where, all right, there probably was champagne, and also sandwiches and a piece of fruit cake, but there wasn’t much more fuss than that. No huge evening party. No photo booth. No doughnut wall (literally, a wall from which you pluck doughnuts, instead of a boring old-fashioned cake). No espresso martinis and certainly no regional tribute band smashing out a ropey Bruce Springsteen cover. Tea, cake, home. Splendid.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith’s think tank, the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), has recently recommended that the government stump up £550 for poorer couples to get married, which it reckons would help tackle loneliness. Married couples are more stable, this theory goes, and having more of them about would create a more harmonious society. If the state chipped in with £550 to help those who can’t afford it, we’d all be better off, says the CSJ. “Helping more people to get married by subsidising the bill for those on the lowest incomes offers significant health, social and economic benefits,” intones Josh Nicholson, one of the think tank’s researchers. “Family relationships, and particularly marriage, are the best defence against loneliness.”
I was going to counter that the state should probably focus on outgoings such as doctors and angry train drivers before it starts shelling out for registrars and doughnut walls. But then I thought: hang on, maybe this should apply to everyone? What if every wedding could cost a maximum of £550? It would be like the budget cap in Formula One except, well, a bit lower. Wouldn’t that make life less exhausting?
Listen to some of the wedding “trends” that were forecast by Vogue for this year (oh you sweet, sheltered being, did you not realise that there were wedding trends?). In 2024, according to the fashion bible, affogatos should be doled out instead of pudding, because “coffee and ice cream are a delight and serve two needs at once”. Drone shows should be used instead of fireworks, because they’re more environmentally friendly. “Dutch Masters-inspired florals” are apparently going to be huge this summer, as are “wedding crests” or “custom logos… used throughout the event”.
You see? As we stagger towards another summer of wedding mania, wouldn’t it be simpler to implement a cap of £550 on each couple? The government helps those who need it, but those who don’t need the state’s help can’t spend a penny more either. The bride can’t drop the defence budget on a dress, ostentatious and overly priced venues are out, and nobody has to worry about whether their tables at the reception look like a Vermeer, because the budget only covers a few tulips in a jam jar.
Compare this idea with a wedding that took place last weekend in the South of France. Umar Kamani, the Mancunian founder of the online fashion giant PrettyLittleThing, was marrying his model girlfriend, Nada Adelle. Andrea Bocelli sang as the bride, in custom Dior, tottered down an aisle fashioned from approximately 80 billion white roses; Mariah Carey sang afterwards; the whole event lasted four days and cost an estimated £20 million.
On the one hand, Kamani is said to be worth around £800 million, his family are self-made retail tycoons, and if he wants to spend £20 million on his wedding then why not. On the other hand, isn’t this level of Marie Antoinette-like excess making others feel as if they need to aim for the same, and if they can’t, then they’re somehow throwing “less” of a wedding? That their relationship is less valid because they couldn’t afford to put on such a circus? The pressure on this one day has become so silly. So crazed. So demented – and never more so than now, when people are fretting about mortgages and whether they can afford one or two children.
I remember, a few years ago, a friend of mine – an otherwise sensible, intelligent woman – coming alarmingly close to tears over what colour the napkin rings would be at her reception. I’ve heard engaged couples take judgmental notes at other weddings – “Ooh no, let’s not have that hymn,” or “We definitely wouldn’t have picked that band” – as if they’re on some kind of competitive gameshow. Stick a £550 cap on this and we’d level the playing field.
It might come as something of a relief to the guests, too. A few weeks ago, there was a panicked thread on Mumsnet from a woman asking if she could possibly wear the same dress to two different weddings this summer. Because this is the other problem: increasingly show-off weddings have upped the pressure on those going to them. Now you need a new outfit for every wedding – new frock, new shoes, new bag and so on. I’m all for renting dresses; I have for several weddings. But even renting encourages the idea that you need to wear something different for each big do because, what, otherwise you’re making some disgraceful faux pas? Deary me, have you seen what Sophia’s wearing? She’s in the same dress she wore last month! I know! So embarrassing, she shouldn’t be allowed out!
It’s madness, the whole thing, but a cap would put everyone straight again. A pint of cider, in a pub garden, toasting a couple of friends. Wouldn’t that be grand?
