The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #981  
Old 04-29-2015, 04:46 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
Yes, I think you're wrong.
Anyway, my point was that it is not up to her to decide. She could not unilaterally remove Charles from the line of succession even if she wanted to.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #982  
Old 04-29-2015, 04:51 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I think the exact opposite. I think HM has the utmost faith that when the time comes, Charles is very much ready to step into his role as monarch. I think she also is taking quite a bit of pride being able to be there and teach her grandson what he'll need to know as he eventually steps into his father's shoes as the heir apparent. She's been doing that with William since he was young.

I think when the time comes, HM will be able to leave this world smiling with the knowledge that the monarchy is going to stand firm and strong as she's checked all the bricks inside out and backwards for any kind of cracks and fortified with mortar all places that needed work done.

How amazing would it be if as George gets older, he'll also benefit from learning at Great Granny's knee?
I fully agree with you.
__________________

__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #983  
Old 04-29-2015, 04:52 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,920
Don't underestimate the power and the influence of the Prince of Wales. His achievements and his nose for business (the Duchy of Cornwall) are impressive. He has proven that he can initiate and lead succesful projects (implementing and booming organic food, the expansion of The Prince's Trust, the development of the Poundbury project, the complete make-over of Highgrove Estate into a sustainable House-with-Park, the immense restoration of Dumfries House as a project to re-integrate jobless youngsters into durable work with skills and craftmanship, etc.)

I have read that the Prince of Wales already gets the notes from the board and management meetings of the Queen's estates, like Balmoral, the Duchy of Lancaster, Windsor Great Park. Her Majesty remains Her Majesty, the only and one Queen. But the interests of the monarchy and the "business of the Firm" are more and more co-steered by the Prince of Wales. That is a token of responsible and forward thinking, ensuring a smooth "hand over". I feel that many posters underestimate the Prince of Wales and think he is only nipping tea with Camilla, the whole day long, awaiting the kingship.
Reply With Quote
  #984  
Old 04-29-2015, 05:05 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Don't underestimate the power and the influence of the Prince of Wales. His achievements and his nose for business (the Duchy of Cornwall) are impressive. He has proven that he can initiate and lead succesful projects (implementing and booming organic food, the expansion of The Prince's Trust, the development of the Poundbury project, the complete make-over of Highgrove Estate into a sustainable House-with-Park, the immense restoration of Dumfries House as a project to re-integrate jobless youngsters into durable work with skills and craftmanship, etc.)

I have read that the Prince of Wales already gets the notes from the board and management meetings of the Queen's estates, like Balmoral, the Duchy of Lancaster, Windsor Great Park. Her Majesty remains Her Majesty, the only and one Queen. But the interests of the monarchy and the "business of the Firm" are more and more co-steered by the Prince of Wales. That is a token of responsible and forward thinking, ensuring a smooth "hand over". I feel that many posters underestimate the Prince of Wales and think he is only nipping tea with Camilla, the whole day long, awaiting the kingship.

I admit he has been a successful businessman and a successful philantropist. I have misgivings though about his performance as an heir apparent specifically, especially compared to some of his continental counterparts. He has repeatedly caused embarassment to the RF and the monarchy both in his personal life (being for example openly adulterous when he was married) and, most significantlly, in his public life (e.g. violating the political neutrality of the Crown several times, trying to influence government policy in areas where he could potentially personally profit, etc.). William, with a much lower profile, has been a much better model prince.
Reply With Quote
  #985  
Old 04-29-2015, 05:39 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
She could not unilaterally remove Charles from the line of succession even if she wanted to.
Of course she couldn't. The Queen is a constitutional monarch, she is not a dictator.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Don't underestimate the power and the influence of the Prince of Wales. His achievements and his nose for business (the Duchy of Cornwall) are impressive. He has proven that he can initiate and lead succesful projects (implementing and booming organic food, the expansion of The Prince's Trust, the development of the Poundbury project, the complete make-over of Highgrove Estate into a sustainable House-with-Park, the immense restoration of Dumfries House as a project to re-integrate jobless youngsters into durable work with skills and craftmanship, etc.)

I have read that the Prince of Wales already gets the notes from the board and management meetings of the Queen's estates, like Balmoral, the Duchy of Lancaster, Windsor Great Park. Her Majesty remains Her Majesty, the only and one Queen. But the interests of the monarchy and the "business of the Firm" are more and more co-steered by the Prince of Wales. That is a token of responsible and forward thinking, ensuring a smooth "hand over".
I agree with you in this, but not what you wrote in your earlier post. He is not the shadow master behind the visibly ageing Queen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I feel that many posters underestimate the Prince of Wales and think he is only nipping tea with Camilla, the whole day long, awaiting the kingship.
I have never underestimated him and I think he will become a good king, when the time comes.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #986  
Old 04-29-2015, 06:29 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
I agree with you in this, but not what you wrote in your earlier post. He is not the shadow master behind the visibly ageing Queen.
If anything, those that are involved with the Firm have been making plans and executing them for quite a while now. Although I believe it is now defunct, there was the Way Ahead committee that met twice a year to make and execute plans for the Firm.

Although perhaps way out of date, I found this article that addresses specifically what we've been talking about here regarding Charles and the succession and his perceived "unsuitability" to be King.

If anything, in my opinion its been some of the actions that the Prince of Wales has taken over the years that makes me realize that he will be a king that actively cares what happens to the people, the country and the planet. If you've not had a chance to check out his book "Harmony", I definitely recommend it.

Britain's crisis of succession: Charles and the story behind the royal wedding - The Globe and Mail
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #987  
Old 04-29-2015, 08:03 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thumbahlina View Post
Prince Charles has a little more to do these days, but The Queen is still real sound of mind and able to handle her part. She is just letting Prince Charles have a little more responsibility now a days.
We don't know this. In terms of 'evidence' there is none. It is more reasonable to suspect (going by visual observation) that she is failing than that she is not. Her grandfather's true condition was kept from the British public way past his death, in fact, if I have my facts right. I cannot see the BRF saying anything to dissuade the public that the Queen is anything but capably handling her job. If they didn't, they would not being doing their job imo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
"Little more"? I think the Prince of Wales is an extremely busy man and holds a lots of reins in his hand. I think he is already functioning as shadow master behind the visibly ageing Queen and more and more frail Duke.
I agree. Anyone who has had to deal with aging parents knows how much one has to step into the breach. How much more for Charles vis-a-vis the monarch, his mother.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Let us keep things in perspective. It is not that they have to work from 8.00 to 17.00 o'clock in a factory.

The Queen and/or the Duke are transported in the most luxury limousines to the engagement they are attending. They are welcomed by dignitaries and then are given the Very Royal & Important Person-treatment, all and everyone making absolutely sure that Her Majesty and/or His Royal Highness are doing and feeling well. Their stamina is beyond belief but let us keep anything relative, it is incomparable with a "common" ninety-year old, of course.
A good summation of how it must go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
No, he is not.
Your reply to Duc_et_Pair's comment that he sees Charles as "already functioning as shadow master behind the visibly ageing Queen and more and more frail Duke." Why would you object to this summation? What about it strikes you as either untrue, or not possible? Just wondering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Don't underestimate the power and the influence of the Prince of Wales. His achievements and his nose for business (the Duchy of Cornwall) are impressive. He has proven that he can initiate and lead succesful projects (implementing and booming organic food, the expansion of The Prince's Trust, the development of the Poundbury project, the complete make-over of Highgrove Estate into a sustainable House-with-Park, the immense restoration of Dumfries House as a project to re-integrate jobless youngsters into durable work with skills and craftmanship, etc.)

I have read that the Prince of Wales already gets the notes from the board and management meetings of the Queen's estates, like Balmoral, the Duchy of Lancaster, Windsor Great Park. Her Majesty remains Her Majesty, the only and one Queen. But the interests of the monarchy and the "business of the Firm" are more and more co-steered by the Prince of Wales. That is a token of responsible and forward thinking, ensuring a smooth "hand over". I feel that many posters underestimate the Prince of Wales and think he is only nipping tea with Camilla, the whole day long, awaiting the kingship.
I agree wholeheartedly with you.

For some reason, Charles has always been under-estimated. I've never understood it. I think his mother must be exceedingly proud of the son that has turned out to be her heir. Can't imagine anything else.

I think what some people (his own future subjects, in fact) are not aware of is that Charles is held in considerable high and serious regard in various strata of the world politic, both high and low. That I think would startle some British folks given how relentless he is given a negative spin in the British tabloids. It's a real curiosity how much (some) British disrespect their heir to the throne.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I admit he has been a successful businessman and a successful philantropist. I have misgivings though about his performance as an heir apparent specifically, especially compared to some of his continental counterparts. He has repeatedly caused embarassment to the RF and the monarchy both in his personal life (being for example openly adulterous when he was married) and, most significantlly, in his public life (e.g. violating the political neutrality of the Crown several times, trying to influence government policy in areas where he could potentially personally profit, etc.). William, with a much lower profile, has been a much better model prince.
Charles' performance as heir has been one of utter dedication to his role as Britain's heir. I can only guess that his mother the Queen must feel he is exemplary in that regard. His dedication to duty is akin to her own.

Every step of the way he did what was expected/required of him, and got a pretty nasty experience into the bargain. When he finally said on some deeply personal level 'Enough!' and made an important decision for himself, he has been skewered for that. I'm not sure this man could have ever won after he misjudged the character of the woman who became his first wife.

BTW Charles was never 'openly adulterous'.

Also, since Charles is not the monarch he has never violated any political neutrality standards. At least, that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong, please say.

As for William's 'lower profile', let's be honest, William is simply not as intellectually adroit as Charles. He does not appear to be 'into' things in an intellectual way. Hence, William is non-threatening to the establishment, or the powers in office at any given time. Charles is definitely a thinker and viewed as a threat, I think, which is why those same people in power make sure he is skewered in the press from time to time. Let's Charles know who's boss perhaps?

Fact is, if Mr Future King does not behave himself, the PTB will let him know who pulls the strings. Sadly, there is an ever willing public eager to see the strings pulled.

But in all this, I am reminded of Charles' Uncle David who had pro-Nazi leanings. As King would he have really been a problem for Britain? Totally off-topic but a consideration. Is Charles comparable to that? Off-topic.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #988  
Old 04-29-2015, 10:18 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
Yes, King Edward VIII, even without Wallis, would have been a problem for the British Government in the late 1930's.

As far as Charles is concerned, he received the Dalai Lama (I believe the two men have met several times) causing offence to the Chinese leadership. He was a noted absentee when the Chinese President was given a State Banquet by the Queen when on a State visit, and I don't think he appeared in his role as POW in greeting the Chinese party at any stage either.

It's this aspect of Prince Charles that worries me the most. When he becomes monarch and has a problem with a foreign government over their human rights policies, is he going to imitate an icicle, or deputise Prince William to act in his place?

Sometimes, when you are a member of a reigning dynasty you have to put your personal feelings aside. What of Prince Philip, for instance, in the days of Russian communism having to meet and greet on occasion members of a regime that murdered two of his grandmother's sisters and their families.
Reply With Quote
  #989  
Old 04-29-2015, 11:16 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Nevertheless, Charles is not a regent yet. The Queen still signs orders in council, accepts diplomatic credentials and performs all her state-related functions on her own, even at her advanced age.

I may be wrong, but I suspect HM has misgivings about the monarchy under Charles and would rather see William succeed her instead. In fact, she has been raising William's profile lately in terms of official and diplomatic engagements. The Queen, however, cannot unilaterally change the law and the law says Charles is the heir apparent.

What basis do you have to believe that the Queen doesn't support Charles as heir?

While she is now giving William more diplomatic engagements, this can be seen as a training for his one day being heir apparent and then monarch and has been going on for years now. Charles has been doing these duties and more for years now. William doing them isn't indicative of the Queen's desire to bypass her son so much as to have her grandson ready to fill his father's shoes when Charles is King.

What's more is that while the Queen might be giving William more diplomatic roles since his marriage she's also given him a lot more freedom and the ability to only be a part-time Royal. This doesn't suggest she wants him to be the heir over Charles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I admit he has been a successful businessman and a successful philantropist. I have misgivings though about his performance as an heir apparent specifically, especially compared to some of his continental counterparts. He has repeatedly caused embarassment to the RF and the monarchy both in his personal life (being for example openly adulterous when he was married) and, most significantlly, in his public life (e.g. violating the political neutrality of the Crown several times, trying to influence government policy in areas where he could potentially personally profit, etc.). William, with a much lower profile, has been a much better model prince.

You could probably argue that Charles at William's age was more of a model prince than William is now - like his son he was married and had produced an heir and a spare, but both he and his then-wife were far more active in terms of duties than William and Kate are now, as they were full time royals.

Charles has made mistakes in his life, yes, but to say that the mistakes he's made over more than 60 years make him less desirable of a prince than his 30 years younger than him son is absurd. The so-called flaws in Charles' personal life happened nearly 25 years ago and was actually a private affair that was made public and skewed by the press to make him look like the villain. While he has communicated with politicians about his political views he's typically done so privately and not simply for the betterment of himself as you put but rather in support of causes he believes in. Given as he is not the monarch he hasn't betrayed the neutrality of the monarch, furthermore even if he was the monarch the monarch is allowed to discuss issues with the government - and the Queen has weekly meetings with the PM in which she does so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
We don't know this. In terms of 'evidence' there is none. It is more reasonable to suspect (going by visual observation) that she is failing than that she is not. Her grandfather's true condition was kept from the British public way past his death, in fact, if I have my facts right. I cannot see the BRF saying anything to dissuade the public that the Queen is anything but capably handling her job. If they didn't, they would not being doing their job imo.

I'm going to both agree and disagree with you here.

While the poor health of both George V and VI were hidden from the public, or at least the extent to which they were ill, their illnesses were more physical and for the most part didn't prevent them from being able to reign. There were only relatively short periods of time when either couldn't fulfill the most basic duties of the monarch, periods during which their heirs were increasingly active and they were out of public view - during these times, the true extent of their illness was hidden, but not necessarily the full fact that they were ill.

Now, as for the Queen and the DoE. I think it would be silly of us to assume that they are of perfect health and completely able. They're of an age where that's extremely unlikely. We do know of some ailments - the Queen has back and knee problems, the DoE has heart problems - and there have been periods where BP has basically implied that one or the other were having serious health problems without really expanding.

That said, there is no actual evidence that she is failing and unable to handle her role, nor that she is not of sound mind. We know there are elements that are too much for her - she no longer does tours because she can't really handle them - but there has been no indication that she can't continue doing engagements or the pomp and circumstance moments in Britain, nor that she is incapable of doing the red boxes. Furthermore, if she was mentally incapable of fulfilling her role and such mental incapacity was more than just a temporary failure then it would not be the job of the BRF to hide it. If the monarch is not of sound mind then a regency is necessary and the BRF is not doing any good by hiding this failing.
Reply With Quote
  #990  
Old 04-30-2015, 03:38 AM
JR76's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post

Sometimes, when you are a member of a reigning dynasty you have to put your personal feelings aside. What of Prince Philip, for instance, in the days of Russian communism having to meet and greet on occasion members of a regime that murdered two of his grandmother's sisters and their families.

That's true today but from what I've heard, through a friend who's mother was one of her ladies-in-waiting, his aunt Queen Louise refused to take part in functions that included Soviet representatives. Not very likely today though even if Queen Silvia and Madeleine refused to honour Chuck Berry and as you say Prince Charles was absent from the Chinese state visit.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
Reply With Quote
  #991  
Old 04-17-2016, 11:16 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Why Queen Elizabeth must end her abdication taboo | Stephen Bates | Opinion | The Guardian
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #992  
Old 04-18-2016, 06:17 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
No the Queen won't abdicate, so there's no point in discussing it. Nevertheless, this article does highlight several of the problems that I, as a convinced monarchist, have been worried about for some time.

The future King in waiting is an already elderly and not too popular figure (though personally I believe him to be committed and hardworking.) He will be followed as monarch by a middle aged man who has so far been determined to maintain his and his family's privacy at all costs. There has to be a little magic there to bind a monarch and his/her people, besides the age old rituals.

If people believe William is dull and staid now, it's not going to improve when he's in his fifties, is it? This is a man who wants to micromanage his and his wife's image to the nth degree so that all spontaneity is gone. Whether or not you like the British media, they have played a part in fashioning the BRF's image. What if people aren't going to buy it any more? Once the fairy dust of monarchy has disappeared there's little left to sustain it.
Reply With Quote
  #993  
Old 04-18-2016, 07:30 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,381
If you're truly a convinced monarchist, you should have no worries. Look at the latest opinion polls. William is as popular as ever and Charles' numbers are steadily climbing. Even on his worst day, Charles is still more popular than any politician.

History shows us that 'negative' press has very little impact on the monarchy. Thankfully people are able to make up their own minds.

Even during the dark days after Diana's death and Charles marriage to Camilla, monarchy barely got below 70 percent.

So no the Queen won't abdicate but when the time comes, both Charles and William will make fine kings in the public's mind
Reply With Quote
  #994  
Old 04-18-2016, 08:29 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
Are Charles's numbers steadily climbing though? And what happens when the Queen dies, as she inevitably will in the next decade?

I don't know why you consistently question my commitment as a monarchist, Rudolph. Look, I've had a very long life.

When I was a small child, the monarchy and what it stood for in Britain was an integral part of people's lives. My grandchildren don't believe it when I tell them this, but people would not only stand up when the National anthem was played in the cinema at the end of a session, with the picture onscreen of the Queen on horseback at the Trooping of the Colour but would actually stand up in their homes at the end of the Queen's Speech at Christmas on TV as a spontaneous mark of respect.

The Queen and Duke came to my home town when I was a child (in Britain) and people came out in their thousands and cheered and waved flags. I was there and I remember the excitement still. I was brought up on tales of young Charles and Anne and it felt as if they were almost part of the family. People talked in general conversation about the Coronation and golden coaches and the Queen in her crown etc, the magic of royalty. People had tears in their eyes when they talked about the late King.

Are children in Britain today going to regard George and Charlotte as almost part of their family? No, probably not. Are they going to be wistful about Charles looking good in ermine and robes? Perhaps momentarily.

Or has it all just turned, since the rent in Royal mystique following the War of the Wales's, into just some nice soap opera that doesn't really affect people's lives, (the attitude of most Britons now) or a popularity contest? You bet I have worries about the future of the British monarchy. It's changed so much in my lifetime it's unbelievable!
Reply With Quote
  #995  
Old 04-18-2016, 08:35 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Not sure The Queen will abdicate, but Charles will take over if she's no longer able to do the job. She can only go on if her health permits her to. If she falls seriously ill, her doctors will tell her what to do, not the other way around. That's just reality.

Charles will make a good Prince Regent if need be.

William will make a good King, because he's getting the best apprenticeship at the moment. I know folks are worried about William's feelings on privacy, but the royals have always been tough on keep their private lives private. The royals can't give 100% of themselves to the public. That's killing. They must have a degree of privacy to survive.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #996  
Old 04-18-2016, 08:44 AM
Marty91charmed's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Near Verona and Venice, Italy
Posts: 5,674
While I've always been against abdication, especially one coming from the queen, I'd go against popular opinion now and say that I wouldn't mind abidication in the next years. I'd like to see how that would work and affect the royal family. Don't get me wrong, I adore the queen, but she has been the monarch for over 60 years, and, to be honest, I'm a bit curious to see a change. Just for the sake of something new happening.

I would be very surprised if that happened though, and I'm sure a regency would satisfy my curiosity just the same.
__________________
"Yet, walking free upon her own estate
Still,in her solitude, she is the Queen".
Reply With Quote
  #997  
Old 04-18-2016, 09:30 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
1: This is the Guardian, and what they say about the monarchy must be taken with a pinch of salt.

2: I usually don't say this about people, but Stephen Bates is a hypocrite. Why? Because he suggests that the Queen must end her abdication taboo, while in the end of the article he writes ''Long to reign over us? The Windsors must hope that it’s true''.

3: Stephen Bates was the Guardian's royal correspondent, 2000-2012, and he changes his opinions all the time. He has written the book Royalty Inc: Britain's Best-Known Brand, where he writes about how the institution has evolved to maintain its popularity at a time when many other bodies have seen marked declines in esteem and popularity.

4: He was interviewed by NRK's (Norwegian version of the BBC) London correspondent Espen Aas in september last year. Then he praised the monarchy, saying that it had a bright future.

5: I have until recently thought that William and Kate was going to live their lives as they do now until the Queen dies, and I still support that decision. But I now think especially after the ridiculous criticism from the media, that maybe we'll see them as full-time working royals within 3-4 years, although as cepe said in another thread: they are not needed in terms of delivering to the current Royal agenda. Another issue/problem is who should pay for it?

When William and Kate decide to become full-time working royals, the press will let go of their criticism and mostly ignore them. We will of course se coverage of royal tours (when they still are young) and of course se the usual criticism of spending/costs, but otherwise everything will be fine.

5: And as several royal authors, so-called experts and professors have said: The longer our Queen is on the throne, the better it is for the nation and for Charles.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #998  
Old 04-18-2016, 09:58 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
The Cambridge's will be finically supported when they make the (inevitable) decision to fully focus on official royal duties. It's pretty much down to them making the switch.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #999  
Old 04-18-2016, 10:05 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
No the Queen won't abdicate, so there's no point in discussing it. Nevertheless, this article does highlight several of the problems that I, as a convinced monarchist, have been worried about for some time.

The future King in waiting is an already elderly and not too popular figure (though personally I believe him to be committed and hardworking.) He will be followed as monarch by a middle aged man who has so far been determined to maintain his and his family's privacy at all costs. There has to be a little magic there to bind a monarch and his/her people, besides the age old rituals.

If people believe William is dull and staid now, it's not going to improve when he's in his fifties, is it? This is a man who wants to micromanage his and his wife's image to the nth degree so that all spontaneity is gone. Whether or not you like the British media, they have played a part in fashioning the BRF's image. What if people aren't going to buy it any more? Once the fairy dust of monarchy has disappeared there's little left to sustain it.
Frankly, I see no problem in William becoming king in his mid-fifties. Most monarchs ascend the throne when they are middle-aged anyway. William and Catherine are fairly popular now. When they are in their 50s, their twenty-something children will be hugely popular and provide plenty of "fairy dust" to the monarchy. Actually, that is one of the advantages of monarchy being a family business: there is always the next generation !

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post

5: And as several royal authors, so-called experts and professors have said: The longer our Queen is on the throne, the better it is for the nation and for Charles.
I disagree it was good for Charles. The PoW is already past the "ideal age" to ascend the throne and a short reign in his advanced age is not the best way for him to leave his mark in royal history. One's circumstances in life are what they are though and, often, one doesn't have control over them.

On the other hand, the perception that the longer the Queen is on the throne, the better for the nation and, I would add, the better especially for the monarchy's position in the Commonwealth realms, is as much a statement about the Queen's qualities as a sovereign as it is about the doubts that still remain over Charles' suitability to succeed her.

No matter what some posters here might claim, the truth is that Charles is still controversial to a significant part of the population in the UK and in the Commonwealth realms at large. One might argue that doesn't matter as Charles will be king by law if he survives his mother, regardless of what people think about him, but the practical reality is that we are not in the Middle Ages or not even the 19th century anymore, and popularity matters to the monarchy.
Reply With Quote
  #1000  
Old 04-18-2016, 10:23 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
The emotional bond, the link between the British people and members of their royal family begins in the childhood of the Royal person concerned. See my previous post about Charles and Anne.

You don't suddenly grow an emotional connection as a subject to someone you barely saw in their early years when they're a fully fledged adult. (I'm not referring to married-ins here but to born royals.) When William and Harry were little there were lots of photos and a video and we saw plenty of them as they grew up.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, elizabeth ii, queen elizabeth ii, regency, retirement


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would They Have Married? auntie Royal Chit Chat 501 07-25-2014 12:23 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit 2016 catherine middleton style countess of wessex coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events dom duarte duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll felipe vi grand duchess josephine-charlotte grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl gustaf's birthday king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:59 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises