The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1061  
Old 08-15-2017, 04:52 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,560
Having thought long and hard about it I really don't think the Queen will ever abdicate - the only abdication in the RF is that of King Edward VIII and IMO her views on that are shaped by her mother (and to a lesser extent her father). I also think the Queen believes strongly in the idea of monarchy being a life long thing and that if she abdicated it could set a precedence. I suspect she feels to take away the life long service takes away apart of the purpose of monarchy - if a monarch has the option to go at sometime before their death would they not just be pressured into abdicating when they become unpopular? Remember how unpopular the Queen was for a few days in 1997 - if abdication was the norm would she have felt pressured to go because the public had 'fallen out' with her?

The Queen is, I think, a very practical woman. To her abdication is simply not on the cards. I can imagine she is more likely to entertain the thought of a Regency, for the purely practical reason that she knows she is getting old and at an age where loosing ones faculties are more likely. The more and more I have thought about it the more and more I have come to see that much of what the Queen does is "extra" to her constitutional duties, and certainly the constitutional duties are much less onerous, physically, than her "extras". There are still a lot of "extra" things the Queen is doing that she could yet handover and so while she does those there is no chance of a Regency. IMO before a regency (unless the Queen suddenly suffers a quick decent mentally) we will see the Queen withdraw much much more than now, with her still acting as Head of State as constitutional required - signing necessary documents, meeting ambassadors etc the very bare minimum with Charles doing more of the big events on her behalf.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1062  
Old 08-15-2017, 06:24 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
The suggestion being made is NOT about her abdicating at all. It is about the possibility of her asking for a Regency.

She would remain HM The Queen.

Charles would remain HRH The Prince of Wales with the added title of The Prince Regent.

That is not an abdication.

When she was 21 she promised to serve for her entire life (not at her accession as someone in an earlier post said but on her 21st birthday in South Africa). How she decides she is best able to serve is a valid question.

If she believes that the best way to serve her people is for Charles to do the actual graft of the monarch then that is how she will serve. She will never abdicate but this suggestion is away of her stepping down without abdicating - in other words having her cake and eating it at the same time - still being The Queen and not having to do the work.

The suggestion is also that she MAY make that decision in around 4 years time. Who knows what the situation will be then?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1063  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:33 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,151
Indeed. The possibility of a Regent lies more at hand than an abdication, but I rule nothing out, seeing the many once "unthinkable" things which turned out to become reality anyway.

At this moment there is a regency in Liechtenstein. While Hans Adam remains Fürst, his son Aloïs executes all the prerogatives. This becomes visible in the princely assent to laws:

In stellvertretung des Landesfürsten:

A l o ï s
Erbprinz


(Representing the Sovereign Prince:

A l o ï s
Hereditary Prince)

------------------------

During a regency in the Netherlands, always and ever the factual Sovereign is named, even when it is only "just" the offering of a Bill:

http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=sg...1891%3A0000975

My Lords!

In the name of Her Majesty WILHELMINA, by the grace of God, Queen of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Etc., Etc., Etc.;
We, Emma, Queen-Dowager, Regentess of the Kingdom;

Hereby offer into Your consideration two drafts of Bills:

[....]

And herewith We command You in the Lord's holy protection.

[signed] E m m a

----------------------

I can see Queen Elizabeth II indeed doing so, handing over the execution of the royal prerogatives into the hands of the Prince of Wales, the Regent, but remaining The Queen nevertheless.
Reply With Quote
  #1064  
Old 08-16-2017, 05:02 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,851
Strangely, I believe her 21st Birthday vow is the most important. She was only a princess then as Duc said but she's a darned sight older and I know she hoped she would have years before ascending the throne. She didn't but that changes not her vow one whit. She knew she would be the next Monarch.

Some obnoxious journalist once said to Prince Charles that surely he must feel the passing of wasted years as Prince of Wales. He fixed his steely gaze on the idiot and replied 'as my ascension to the throne is dependent upon the death of my mother, I'm in no hurry to attend her funeral' (or words to that effect). And who said Charles didn't get some of the sarcastic wit of his dad.

I am prepared to wait for what will be.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1065  
Old 08-16-2017, 05:42 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
Regency is permanent thing in UK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
Obviously every regency lasts till death of monarch or monarch's adulthood.
A regency for an adult monarch only lasts "until it is declared...that [Her] Majesty has so far recovered [Her] health as to warrant [Her] resumption of the royal functions or has become available for the performance thereof."
Reply With Quote
  #1066  
Old 08-20-2017, 02:33 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
Nobody talks about an abdication, just a few foreign newspapers who misunderstood what Robert Jobson said/wrote.

Why are the papers and posters here talking about this again? This:

Robert Jobson (royal editor at Evening Standard and now royal commentator for the Fail on Sunday) said for years that the Queen was going to abdicate. When that didn't happen and other more trusted commentators/experts (and former royal staffers) disagreed with him, he changed his mind and then said she was going to reign for life.

But last year he came up with something new to write/talk about.

When Her Majesty turned 90 last year, he said on British/Australian TV that his sources told him she was considering a regency at the age of 95. Other more trusted commentators/experts (and former royal staffers) disagreed with him and there was no more talk about it.

But when we got the news about Philip retiring from solo engagements on may 4th, Robert Jobson started to talk (on British/Australian TV) about the regency stuff again. He said (again) that she was considering doing it at the age of 95.

Then the palace went out in the evening on May 4th and said (to Royal Correspondents) that the Queen was as committed as ever to her public life. Royal Correspondent Rhiannon Mills said this on Sky News: ''Also within that statement that was relised this morning there is that very clear message of reassurance when it comes to the Queen's role going forward. Today I'm being told very clearly that she will carry on with those engagements and that it will be business as usual, she will continue to be busy and she is as dedicated as ewer to her own public life.''

But Robert Jobson wouldn't give up.

And on July 28th, he wrote this article, where he mentions the regency stuff again:
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/c...-a3598631.html

And on July 29th, he wrote this article, where he mentions the regency stuff again:
Queen's top aide quits in dramatic shake up of Royal staff | Daily Mail Online

Then the palace went out again on July 31th when we got the news that the Queen's Private Secretary Sir Christopher Geidt was to stand down. He said this: “It has been my very great privilege to serve the Queen since the Golden Jubilee in 2002 and, especially, as her private secretary for the past decade.

“In that time, as throughout her reign, her majesty’s authority has brought stability, purpose and colour to country and Commonwealth alike.

“With the Duke of Edinburgh’s recent decision to draw back from public life, the Queen’s own unwavering commitment as sovereign has the full and active support of the entire Royal family.

“It is therefore with every confidence, and with Her Majesty’s agreement, that I now hand over the responsibilities of the Queen’s private secretary to my successor, Edward Young.”

But Robert Jobson continued to talk about it, and Dickie Arbiter and other former royal staffers went out and said that as long the Queen is mentally capable, she will remain the acting monarch and we will not se a regency.

And Royal Central Editor-in-Chief Charlie Proctor wrote this article on August 4th where he spoke to Phil Dampier, who has been writing about The Royal Family for 30 years:
Will The Queen make Prince Charles Prince Regent when she turns 95? – Royal Central

Phil Dampier said this: At the moment she is in excellent health and so she won’t be giving this serious thought right now. In fact, I know she has told friends that she wants to live to 100 like her mother.

“The only reason a regency would ever be contemplated if is she became seriously ill, either mentally or physically. But I don’t believe she would consider an artificial cut off time such as reaching 95. She will consider the situation as each year passes.”

But Robert Jobson still wouldn't give up. And on Agust 5th, he wrote this:
Palace shake-up has turned into 'royal shambles' | Daily Mail Online

And on August 12th, he wrote the same again: (If you click on this DF article, you will se that the headline is this: Charles the Prince Regent? Amid major palace shake-up, is the Queen preparing to 'abdicate' and make Charles the king in all but name?)
Is the Queen preparing abdicate? | Daily Mail Online

The difference now is that other news/gossip sites have seen the last article and is making a lot of noise about it. Charlie Proctor said this on Twitter:

Charlie Proctor @MonarchyUK
Strange how all of the nationals have only just picked up on this story we reported over a week ago.

Wgat do I think:

About Robert Jobson: He is known as very unreliable and one of the few times he has been right was in 2005 when he was the recipient of the London Press Club "Scoop of the Year" award for his world exclusive that Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles were to Wed in 2005. He is rude/sexist and bullies people who don't agree with him. And he have defended all of Philip's so-called jokes.

The Queen's health: She has some problems with her knees and is a bit bent over, but she still walks wery well and quite fast when she has to, as we have seen on several occasions lately.

The Queen Mother did about 50 engagements in 2001 at the age of 100/101, and that despite the fact that she fell and injured herself more than once and was therefore very frail from 93 to 101. She also had two hip replacements, one in 1995 and one in 1998.

If the Queen manages to keep herself on her feet and avoids falling, then I think she can keep going and do what she's doing now for at least 5 years.

If she is still well after the Platinum Jubilee, then I think she can keep going with around 100-150 engagements a year until she is weakened and eventually dies after a short illness. That's what the palace (according to the The Guardian) sees as most likely.

So yes, I expect HM to be with us for years to come. But she's 91 and things can happen very fast at that age.

Philip: He is 96 years old (almost 100) and has had some health problems and 6 hospital stays since 2008. So things can happen at any time now.

So will the Queen opt for a regency at the age of 95 (the year before her Jubilee) or when Philip dies (if he passes before her) while she is healthy and mentally capable? No way. And if she does, then I will eat both my shoes and call myself stupid for the rest of my life.

And considering that I'm a pretty healthy 29-year-old with good genes, that will probably mean for a long time to come.
By Roya Nikkhah, Royal Correspondent and Caroline Wheeler, Deputy Political Editor:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...rles-xzlt6dqmc
Quote:
The Queen has no intention of stepping aside for Prince Charles and insists it is “duty first, nation first, I’m going to be there”, according to sources close to the monarch.

Royal insiders said the Queen, the world’s longest-reigning living monarch, remained as committed as ever to her duty. They dismiss claims that she will request that the Regency Act come into force in the foreseeable future.

Neither Buckingham Palace nor Clarence House is planning for a regency, three separate senior sources told The Sunday Times.
Quote:
One source said: “The Queen has always been so vehement that there will never be a regency unless she was sick to the point of being unable to perform her duties. As long as she’s healthy, regardless of her age, I don’t see a regency. Other members of the royal family can just do more.” Upon the announcement in May of Prince Philip’s retirement from official duties, the Queen signalled via a speech from her private secretary, Sir Christopher Geidt, to 500 royal staff that her family should place more emphasis on state business in support of the monarchy, rather than what royal sources describe as “individual activity”.
From the Times (above) and the Daily Stupid Express article, which I don't bother to post her:
Under the 1937 Regency Act, the monarch can cede power to the heir apparent ''in the event of incapacity of the sovereign through illness, and for the performance of certain royal functions in the name and on behalf of the sovereign in certain other events''.

It states that the monarch’s duties can be performed by a regent if the monarch is declared in writing to be incapable of performing royal functions by three or more of the sovereign’s consort, the lord chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons and the master of the rolls.

From the articles, but written differently by me - so not a quote:
Andrew Rosindell, chairman of the flags and heraldry all-party parliamentary group, has said that it is ''more important than eve'' that the Queen remains head of state as the UK prepares to leave the EU.

''To lose her as a head of state at this point would not benefit the country or be popular,'' he said.

From me: As I, the palace and reliable commentators have said several times now: We will not see a Regency when HM (if mentally capable) turns 95. So both people/politicians can calm themself down and most importantly (as I wrote in my above post) don't listen to Robert Jobson.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1067  
Old 08-20-2017, 02:58 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,151


" Andrew Rosindell, chairman of the flags and heraldry all-party parliamentary group, has said that it is ''more important than ever'' that the Queen remains head of state as the UK prepares to leave the EU. "

What has the person of the head of state, be it King Charles, King William or King George, to do with Brexit?

The nail-clipping of Mr David Davis (the British chief negotiator) is of far more importance for the Brexit process than the person who bears the Crown, I am afraid to say. The monarchy is better off without figures as Mr Rosindell who is known for blocking a ban on the use of wild animals in circuses with as argument that the cirucs needed to be defended against propaganda [of animal welfare groups]. He also is not too afraid to use "alternative facts" when he claimed: “The humiliation of having a pink European Union passport" (the EU does not issue passports at all, and the uniform colour is not pink but dark burgundy-red).
Reply With Quote
  #1068  
Old 08-20-2017, 03:08 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,316
I think some members of the media patience are wearing thin on Charles's future. It's the ages that's getting to them.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #1069  
Old 08-20-2017, 04:25 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
The media know that only young and very old sell. Middle aged to elderly don't sell. All the media cares about is the bottom line - not the truth or people's feelings.

Unfortunately for the BRF they are set up for a succession of aging monarchs and so the media will bay for one or more of them to be passed over - that sells as well - controversy.
Reply With Quote
  #1070  
Old 08-20-2017, 08:14 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,851
I have great faith in "the silent majority" when it comes to HM. She is not ill or infirm and she most definitely has all her marbles so, if it aint broke don't fix it. Without a Regency, HM has already let it be known that almost all of the donkey work is passing to Charles, Camilla, William and Harry.

When I see HM I see a very elegant and well groomed old lady. But I do not see haggard, worn, elderly woman shuffling around with her zimmer frame. And the use of a Zimmer frames does not denote the loss of mental acuity.

I think we will see less and less of HM until we only really see her on important occasions. And why not? At her age, she has earned the right to delegate and I believe her people will endorse her decision to cut back and spend a lot of time with her husband.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1071  
Old 08-20-2017, 08:44 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,015
A couple of thoughts:

People talk about the 21st birthday speech and the vows made at the Coronation but I recently found the text from her first Christmas broadcast (so between these two events) which shows that her thoughts had not wavered

"I want to ask you all, whatever your religion may be, to pray for me on that day [coronation] - to pray that God may give me wisdom and strength to carry out the solemn promises I shall be making, and that I may faithfully serve Him and you, all the days of my life."


as for the Charles v William debate (slightly off topic but this quote is worth it); old vs new is a repetitive strain in all royal families. Quote from Nancy Mitford - "How much nicer to have a young queen than that very dull man."
Not everyone appreciated his (GVI) commitment either.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #1072  
Old 08-27-2017, 08:20 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
I can see the Queen handing duties over but not the role. Why would she? She saw her father die at a relatively young age and her mother carry on for decades. She is - as far as we can see - in good health. I also don't think she would want to be around for the Camilla situation.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1073  
Old 08-27-2017, 09:53 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
What Camilla situation?
Reply With Quote
  #1074  
Old 09-02-2017, 04:40 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
The official title Camilla will be known by when/if Charles becomes King. There has been quite a bit of speculation on it since the Princess Consort title was put out there when they got married. Will or will she not be Queen Camilla.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1075  
Old 09-02-2017, 05:31 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
well kind of moot, since Charles will not be king until the queen dies.
Reply With Quote
  #1076  
Old 09-02-2017, 05:37 AM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 2,439
If the queen *would* hand over her role, iow abdicate, she *would* be around for the "Camilla situation"...

That said, i still believe she will not abdicate; if only because she is the head of state of several countries and it would be quite complicated overall (this is an aspect that is not comparable to other european monarchs).
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #1077  
Old 09-02-2017, 05:41 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
She would not abdicate. So it is completely "moot".
Reply With Quote
  #1078  
Old 09-02-2017, 05:52 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
well kind of moot, since Charles will not be king until the queen dies.
Not if she were to abdicate which was the point I was making!
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1079  
Old 09-02-2017, 06:40 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,421
HM, The Queen will abdicate the throne when she decides to wear blue jeans and a hoodie to the state opening of parliament.

Its occurred to me that it really doesn't matter what Camilla's title is going to be when Charles becomes King. What is important is her role in the scheme of things. Whether it be Queen or Princess Consort or General Gladys, she'll be right there by Charles side doing what she does best. Supporting and loving him and bringing out the best in him.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1080  
Old 09-02-2017, 07:16 AM
padams2359's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 595
Her life, her whole life.
__________________

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 Life and Lifestyle 501 07-25-2014 12:23 PM




Popular Tags
best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria crown princess victoria daytime fashion current events denmark earl of snowdon fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy nassau news noice opening of parliament picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess diana lady spencer princess eleonore princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary style princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie succession sweden swedish royal family uae wildlife victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:03 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises