Princess Beatrice of York Current Events 15: January 2014-July 2015

[Roslyn]

Why should any other royal who attends a charity event then have that listed in the CC?


The best example to me of this occurred in 2012.


On one day Kate presented medals at the Paralympic Games - listed in the CC.


Next day Eugenie did the same thing - not listed in the CC.


Why was it an official engagement for Kate but not for Eugenie?


Why is it when Anne attends a charity dinner it is listed in the CC but not when Beatrice does the same thing?


Why is it when Harry greets people linked to one of his charities it is in the CC but when Beatrice does that it isn't?


The Crown isn't always represented when things are listed in the CC. Often the event is simply described as xxxx attended a dinner for yyy charity.

This stinks, in my opinion. Andrew's daughters are Royal Highnesses, and were born into that status as the children of the monarch's second son. Yet they are blatantly discriminated against. I think HM is making a huge blunder with this.

 

[Rudolph]

If the problem is Bea being an HRH, I have a feeling either an individual or group conferral Letters Patent will be issued during Charles reign that will settle the York issue once and for all.

 

[muriel]

This stinks, in my opinion. Andrew's daughters are Royal Highnesses, and were born into that status as the children of the monarch's second son. Yet they are blatantly discriminated against. I think HM is making a huge blunder with this.

To me, it is very clear that HM does not see any of her grand children, save the Wales boys, as working members of the royal family. Some have the HRH, some don't, but none of them are part of "The Firm".

The future direction is clear, and a strong message was set out at the Diamond Jubilee: 7 key members, supported by the younger children of HM, and her cousins.

Andrew's daughters are Royal Highnesses, and were born into that status as the children of the monarch's second son.

They certainly have the status, and titles they were born with. They are just not required by the firm to be working members of the BRF at this juncture. What is wrong with that?

 

[GracieGiraffe]

This stinks, in my opinion. Andrew's daughters are Royal Highnesses, and were born into that status as the children of the monarch's second son. Yet they are blatantly discriminated against. I think HM is making a huge blunder with this.

I agree - if you are a member of the BRF and do work for the Firm, you should get credit - I believe this is done to make some royals look better than others.

If the problem is Bea being an HRH, I have a feeling either an individual or group conferral Letters Patent will be issued during Charles reign that will settle the York issue once and for all.

You mean Charles' first step will be to issue Letters Patent stripping Bea and Eu of their HRH? Blimey, the tabloids would have a field day!! Can't be what he wants...

 

[muriel]

I agree - if you are a member of the BRF and do work for the Firm, you should get credit - I believe this is done to make some royals look better than others.

I think you have identified the key point: "if you ....do work for the Firm, you should get credit". It is pretty clear the York girls do not work for the Firm, and hence, do not get credit for it.

 

[muriel]

You mean Charles' first step will be to issue Letters Patent stripping Bea and Eu of their HRH? Blimey, the tabloids would have a field day!! Can't be what he wants...

I don't think that will be necessary at all. My sense is the York girls will be allowed to keep their titles, without being burdened with the responsibility of carrying out engagements for the monarchy. They are free to develop careers and lives independent of the Firm run by their grand mother, and one that will be run by their Uncle in time to come.

Blimey, the tabloids would have a field day!! Can't be what he wants...

You can't run the Firm based on what the tabloids think. That is a complete recipe for disaster, IMO.

 

[MARG]

I don't see that any good will come to the BRF should they interfere with the status of the Yorks. They are the Queen's granddaughters and, as such, they are HRH's. That is the way things have always been and it is pointless to change it.

But, what is Charles expected to do? Strip them of their HRH status (metaphorically kicking them out of the family) and forbid them to carry out any charity work or be seen in public with Royal family members.?

No Ascot, no Trooping of the Colours, no church services . . . etc. Of course that would mean doing away with family gatherings altogether. Ensuring Harry does not spend time with them holiday because they could be photographed together and called 'family'?

None of it is decent or kind in a family and dreadful PR for a new monarch.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I don't see that any good will come to the BRF should they interfere with the status of the Yorks. They are the Queen's granddaughters and, as such, they are HRH's. That is the way things have always been and it is pointless to change it...

Marg - it was just one of us making that assumption. There are no indications that will happen. But there are a fair number of indications they will not become working members of the RF, IMHO.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If the problem is Bea being an HRH, I have a feeling either an individual or group conferral Letters Patent will be issued during Charles reign that will settle the York issue once and for all.

If Charles was to restrict the HRHs further than it is at the moment he would also have to deny it to Harry's children - they after all will be in the same position as the York girls - the children of the second son of the monarch (the same position into which The Queen and her sister were born as well).

 

[cepe]

I just don't get the angst over Beatrice and Eugenie.

Letters patent existed; at the time they were born using HRH = norm. Different situation re Wessexes children (but they could be HRH - we dont know).

They are trying to make their way in the world. They dont cost the tax payer any money. They are like the children of Beatrix of the Netherlands - royal with titles but working. Or not if they choose not to.

MAny young women across the globe with well-off parents dont work. And many of them to zip for charity. Beatrice does do work for charity.

It's the waves on here that create the news - DM and it's ilk check you guys out and make news. I think she deserves to be left alone. And I'm a tax payer in the UK

EDIT: forgot to say - some people (esp DM followers judging by comments) could just be blaming her for the sins of the parents. Which would be appalling

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I think you have identified the key point: "if you ....do work for the Firm, you should get credit". It is pretty clear the York girls do not work for the Firm, and hence, do not get credit for it.

Sorry, if Kate is doing something one say and Eugenie the next, she's working for the Firm... she's hardly presenting medals based on her own achievements.

 

[Rudolph]

If Charles was to restrict the HRHs further than it is at the moment he would also have to deny it to Harry's children - they after all will be in the same position as the York girls - the children of the second son of the monarch (the same position into which The Queen and her sister were born as well).

I have no issues with such a scenario. IMO the BRF doesn't need random royal highnesses who in all probability won't be called upon to carry out official duties.

Limit the style of HRH to W&K and their direct descendants and the others can call themselves whatever they like.

Use the example of the of the Earl of Wessex and style Harry's children as lords and ladies

 

[Iluvbertie]

Does anyone truly believe that Charles isn't going to want ALL his grandchildren styled HRHs?


Of course he is - which is why I don't think he will issue LPs to strip his brother's children of their HRHs.


Prince Michael has managed with HRH all his life and hasn't been a full-time member of the firm so it is perfectly possible for the York girls to do so as well.

 

[cepe]

that was when they were able to just get on with their lives. Same with the children of Glos and Kents.

It's the change in media that promotes this debate - not the reality of the situation.

Blogs, forums and "click" hungry online media are creating something out of nothing. and like e/one else I'm doing it too by responding.

 

[Rudolph]

I think Charles like George V will be pragmatic. If there is an advantage to limiting the style (public opinion for example) then he will limit the style.

The reason I brought this up is because people don't think its fair the Yorks don't get the same credit as William and Harry despite being HRH.

The solution is to limit the style.

 

[cepe]

What people? the electorate of GB? Commonwealth? Who?

Or is it people on a forum having a discussion that interests them?

Changing the "rules" willy-nilly" is not going to happen.

 

[Rudolph]

I don't think Letters Patent are ever issued willy nilly. Again if there is an advantage to limiting the style of HRH then thats what Charles will do.

This is after all a man who is willing to have his wife be the first princess consort in history based solely on spin and PR

 

[USAPolitics]

Who reads the Court Circular anyway? If the issue is attention, Beatrice and Eugenie get just enough in tabloids and the DM, which many more people read than the Court Circular. This coming from a Beatrice fan.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I obviously read the CC as I use that to do my weekly update on the number of engagements.


I know that others also read it.


Given the fact that the British Monarch website has within the past week updated the missing dates from January and February - something they didn't do last year - it would suggest that a number of people read it and complained about the missing days - so there are people that read it.


Mr O'Donovan and not others e.g. the DM, are using the CC from either The Times or the British Monarchy website to do their own annual counts.

 

[MARG]

If Charles was to restrict the HRHs further than it is at the moment he would also have to deny it to Harry's children - they after all will be in the same position as the York girls - the children of the second son of the monarch (the same position into which The Queen and her sister were born as well).

Not quite. Princess Elizabeth was never "Princess of Wales", she was never the Crown Princess, merely the heir who just happened to be female. Princess Margaret and her children were in the same position as Princess Anne and hers.

What people? the electorate of GB? Commonwealth? Who?

Or is it people on a forum having a discussion that interests them?

Changing the "rules" willy-nilly" is not going to happen.

What people indeed! There seems to be no rallying calls to "reduce" the York girls circumstances that I can see, except for one or two here and other message boards and, of course, a few republican papers. Even the dreaded DF keeps just within the bounds because they don't want to kill the geese that lay the golden eggs! And contrary to what they bang on about, both the York girls relocating to the US would not be a good outcome for them.

As to changing the rules? Contrary to what the DF and such witter about, I do believe the BRF is nothing if not pragmatic so, if it's not broken, don't try to fix it.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Not quite. Princess Elizabeth was never "Princess of Wales", she was never the Crown Princess, merely the heir who just happened to be female. Princess Margaret and her children were in the same position as Princess Anne and hers.

When Princess Elizabeth was born she was the elder daughter of the second son of the monarch and Princess Margaret was the younger daughter of the second son of the monarch.

Remember that George VI was the second son and not the eldest son.

In that regard Elizabeth was born in the same position as Beatrice - the elder daughter of the Duke of York, the second son of the monarch - and as such was born HRH Princess Elizabeth of York.

 

[Camsterlaird]

I obviously read the CC as I use that to do my weekly update on the number of engagements.


I know that others also read it.

I too read it on a daily basis, because I get the Times each day (not the Sunday Times, but that doesn't carry the CC anyway). It is annoying that the online CC regularly misses out Friday engagements.

I do still think, however, that if the York girls do charitable engagements they should be included in the CC, their precedence is higher than Princess Alexandra who does get a mention.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The online CC is up to date to last Thursday for this year.


It normally doesn't update for Friday, Saturday or Sunday until the following Monday (or Tuesday for me down under) which is why my weekly updates are Friday to Thursday. I need the time on the weekend to do all the entries into the spreadsheets etc.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Does it matter whether they make an appearance representing the Queen rather than on the basis of their own charitable interest?

I too read it on a daily basis, because I get the Times each day (not the Sunday Times, but that doesn't carry the CC anyway). It is annoying that the online CC regularly misses out Friday engagements.

I do still think, however, that if the York girls do charitable engagements they should be included in the CC, their precedence is higher than Princess Alexandra who does get a mention.

 

[Rudolph]

Princess Beatrice attends new exhibition honouring Alexander McQueen | Daily Mail Online

Princess Beatrice showed she has a royal flair for fashion as she turned up at the Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty exhibition in a black tuxedo gown slashed to the thigh.

The 26-year-old guaranteed all eyes were on her, yet still managed to appear elegant as she flashed some leg on her way into the venue.

The slender princess inadvertently brought back memories of the 2012 Oscars, when pictures of Angelina Jolie 'legbombing' went viral on the internet.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I thought that Beatrice looked great in an old-Hollywood-glamour-queen kind of way. It's certainly a different look for her, but I think that she "rocked it." Personally, I like a less glamorous look for a princess; but that's just me.

 

[roseroyal]

Princess Beatrice attends new exhibition honouring Alexander McQueen | Daily Mail Online

Wow! I love it! Beatrice looked so gorgeous! While the only thing striking about some of the other outfits was they were so ghastly - and yet people wore them! Lady Gaga who I'm not a fan of- don't wish her ill - just not a fan- would have been in heaven.
Surprised the Duchess of Cambridge did not attend.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Dear God, are we looking at the same photos...she looks like a cross between a 1940's starlet and a vampire.

 

[Roslyn]

Yep, we're looking at the same pictures. I personally like the 40s starlet/vampire look, and I love it on Beatrice with her gorgeous auburn hair.

 

[cepe]

Does it matter whether they make an appearance representing the Queen rather than on the basis of their own charitable interest?

She is not a formal representative of HMq and therefore does not appear in the CC. REgarding another comment her "precedence" has nothing to do with whether she is in the CC or not.

People may not like it but only those specific members of the BRF nominated by HMQ as her repsresentatives are in the CC.