The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2261  
Old 01-27-2016, 11:36 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 967
The Express is always coming up with crazy theories about Charles’ future reign. This one is from 2008.

EXCLUSIVE: Charles 'to rule at 65’ as Queen 'steps aside' | UK | News | Daily Express

Charles is now 67 and The Queen is still reigning so The Express must come-up with with a new fictional spin. The Queen didn't abdicate when they said she would so they have to come-up with a reason why, lest they look like liars. So now they're pushing the agenda that The Queen is afraid for Charles to takeover because of his drastic desires to change the monarchy. I call baloney.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2262  
Old 01-27-2016, 11:51 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,337
If you have 1000 patronages, how many times will you see the Royal patron? One every 5 years? The Queen is patron of Wimbledon. She been there a couple of times in sixty years. How many of these patronage are just a token patronage and the Queen was asked just because she is the Queen not that she really has a interest in the patronage. We have seen Philip give up somethings such as chancellorships and some patronages. But not much from the Queen.




Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2263  
Old 01-27-2016, 12:16 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,388
I think that the Express report is fair but I still don't agree with this obsession that Charles will automatically "cull" working royals.

The numbers will diminish over time and from a PR perspective, it would be a bad move for a new king.

The issue is financing the work. Is it right that HMQ should be using her own money to fund the junior royals offices/travel rather than public money? Charles (apparently) thinks it should be funded through Sovereign Grant. That would be an interesting debate.

There is nothing stopping any member of the royal family carrying out charitable work if that's what they want to do. Princess Beatrice does it.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2264  
Old 01-27-2016, 12:28 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLLK View Post
Adding to that would the government of the UK be open to that type of UN work being done by the BRF?
They can but ask I suppose, but considering that Royal tours will continue in the foreseeable future to often far-flung parts of the Commonwealth, leaving whichever of the six family members is left in Britain with extra duties, I can't see them having much time to tackle UN projects as well.

If the realms do go and the Commonwealth then starts to fade in some major way, that might turn William/Kate or the young adult George in that direction. However Charles and the other members of the BRF have imbibed so much of the Queen's enthusiasm for the Commonwealth and commitment to it that I really can't see the UN replacing it in Charles's lifetime, quite frankly.
Reply With Quote
  #2265  
Old 01-27-2016, 01:05 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
When you think about this though, what better training is there to be had for a future king-to-be? As for Charles, to paraphrase his own words. "He's been at it long enough". He's more than ready to be King.
If you think about it, Hillary Clinton is 68 (approximately one year older than Charles) and is running for POTUS, If she is elected, she will be 73 by the end of her first term and, if she is reelected, she will be 77 by the time she leaves the presidency. Nobody knows when Charles will ascend the throne, but, when he does, he may be in the same age bracket as a hypothetical "president Hillary". If that is acceptable for the POTUS, who actually has to run a country, it should be also for the British monarch, who is mostly a ceremonial figure.

One important difference though is that neither Hillary, nor probably any other future US president will ever have to serve as Head of State until his/her 80s or 90s, as Charles might have to do after he becomes king !
Reply With Quote
  #2266  
Old 01-27-2016, 01:07 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,424
I hope this is all speculation. The royal family will slim down naturally anyways with the Kents and Gloucesters retiring from public eye as age and health over takes them. I don't think Charles will push his siblings out either. Edward is being groomed to take over the Duke of Edinburgh awards and I don't think Charles will eliminate the awards his father has spent so many years with and now Edward as well.


The role of the BRF is to represent the country but also support the charities. The queen alone has a 1000 patronages. You add up all those supported by her cousins, her kids and her children in law, and there is no way that Charles, his sons and daughter in laws could make a dent on them all, even when the kids are old enough. Yes, you wouldn't have to cover them all, but there are quite a few that have had royal patrons for generations an it would be a true loss to lose one now. It would cost Charles little to allow his nieces or someone to have a few and pay them for event that they do. The problem is if he slims it down right away, and they force people like Bea and Eug straight out of the RF, if the time comes they need them to pick up some slack they may not be willing or able. They may have been private citizens for so long they will not see any need. Better to give them a patronage or two for now, when the older royals are still involved, and with time see if they are needed more.
Reply With Quote
  #2267  
Old 01-27-2016, 01:19 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
I think that the Express report is fair but I still don't agree with this obsession that Charles will automatically "cull" working royals.

The numbers will diminish over time and from a PR perspective, it would be a bad move for a new king.

The issue is financing the work. Is it right that HMQ should be using her own money to fund the junior royals offices/travel rather than public money? Charles (apparently) thinks it should be funded through Sovereign Grant. That would be an interesting debate.

There is nothing stopping any member of the royal family carrying out charitable work if that's what they want to do. Princess Beatrice does it.
My concern is that a core adult Royal Family consisting only of an aging Charles & Camilla, Wiliam & Kate, and Harry plus his (hypothetical) future wife seems too small to me for the amount of work the British royals do. The family would have to cut their workload quite substantially to accomodate such a drastic downsizing. Even Commonwealth tours, which are now strategic as republicanism gains strength in places like Australia, New Zealand and the Caribbean, might have to be cut down significantly.

When all is said and done, it looks to me like an unnecessary move considering that Charles' siblings and nieces will be available for the foreseeable future to do official royal work. Maybe Charles is leaking those ideas just to put pressure on the government to fund the junior royals, which would be politically disastrous IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #2268  
Old 01-27-2016, 02:25 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,437
I know the minor working royals are getting older, but I don't see Charles just cutting their work once he's King. I think he will allow them to continue on supporting their charities as long as they can. The main focus on the stage will be Charles's family though. Perhaps the whole family come together for major family events, but Charles & Camilla, the Cambridge's and Prince Harry and future wife should be the only principle players on the royal stage.
__________________
"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
  #2269  
Old 01-27-2016, 02:38 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 391
I see no problem with the Queen's cousins being pensioned off but it would be unwise to stop Charles' siblings continuing royal duties as they do so much.

Beatice and Eugenie will never be needed, but it is important to consider that the Queen and Phillip have 1300 royal patronages between them, many of which may be lost.
Reply With Quote
  #2270  
Old 01-27-2016, 04:44 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
I don't think anyone who is currently working for the Firm will be asked to stop, especially as they are supported by The Queen due to that idea and she asked them to do so rather than have careers. The Kent's are both approaching or already in their 80s (Edward is 80 and Alexandra is 79). The Gloucester's are different - although Richard is first cousin to The Queen in age he is much closer to Charles being only 4 years older than him - more like a big brother (we know Charles look up to William as a 'big brother' so presumably he sees Richard in much the same way). It would be poor PR to suddenly throw away such loyal supporters. The same with his siblings - they will continue.

It is Beatrice and Eugenie who won't be needed. In time the family will reduce naturally. As far as tours to Commonwealth countries - they visit the republics in the Commonwealth as much as the monarchies. They respect the rights of the monarchies to say 'thanks but no thanks' as they have had to get used to doing it since 1947 when the majority of the countries of the Commonwealth have done just that. The Queen was Queen of over 50 nations at her accession and now it is down to 16. She kept visiting the republics as do her children and now her grandchildren.
Reply With Quote
  #2271  
Old 01-28-2016, 09:42 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Madison, United States
Posts: 10
The Queen's grandchildren are visiting the republics but when you really look at the visits there are many to the Caribbean, which is kinda irritating. Princess Royal went to the Caribbean for the Queens Jubilee and then approximately 12 months later Prince Harry went to the same nation for a royal visit (I can't remember which nation, just that it was in the Carrbbean.)

I do think certain royals abuse the priviledge to make royal visits. IMO
Reply With Quote
  #2272  
Old 01-28-2016, 09:52 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFluffs View Post
The Queen's grandchildren are visiting the republics but when you really look at the visits there are many to the Caribbean, which is kinda irritating. Princess Royal went to the Caribbean for the Queens Jubilee and then approximately 12 months later Prince Harry went to the same nation for a royal visit (I can't remember which nation, just that it was in the Carrbbean.)

I do think certain royals abuse the priviledge to make royal visits. IMO
I think its kind of hard for the royals, themselves, to abuse the privilege of royal visits because actually its not up to them. For an official royal visit to any country, they first and foremost have to be invited and then I believe it has to be approved by both the Queen and the government.

I'm sure that those that know more in depth on how this works will fill us in.
__________________
“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
  #2273  
Old 01-28-2016, 09:54 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
Royal visits are made in response to an official invitation from the host nation. If more invitations come from the Caribbean than other parts of the Commonwealth, that is not the fault of the Royal Family, and accepting the invitation is hardly an abuse of a "priviledge".
Reply With Quote
  #2274  
Old 01-28-2016, 10:02 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFluffs View Post
The Queen's grandchildren are visiting the republics but when you really look at the visits there are many to the Caribbean, which is kinda irritating. Princess Royal went to the Caribbean for the Queens Jubilee and then approximately 12 months later Prince Harry went to the same nation for a royal visit (I can't remember which nation, just that it was in the Carrbbean.)

I do think certain royals abuse the priviledge to make royal visits. IMO
there are 17 Caribbean islands that are within the Commonwealth. So which ones were they and did they repeat?
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2275  
Old 01-28-2016, 10:04 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I think its kind of hard for the royals, themselves, to abuse the privilege of royal visits because actually its not up to them. For an official royal visit to any country, they first and foremost have to be invited and then I believe it has to be approved by both the Queen and the government.

I'm sure that those that know more in depth on how this works will fill us in.
Exactly.

The country to be visited sends in invitation to the UK asking for a royal to visit - either for a 'visit' or for a specific purpose.

Often with areas, such as the Caribbean, the nations near each other join together and send a combined invitation.

The British government then has to accept the invitation.

Once the invitation is accepted the Queen and the PM decides who to send.

It isn't a matter of the royal 'abusing their position' to visit as you say as they are simply accepting an invitation.

I am sure that often they would prefer to be at home with their own families rather than travelling around the world.
Reply With Quote
  #2276  
Old 01-28-2016, 10:09 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,337
Every realm got a visit for the diamond jubilee. So it didn't matter if a Royal was there the year before. A Royal was going to visit because of the jubilee.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2277  
Old 01-28-2016, 10:42 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFluffs View Post
The Queen's grandchildren are visiting the republics but when you really look at the visits there are many to the Caribbean, which is kinda irritating. Princess Royal went to the Caribbean for the Queens Jubilee and then approximately 12 months later Prince Harry went to the same nation for a royal visit (I can't remember which nation, just that it was in the Carrbbean.)

I do think certain royals abuse the priviledge to make royal visits. IMO

Canada typically gets 3 or 4 tours a year. The last time an entire year passed without at least 1 tour was 1972.

Some realms want many tours, or annual tours. Others do not. It's not the royals who decide it.
Reply With Quote
  #2278  
Old 01-28-2016, 11:00 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,437
Although, the royals can make a suggestion on what country they would like to visit. They have they're own interest too.
__________________
"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
  #2279  
Old 01-29-2016, 03:07 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,203
It looks as if the speculation about a streamlined monarchy under Charles is correct, unless his palace contacts are lying through their teeth to Richard Palmer. He has reiterated to Cepe and to others that he's been told that the Jubilee balcony and Royal barge scenarios were no accidents.
Reply With Quote
  #2280  
Old 01-29-2016, 10:30 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Madison, United States
Posts: 10
Thanks for all the info on how royal visits are set up.

I stand corrected on the theorem that the royals abuse the priviledge.

This is a cool Forum!
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british, camilla, charles iii, charles of wales, coronation, crown jewels, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, queen camilla, titles, william v


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
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 309 10-31-2016 06:54 PM
Monarchy vs Republic marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 392 10-16-2016 10:14 AM
The Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 311 12-29-2012 04:36 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 05:06 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit poll catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 october and november 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess marie events 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 queen rania in washington 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 the duchess of cornwall working visit


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 07:14 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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