The Monarchy under Charles


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Recently thinking about Charles as King. I personally think that the under his rule, the Royal Family [including all the nieces, nephews, aunts & uncles] will be drastically cut to the bare bones when it comes to public events and money spent by them from the till. Privately, they will all still be family and enjoy certain perks, but certain activities by younger family members will not be favored and he will turn his back publically. I truly believe he will run a tight ship.

That can't be a bad thing. A smaller, more focussed family, with clearly identified roles.
 
Given the 1000s of invitations to do things that are already turned down due to not being enough time to cover them even more invitations will be turned down and they only do around 4000 a year between 15 working members now (or an average of 266 per year which allowing for normal holiday periods and weekends words out at fewer days per year than school kids spend at school). An engagement can be as short as half an hour.

To cut back further those who are working and realises that due to the amount of preparation we are told goes into those engagements - and for a half hour - 'received in audience xxxx on the occasion of them relinquishing their position as yyyy' which is a very formal occasion doesn't take much more than half an hour of briefing first.

As the Sovereign Grant is expected to cover the expenses of official engagements of all members of the royal family - having fewer members would mean getting less value for money and would also mean a lot of the smaller organisations and events who get a lot of pleasure out of seeing a minor royal would lose out.

I don't see a role for Beatrice or Eugenie but I do think Charles will need to keep on his brothers and sister along with the Gloucester's but I do expect to see Harry leaving the army sooner rather than later and for him, his wife and the Cambridge's will need to be doing around 500 each a year, which is only being done by Anne and Charles these days.

There is no replacement coming through for another 25 or so years - and I don't see George being able to spend his 20s having a life as William has had as he will be needed at a much younger age and even earlier if Charles cuts out his siblings.
 
Last edited:
The "Firm" at the moment is just too big, IMO. The main focus should be on The Queen & Duke of Edinburgh, the Prince of Wales & Duchess of Cornwall, Duke & Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry of Wales. I totally understand the roles other members of the royal family play but I think the focus needs to be on the major players within the royal family.

I think once the focus of the "Firm" is trimmed, then they can bring a new vision to the official British Monarchy Website as well. I think at the moment the website lacks vision, focus and it's not updated in the way it should be. I think it really reflects the way the "Firm" is currently setup. I just think some changes are needed and pretty much overdue for the royal family.
 
Last edited:
The "Firm" at the moment is just too big, IMO. The main focus should be on The Queen & Duke of Edinburgh, the Prince of Wales & Duchess of Cornwall, Duke & Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry of Wales. I totally understand the roles other members of the royal family play but I think the focus needs to be on the major players within the royal family.

I think once the focus of the "Firm" is trimmed, then they can bring a new vision to the official British Monarchy Website as well. I think at the moment the website lacks vision, focus and it's not updated in the way it should be. I think it really reflects the way the "Firm" is currently setup. I just think some changes are needed and pretty much overdue for the royal family.

I think Charles will let nature take it's course. IT will cause upheaval if he ascends the throne and then tells 100's of charities, we aren't going to support you. He is already making adjustments to his own patronages but in a very low key way.

If he can get some decent advisers in to manage the Duchy of Lancaster as he did with the Duchy of Cornwall, he could afford to pay for the extended family.

I've noticed that the Wessex's are travelling overseas a lot re Duke of Edinburgh scheme and that the organisation is extending its fund raising. Sophie specifically is raising her profile.

As for the web site grrrrrr! That's got nothing to do with the family but the restructuring of the staff. As with many organisations going through change, performance drops and then comes back stronger. I understand it, but that doesn't mean I like it.
 
How is the focus of the Firm not on the main line and Harry right now? Further more, why should the focus right now not also extend to the Queen's children, who do far more than Charles' children?

I tend to side with Bertie on this; forcibly downsizing the Firm isn't going to actually benefit the institution of the BRF as it means that they'll be able to do considerably less. I do think that in the future, as the Gloucesters and Kents do less, we'll see more of a role for Beatrice and Eugenie develop, but I don't believe that they'll ever play such a role that they'll steal focus from the main line. Furthermore, I can't see what William or Harry have done so far that justifies why the focus should be on them more than on someone like Anne, who has done far more to dedicate her life to the Firm.
 
The focus is on the main line but that doesn't mean we have to cut out the supporting cast.

Why should Harry be a focus when he is only in the same position as Andrew, Edward and Anne - a younger child? Or why should they be thrown out when they are no longer the children of the monarch but merely the siblings?

The cousins of The Queen are aging, particularly the Kents with the Duke 80 next year and Alexandra the following year so they won't be around forever but that is over 200 engagements right there that would have to be picked up by someone else or a lot of people would be disappointed at missing out on a chance to meet a Prince or Princess.

The Gloucester's are the same age as Charles and Camilla give or take a year or so. Throw them out and there is another 500 engagements not being doing and a lot more disappointed people.

The Kent's and Gloucester's often go to the smaller places and even realms on behalf of The Queen which allows the mainline to concentrate on the bigger realms and not have the smaller ones feel left out.

Anne, Andrew and Edward with Sophie do about 1500 engagements between them annually so even more disappointed people if you cut them out.

Can William, Kate and Harry really pick up 2000 between them and then add in the 400 that The Queen and Philip do and you see why Charles' sibling will still be needed.
 
While some people may grumble at how large The Firm is going by the numbers Iluvbertie has mention the extended family is needed to prop up those at the top, unfortunately it doesn't appear that the younger generations are remotely interested in doing royal duties but perhaps that would change once Charles is on the throne.
 
I'm 100% with Ish and Iluvbertie on this.

Charles is far from stupid and he will take things very slowly in the beginning. He will have 2 main objectives - both already in train. Camilla (enough's been said already) and royal finances. The financial issues he faces are serious and they wont be sorted out by getting rid of a few royals who are paid for anyway out of the Duchy of Lancaster budget. He has a gift for getting in good financial people and I should think he's already on the case.

As for the younger generation - some of you don't like it but we have been told what is happening there so we can't say we don't know. William is in a "transitional" year; Catherine is minding George; and Harry is still a full time soldier.

I am accepting what has been said by the Palace, but I expect a change come September.
 
As for the younger generation - some of you don't like it but we have been told what is happening there so we can't say we don't know. William is in a "transitional" year; Catherine is minding George; and Harry is still a full time soldier.


I'm not trying to critique the younger generation here - the arguments on that have been made elsewhere and we don't need to go into it again.

The problem with the idea of focusing more on the main line and Harry than on the Queen's younger children or even her cousins isn't a case of "the Cambridges and Harry don't do much, so why focus on them" so much as others have done a lot and as such have earned recognition. The Cambridges and Harry will do more in the future and really will be the stars of the show, but we should be acknowledging those who have done a lot for the Firm in the past with significantly less recognition - the Queen's cousins - and those who continue to do a lot for the Firm now - her younger children and daughter-in-law. To simply shove them aside in favour of focusing on the Cambridges and Harry who haven't yet put the time in is rather disrespectful to the supporting cast.
 
I'm not trying to critique the younger generation here - the arguments on that have been made elsewhere and we don't need to go into it again.

The problem with the idea of focusing more on the main line and Harry than on the Queen's younger children or even her cousins isn't a case of "the Cambridges and Harry don't do much, so why focus on them" so much as others have done a lot and as such have earned recognition. The Cambridges and Harry will do more in the future and really will be the stars of the show, but we should be acknowledging those who have done a lot for the Firm in the past with significantly less recognition - the Queen's cousins - and those who continue to do a lot for the Firm now - her younger children and daughter-in-law. To simply shove them aside in favour of focusing on the Cambridges and Harry who haven't yet put the time in is rather disrespectful to the supporting cast.

I agree - I was responding to Victorian-Dandy's comment.

Regardless of media verbage, for all we know Harry may stay a career soldier and only be part-time (like Duke of Kent); we assume he'll get married but even if he does, if the Cambridges are anything to go by she wont be active for the first 3-4 years.

There's an old military (artillary) expression about getting over heavy ground as lightly as possible. That is what Charles will want to do so I think keep what you know works (or should that be "who" works)
 
I'm not saying The Queen or even Charles should drop off the other members of the royal family. I totally understand and appreciate the great work and dedication they've done for they're patronages, Charities and other organizations but I'm just saying that the focus should be on the main principle members of the royal family more.

The older royals work far much harder than the younger royals, so I think The Queen and the palace PR team got it right during the Diamond Jubilee. That Buckingham Palace balcony appearence set just the right tone on how the current face of the "Firm" should look like. The younger royals should be stepping up they're game.

I hope there's a new staff that will come in under Charles's reign. The official website for the British Monarchy needs a major makeover. If I was on the staff running the site, I would throw some fresh ideas in that would bring that site to life. I would also throw in the idea of the principle members of the royal family doing an official photo shoot (formal and casual) for the website. Those professional pictures would also be used in their official engagements page. There should be a real vision behind the website instead of just putting anything up there because they need one.
 
Last edited:
Except for the failings in updating the CC the British monarchy website is fine - up to date photos of major engagements of the major royals most days with appropriate stories attached.

I am hopeful that the issue with the CC, which hasn't been updated for nearly a week now, will be fixed soon but...
 
By younger members I meant those like Beatrice and Eugene who are a bit further down the ranks but who could replace the various cousins, aunts and uncles. I must admit I have very little knowledge of the more modern and younger royals since my main interest lies with the historical and older generations of the royal family.

Though I totally expect William, Kate and Harry to pick to the pace over the next year or so and even moreso once Charles is monarch
 
Except for the failings in updating the CC the British monarchy website is fine - up to date photos of major engagements of the major royals most days with appropriate stories attached.

I am hopeful that the issue with the CC, which hasn't been updated for nearly a week now, will be fixed soon but...

I think the website has some major issues that needs to be worked out. I think some of the members of the staff are getting paid but sleeping on the job. The staff needs to get hip with the new age of technology. I'm talking about updated official pictures, more video content and even Live stream links. I'm just touching on the basics.
 
I'm kind of with Dman on this one. I don't think royal.gov.uk is really the best site. It has an outdated feel to it. They'd be better off updating it do be something more along the lines of Charles' and Andrews' websites. I also don't think it'd be off base if Anne and Edward followed Andrew's lead with their own sites as well.
 
They put up new photos most days when there are official engagements carried out so how more regularly would you like them put up.

They aren't celebrities and hence they don't stream - and many of their engagements involve rather boring things to stream anyway - such as the regular received xxxx on relinquishing their position as yyy and then received aaaa on taking up the position as yyyy. Small talk isn't interesting for the average person to watch.

I really don't know what they would stream - a speech, a receiving line, a walkabout where they meet the crowds, - rather boring really.
 
I'm kind of with Dman on this one. I don't think royal.gov.uk is really the best site. It has an outdated feel to it. They'd be better off updating it do be something more along the lines of Charles' and Andrews' websites. I also don't think it'd be off base if Anne and Edward followed Andrew's lead with their own sites as well.

Yeah, the site should be updated and more content added. I think its a good idea for Anne and the Wessexs to have their own websites.
 
:previous: We still need an overarching monarchy site - we mustn't lose that. A go-to place for engagements, how monarchy works, orders etc - the stuff that's on the existing one.

They dont need one each. They need a section within the single site. They could do what the Cambridges have done. Their own URL that takes you to their pages on the PoW site. Otherwise it will be a nightmare - and also time consuming for the royal office.
 
They put up new photos most days when there are official engagements carried out so how more regularly would you like them put up.

They aren't celebrities and hence they don't stream - and many of their engagements involve rather boring things to stream anyway - such as the regular received xxxx on relinquishing their position as yyy and then received aaaa on taking up the position as yyyy. Small talk isn't interesting for the average person to watch.

I really don't know what they would stream - a speech, a receiving line, a walkabout where they meet the crowds, - rather boring really.

I think the principle royals should take official pictures for the site band for the pictures to be used in the future engagements lists. I think for some of their official engagements, there should be a live stream video. May not for all of their official engagements but for some special engagements. Trust me, some people will be watching the stream. The idea is allowing the people to see you on the job and meeting the people live .
 
When Charles is King, he will be paying for Himself, Camilla, Harry +Harry Family, Andrew, Anne, Edward and Sophie. Plus the palace staff, hospitality and building repair and maintenance which it right now at a backlog. I am assuming that the Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandria and the Gloucesters retire from royal duties by the time of King Charles III.

I would think that Charles would do like the Queen is doing now with most of the engagements in the UK and short trips abroad. William and Kate would then do the long haul around the globe trips.
 
:previous: We still need an overarching monarchy site - we mustn't lose that. A go-to place for engagements, how monarchy works, orders etc - the stuff that's on the existing one.

They dont need one each. They need a section within the single site. They could do what the Cambridges have done. Their own URL that takes you to their pages on the PoW site. Otherwise it will be a nightmare - and also time consuming for the royal office.

I agree. They can do it that way.
 
The best way of slimming down the official family is probably to simply limit future titles to the children of the monarch and the children of the monarch's eldest child.

For example if Harry has children who are prince/sses then the family will be larger than it would if they were without these titles.
 
The best way of slimming down the official family is probably to simply limit future titles to the children of the monarch and the children of the monarch's eldest child.

For example if Harry has children who are prince/sses then the family will be larger than it would if they were without these titles.


Except why does the monarchy need to be slimmed down?

Last year, the Queen, DoE, Anne, Wessexes, Yorks, Gloucesters, and Kents performed 2,463 duties according to Bertie's count. If the monarchy is to be "slimmed down" during Charles' reign then these people will not be doing any duties at all, either because they've passed on or been retired.

That means that Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry, and any hypothetical wife of Harry's will either have to cover those engagements or cut them out. Just to do that, each of them would have to perform 410 duties a year - which is fine, until you consider the fact that that would be on top of what they're already doing.

That's also not taking into consideration the fact that some of the numbers were down last year owing to health problems.

If you divide the total number of engagements done last year by these 6 royals (one of whom is a hypothetical), it means that they would each have to perform 614.5 engagements annually in order to maintain what is being done now. Without Harry's hypothetical wife, it's 737 engagements each.

Or instead of slimming down the monarchy the status quo could be maintained, with the monarch, consort, and the monarch's children performing the bulk of the engagements while others further down the line perform a smaller number of engagements.
 
I think when Charles comes to the throne, the Wessex's, Duke of York, Princess Royal will still be doing their thing but will not be the current face of the Monarchy as they are now. I think the Kent's should be retired though. They've done they're bit and The Queen has awarded them with honors and has shown them her appreciation.

The Monarchy should be slimmed down but I don't think it means just putting everybody out of work but putting the focus on the new faces of the "Firm." The Cambridge's should be doing more and Prince Harry has even said that he's put off his official duties on the back burner.
 
Maybe under Charles as monarch, his siblings, the Kents and Gloucesters could simply be asked to retire and given a generous pension of, say £12k a year each. That way the public will simply stop seeing them working.
 
I can't see any member of the royal family retiring unless they have to, they're all needed frankly. It's worked for 60 years+ I'm not sure why it has to change.
 
Maybe under Charles as monarch, his siblings, the Kents and Gloucesters could simply be asked to retire and given a generous pension of, say £12k a year each. That way the public will simply stop seeing them working.


Once again, why? What purpose would this serve, other than seriously limiting the number of engagements performed by the BRF?
 
12 thousand pounds a year wouldn't cover the rent on their apartments for a month which would mean them having to move into very basic accommodation in many cases - hardly the way the new King should thank his relatives for a lifetime of work on behalf of his mother. Currently working royals pay a peppercorn rent on their apartments but when not working they have to pay the commercial rate e.g. the Michael's of Kent are reportedly paying 120,000+ per year for their apartment at KP while Andrew is reportedly paying 20,000 a month for Beatrice's in St James'. Edward rents part of Bagshot for close on 100,000 a year so the whole lot would need to be somewhat more than that - and you are proposing giving people who are used to living a high standard less than is paid to the gardeners at BP and people criticise the Queen for paying so little to her staff.

Look at the figures - about 4000 engagements a year currently being done by 15 people, including William, Kate and Harry.

Reduce that number to 5 or maybe 6 if Harry marries then they have to really up the numbers they are currently doing or many more organisations who send invitations to the royals to do things will miss out.

Another area that will miss out are the overseas visits to the smaller realms and Commonwealth countries undertaken by the younger siblings and the Kent's and Gloucester's.

I don't see the Kent's being around for long into Charles' reign given that they are so close to 80 now but the Gloucester's are the same age as Charles and Camilla so if they are deemed as too old to work then the argument can be made that Charles is too old to begin a new job. His brothers are more than 10 years younger than him so should also be allowed to continue their work especially as they have both taken over things from their father.

The discussion will have to come up at some point about Beatrice and Eugenie. I don't think they will be necessary, other than as Counsellors of State - and I certainly think one or both of them will serve in that capacity for a while as I don't see The Queen as still being with us in 20+ years time which she will need to be to prevent Beatrice being in that position. As for doing the day to day royal engagements - not so sure - I don't think Eugenie is even interested but Beatrice could be an asset, particularly if Harry doesn't marry.
 
Last edited:
I can both sides of this and actually agree with both sides.

I don't think any member of the RF should be 'retired' or pressured to stop doing public duties. They have worked hard and should be allowed to continue supporting their charities and organisations. I think if Charles did try to do this it would put him in a bad light. I do feel that the RF will naturally focus more on Charles, William & Kate, George & Harry, they will be 'the main attractions' with Charles' siblings in supporting roles and the Kents, Cambridges etc as minor (yet still important) roles.

However, I think in FUTURE the RF should be slimmed down. Personally I think limiting those who in the future have HRH status would be a good move (as in from birth onwards not taking titles off anyone) This will allow the Royal Household and the public time to change their expectations of the RF and what they should do. Clearly the fewer working, HRH royals, the less duties and organisations that will be supported. I'm okay with this, the public need to decide if they are.
Personally I feel this has started already in the way the Wessex children are not using the HRH titles.
 
Currently there aren't that many people who can pass on HRH - William is actually the only one. Harry will be able to when married, Andrew could if he remarried a woman of child-bearing years but the others are no longer in that position.

As a result there won't be that many HRHs in the years ahead.

Assuming Harry marries and had two children and William and Kate have only one more child then the future will see Harry's two and William's second child added to the current HRHs with no more for another generation.

Since the 1917 LPs were issued there have been 18 people born with HRH (and 2 of them required special LPs in 1948).

Those 18 are aged: 88, 79, 78, 71, 69, 65, 63, 54, 49, 32, 29, 25, 22, 10, 6 and 6 months with two deceased. Of those there are three who can pass it on under the existing LPs - the 54, 32, 29 and 6 month old.

I know it is unlikely that Andrew would marry again, except to Sarah, but he is able to do so which is why I am including him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom