The Monarchy under Charles

[Rudolph]

I don't think there is any intention of keeping up the current number of engagements. The days of a royal having 800 patronages (visited only every 3-4 years) is over.

The focus is going to be on quality over quantity. Numbers don't tell the whole story.

 

[Osipi]

I don't think there is any intention of keeping up the current number of engagements. The days of a royal having 800 patronages (visited only every 3-4 years) is over.

The focus is going to be on quality over quantity. Numbers don't tell the whole story.

One change I think that is going to happen, surely but gradually, is that the focus of royal engagements and being out among the people will focus more on issues such as mental health, homelessness, conservation, substance abuse and whatever other issues one could possibly think of rather than this hospital and that park or the new library kind of thing.

With the internet and Twitter and royal websites, the capability to reach many more people at any moment in time has greatly increased in the last two decades and who knows what will be available 20 years from now even.

 

[Queen Claude]

If we were discussing the monarchy under William I would buy into a vision where fewer engagements are carried out and royals having fewer patronages. However, Charles, along with his sister Anne, carries out more engagements than any other member of the BRF and according to princeofwales.gov.uk Charles is patron or president of more than 400 organizations, and if you look at his list (and Camilla's too), they are adding on patronages.

It is well reported that in the past few years that Charles has taken on more and more of his mother's duties, which along with his advancing age, he could have easily reduced the number of engagements he carries out and his patronage load, and yet he has not.

 

[AdmirerUS]

If we were discussing the monarchy under William I would buy into a vision where fewer engagements are carried out and royals having fewer patronages. However, Charles, along with his sister Anne, carries out more engagements that any other member of the BRF and according to princeofwales.gov.uk Charles is patron or president of more than 400 organizations, and if you look at his list (and Camilla's too), they are adding on patronages.

It is well reported that in the past few years that Charles has taken on more and more of his mother's duties, which along with his advancing age, he could easily reduced the number of engagements he carries out and his patronage load, and yet he has not.

Well, at this time he is working for her. He may have an oar in the pond shaping the future, but he is working for his mother's reign.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Your first point works on the assumption that Charles want a RF doing 2,000+ duties a year and visiting all kinds of charities and projects. As much as I am not his greatest fan he is a smart man and surely would see that slimming down the RF will mean a RF doing less.

Exactly. I believe the way royal engagements are being carried out will be changed. My guess is that it will be less engagements with a better focus on quality not quantity, and those engagements will be based on the BRF core family.

I am not saying there will be no work outside the core family (just thinking of Anne, Sophie etc) but I doubt that Charles will allow any conflict of interest in those cases (eg Andrew and his daugthers who do 'cherrypicking' royal work while in real life going on holiday/create headlines with partying).

 

[Pranter]

If the Queen believed that sidling Beatrice and Eugenie was impractical or wrong she'd be doing something about it. She is still the Queen and it's been made pretty clear by the immediate family she's very much in charge.


LaRae

 

[cepe]

The number of royal duties being carried out has already fallen

 

[Mbruno]

Your first point works on the assumption that Charles want a RF doing 2,000+ duties a year and visiting all kinds of charities and projects. As much as I am not his greatest fan he is a smart man and surely would see that slimming down the RF will mean a RF doing less.

Charles may decide to cut down the number of family engagements, but my point was that, if he does that , the popularity of the RF will suffer. The public wants more public appearances by the Royals, not less, and that is true not only for the UK, but for other Commonwealth countries as well.

On the other hand, contrary to Charles' reasoning, cost is not really an issue as the BRF is largely self-funded by the surplus revenue of the Crown Estates. The current debate e.g in Belgium and Sweden on the public funding of the King's younger children doesn't really apply to the UK. Besides, Beatrice and Eugenie don't need to get an annual stipend from the Treasury, but rather just be reimbursed for the official engagements they undertake on behalf of the king.

 

[Dman]

Charles may decide to cut down the number of family engagements, but my point was that, if he does that , the popularity of the RF will suffer. The public wants more public appearances by the Royals, not less, and that is true not only for the UK, but for other Commonwealth countries as well.

On the other hand, contrary to Charles' reasoning, cost is not really an issue as the BRF is largely self-funded by the surplus revenue of the Crown Estates. The current debate e.g in Belgium and Sweden on the public funding of the King's younger children doesn't really apply to the UK. Besides, Beatrice and Eugenie don't need to get an annual stipend from the Treasury, but rather just be reimbursed for the official engagements they undertake on behalf of the king.

The public and media want more appearances by the most senior and popular young royals. They already see enough (although not always widely covered) Anne, Charles, Camilla, Sophie and Edward.

Let's face it, the young royals are the new face of the very old institution. They are the ones that have the responsibility to keep the monarchy going.

The great number of engagements the royals carry out sounds very impressive and grand, but now the focus is now on the quality of their work. That means a little less of 100's of engagements. Anne is able to do a lot, because she speeds through her engagements and are able to get through a lot more of them. Also, she took on a lot of responsibility than usual.

 

[Countessmeout]

exactly a simple arrangement could be made, a certain dollar amount for any engagements taken for the king. An understanding of how many events they are expected to do, or they will be paid for, made clear. Or simple grace and favour suite in return for s specific number of events. Beatrice and Eugenie don't have staff to help plan their events like the Cambridges, do no extra cost.

 

[Rudolph]

When Charles becomes King, The Cambridges will have their own source of income (The Duchy of Cornwall)

It's royals like Beatrice and Eugenie and even Sophie and Edward that have to show their value.

In the future, every working royal has to be funded either through William or Charles.

 

[Skippyboo]

The public and media want more appearances by the most senior and popular young royals. They already see enough (although not always widely covered) Anne, Charles, Camilla, Sophie and Edward.

Let's face it, the young royals are the new face of the very old institution. They are the ones that have the responsibility to keep the monarchy going.

The great number of engagements the royals carry out sounds very impressive and grand, but now the focus is now on the quality of their work. That means a little less of 100's of engagements. Anne is able to do a lot, because she speeds through her engagements and are able to get through a lot more of them. Also, she took on a lot of responsibility than usual.

Those young royals will become middle aged royals who will be doing a large percentage of the Royal work will be replaced in the spotlight by George and Charlotte's generation of royals so the speculation will who is George dating or Charlotte's fashion choices not the Prince and Princess of Wales visiting Cardiff or Leicester.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Rudolph]

I think the 'slimming' down under Charles has as much to do with optics as economics. It's a matter of perception. The BRF appears to be too big, something like 16 royal highnesses.

So even if there won't be tons of money saved it will at least appear that Charles is trying to limit royal spending by keeping the focus on his immediate family.

 

[Mirabel]

The public wants more public appearances by the Royals, not less, and that is true not only for the UK, but for other Commonwealth countries as well.

Perhaps, but the public is not exactly clamoring for more appearances by the Yorks! The comments I have read are vicious. Many seem to feel that it's the thin edge of the wedge to let Fergie back in the door, and nobody wants that!

I don't see how they could help (with the RF's popularity) and they might do a lot of harm.

As for the Queen, it's been reported that she now is careful to avoid any dissension with Charles, who is more like a co-monarch these days than the heir in waiting.


(It's seems reminiscent of Ancient Egypt, where at some point in the later days of a Pharaoh, he allows his successor to rule jointly to ease the transition).

 

[Queen Claude]

When Charles becomes King, The Cambridges will have their own source of income (The Duchy of Cornwall)

It's royals like Beatrice and Eugenie and even Sophie and Edward that have to show their value.

In the future, every working royal has to be funded either through William or Charles.

Charles and William will also likely have to be accountable for how they are managing the funding they receive and the services they are providing for that funding. When it comes to the Duchy of Cornwall it is now funding two full-time working royals and three part-time working royals who did a combined total of 1086 engagements in 2015. It is unlikely that George and Charlotte will be of age to carry out royal duties when William becomes the Duke of Cornwall, so that means that the umbrella organization that supported 1000+ engagements in 2015 will be supporting two working royals who carried out 190 engagements in 2015. To be sure William and Catherine are going to increase their workloads when they become the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall, but I don't see the Duchy of Cornwall under William doing anywhere near the level of work that the Duchy of Cornwall under Charles does. My prediction is that William's Duchy of Cornwall will be expected to operate at a similar level to Charles's Duchy of Cornwall, which will be unfair to some extent given that Charles's Duchy of Cornwall operated for years when it was just funding Charles alone, or Charles plus spouse, but my prediction is that the same people who are calling Beatrice and Eugenie a couple of layabout party princesses will show a similar lack of tolerance for William, as the Duke of Cornwall, getting an income that will likely be in excess of £20 million for doing a "streamlined" workload.

 

[cepe]

exactly a simple arrangement could be made, a certain dollar amount for any engagements taken for the king. An understanding of how many events they are expected to do, or they will be paid for, made clear. Or simple grace and favour suite in return for s specific number of events. Beatrice and Eugenie don't have staff to help plan their events like the Cambridges, do no extra cost.

Interesting idea - but none of the royals are paid for the work that they do - large or small. The money, given to them from the Privy Purse, is to run their offices (staff costs etc.). Travel costs are paid for via the Sovereign Grant.

I would estimate that c 80% of the engagements carried out are by invitation so the BRF are not the sole determiners of the number of engagements done.

But the fact is the numbers have fallen. They are all doing less. If DoKent and Alexandra retired tomorrow, there is plenty of room for the current working royals to take on their work. Same applies to the Gloucesters.

I don't think we have sufficient knowledge to know about the quality of work. Any visit lasting more than 60-90 minutes does put a strain on the resources of the organisation being visited. Judging by the number of repeat visits and requests for Patronage, I think Anne is doing a great job, and so is the person managing her diary.

Charles (along with HMQ) has access to a range of people including ministers of state, esp from the Treasury. So he is aware of their views. He also knows that calls on the public purse are growing so I think hell will probably freeze over before the number of working royals increases.

This is a pity because the Princesses would be good at it, but that is the reality IMO.

 

[Rudolph]

Another option is for William to carry on funding Harry and his family from The Duchy of Cornwall.

Just because the Queen chooses to fund her family in a certain way doesn't mean Charles and William have to do the same.

Charles can fund his brothers and sister and William fund Harry and his family.

 

[Countessmeout]

The reality is no one is asking for the numbers to increase. The reality is the Kent, Gloucesters and Alexandra will all retire in coming years. That is a huge chunk of the working royals. There are currently 16 working, 17 if you include Tim. When the queen dies, that will likely drop to 10 including Tim, as the cousins will be retiring. So not sure how anyone is under the conception people are suggesting the numbers increase. Even if the girls were added, still be less than current. We are looking at least twenty years before the Cambridge kids are included, once done college and such. Heck their dad and uncle are in their thirties and still transitioning to full time. By the time George and Charlotte make the list, Anne and Tim will likely be retired as well.

Beatrice and Eugenie manage to fulfill royal duties without a ten person staff, or even one person staff. So there is no added charge. The suggestion of paying them for events would be simply to cover travel costs, security which their dad pays privately, and such. Which could simply be an agreed upon amount of events and money Charles is willing to pay out for each year.

 

[duke of poliganc]

The reality is no one is asking for the numbers to increase. The reality is the Kent, Gloucesters and Alexandra will all retire in coming years. That is a huge chunk of the working royals. There are currently 16 working, 17 if you include Tim. When the queen dies, that will likely drop to 10 including Tim, as the cousins will be retiring. So not sure how anyone is under the conception people are suggesting the numbers increase. Even if the girls were added, still be less than current. We are looking at least twenty years before the Cambridge kids are included, once done college and such. Heck their dad and uncle are in their thirties and still transitioning to full time. By the time George and Charlotte make the list, Anne and Tim will likely be retired as well.

Beatrice and Eugenie manage to fulfill royal duties without a ten person staff, or even one person staff. So there is no added charge. The suggestion of paying them for events would be simply to cover travel costs, security which their dad pays privately, and such. Which could simply be an agreed upon amount of events and money Charles is willing to pay out for each year.

couldn't agree moe you summed up what i was trying to say

 

[Skippyboo]

Another option is for William to carry on funding Harry and his family from The Duchy of Cornwall.

Just because the Queen chooses to fund her family in a certain way doesn't mean Charles and William have to do the same.

Charles can fund his brothers and sister and William fund Harry and his family.

That can work early on when the kids are little and Harry is part time and single. In time the bulk of the royal workload with be carried by W, K, H and H's wife then adding WK's kids and possibly H's kids so William can't be funding everybody while Charles's siblings will slow their engagement numbers in time.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

In this era, with 7 days on 7, 24 hours on 24, continue media around, the royals doing 2000+ engagements seem overdone. Back in ye olde days it was a way to see the country and to be seen by the people. But countless engagements by royals outside the core royal family are barely or never mentioned and not shown on tv at all.

One may ask what added value is of royal engagements and, if the outcome is that these are valuable indeed, how it should be organized: by a royal court with "fulltime royals" or by members of the royal family so now and then doing engagements on behalf of the King and being reimbursed for their expenditures.

 

[RoyalHighness 2002]

Even if they are not witnessed by everyone, people in that small town(example) may still appreciate it. If there was referendum to abolish the monarchy those people that have never really seen a royal may vote yes because they feel like that are not important. But they are because every vote counts. Edinburgh, Manchester, Cardiff, London and Belfast may be major factors in a vote but if all the small cities and towns feel unloved the yes vote could win.

 

[royal rob]

I watched " the royal good guys " last night and it was made a few years ago but interesting. It made me see that the days of cutting ribbons etc are gone and royals have to be more deeply involved. Not sure if that is what the York girls would want lots of behind the scene work.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Dee Anna]

He's a brilliant Prince of Wales, Probably the best one.

Words from one of you! Bless!

He's lucky to have a job!

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Even if they are not witnessed by everyone, people in that small town(example) may still appreciate it. If there was referendum to abolish the monarchy those people that have never really seen a royal may vote yes because they feel like that are not important. But they are because every vote counts. Edinburgh, Manchester, Cardiff, London and Belfast may be major factors in a vote but if all the small cities and towns feel unloved the yes vote could win.

I really doubt that HRH The Duke of Kent visiting his patronagas like the Scouting or the Stroke Association, or HRH Princess Alexandra visiting her patronages like Children and Families Across Borders or the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art would have any influence at all when it comes to a referendum on the monarchy.

Every year Her Majesty The Queen, daughter of a Scottish mother, visits her beloved Highlands and stays for long periods at Balmoral and uses the Palace of Holyroodhouse as the Scottish equivalent of Buckingham Palace. This did not prevent almost half of the Scots to vote for a break-up of the United Kingdom.

With other words: it is nice that the Princess Royal visits the Battersea Dogs Home for three quarters of a hour and poses with a doggie for the media (which will not extend beyond the local newspaper on page 6) but all these well-meant visits have totally lost the impact still held in the 1950's, 1960's. Moreover: who reads local newspapers these days? The circulation of media is dramatically shrinking in this digital world.

The Queen started her Reign in the 1950's and as she organized it, it is in main lines still the same. We are now almost in 2017. It is logical that King Charles -and after him King William- will set new accents and change the organization.

 

[andrew]

.

I think it will be up to the associations, trusts,organizations,etc to decide whether they will want to have a royal as a patron-because if they decide that they do need a royal as a patron or his name to be associated with them, then there will be need for more than 5 or 6 working royals to cover all the requirements.
I don't think royals force themselves on any organization to become their patron or go to a newly built hospital or school and open it, unless they are asked to.
So if there will be demand for them to perform such activities they will certainly fulfil them. Time will tell.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I think it will be up to the associations, trusts,organizations,etc to decide whether they will want to have a royal as a patron-because if they decide that they do need a royal as a patron or his name to be associated with them, then there will be need for more than 5 or 6 working royals to cover all the requirements.
I don't think royals force themselves on any organization to become their patron or go to a newly built hospital or school and open it, unless they are asked to.
So if there will be demand for them to perform such activities they will certainly fulfil them. Time will tell.

Well, yes, and I think also that:

1. Openings and ribbon cuttings have less/different meaning to millennials and Founders than to Gen X and Boomers. Simply put, the former care less about formal ceremony and more about something real that they get to see on social media. And so these decision makers will be less likely to prefer an opening to a general stop by and see what we do. And if that stop is part of a theme day that focuses on a social topic and increases PR - all the better.
2. The modern monarchy has already started to "bundle" these kinds of activities into localities. So these "openings" are often held months if not over a year past the official opening. It reduces the value of the ceremony and, IMO is intended to reduce the demand for them.
3. I think the monarchy is headed toward proactive focused events - that raise awareness on the front end for issues. So the royals are likely to use their cache to enlighten and focus the realm. This is opposed to showing up to something that has already happened and had little to do with their efforts.

JMO

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It is interesting to see how it went across the other side of the North Sea where royals had honorary functions as well of countless organizations, foundations, unions, clubs and charities. When the Prince of Orange assumed the kingship, both the outgoing as well the coming Sovereign laid down all their honorary functions, swoosh, in one go.

Only the Orange Fund (his wedding present which grants around 33 million Euro per year to charities and social works) was the sole organization which kept Willem-Alexander as Protector.

The fact that all organizations lost their protectorate in one go, made it easy to accept. The argumentation used by the Court: Willem-Alexander wants to be "Everyone's King" and therefore it is no longer desireable to single out specific organizations by accepting honorary functions.

 

[Claire]

Personally I feel that there is an opportunity for the royal family to take deliberate action here. I was thinking about the above comments and yes - they should change the way the charities and patronages are handled. So that they are more focused and specialised in a way. I was looking at the statistics of the engagements undertaken, it is unlikely that the amount of engagements will lessen under Charles' kingship. As the older generations pass away these local and unattractive engagements might fall away, but many of the unattractive charities need continuous support and I don't think that William, Kate, Charles and Harry and wife will be able to fulfil the need. For example if I was Prince Edward - I would actively seek Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie's help in the DOE awards. If I was the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexander I would do the same in my personal patronages. I would feel that I have spend my whole life on these charities and organisations and I would have a say in how they would move forward into the future, if I was able to help mould my successor.

 

[RoyalHighness 2002]

Just a quickie, wouldn't Viscount Severn and Lady Louise take over the DofE Awards.