The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1161  
Old 10-19-2014, 04:35 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,007
It's not a case of a charity having two patrons. It's a matter of a younger royal helping out an older one and perhaps taking it on when the older royal retires/dies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
Why do they have to take up patronage that already has a royal patron?
__________________

  #1162  
Old 10-19-2014, 11:32 PM
miche's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 733
The older ones are not asking for help and they clearly don't want any help
__________________

  #1163  
Old 10-19-2014, 11:50 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
The older ones are not asking for help and they clearly don't want any help

It's more of a case of us deciding it's more important to see William doing stuff than Princess Alexandra, so who cares that she's devoted 60 years to the BRF she should be pushed aside. (Sarcasm)

I don't agree with the idea that the older, further down the line of succession royals should be pushed into retirement in order to allow William and Kate to do more. To me, that's ageist, and it's basically saying that the sacrifices that the Kents and Gloucesters have made in order to support the Queen aren't to be valued. I think if and when the DoK, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, and Princess Alexandra chose to step back then some of the money that's currently going to their duties should be redirected towards the duties of the Cambridges and Harry - not because I think them doing engagements is more important than the Kents, Gloucesters, or the Queen's younger children doing so is, but because it's clear that the income of the Duchy of Cornwall is not enough to support five working royals (and really, during the 80s when it was supporting two full time royals, Charles was only paying 25% tax; now he's supporting 2 full time royals, 3 part time royals, and the personal lives of 5 adults and soon to be 2 children, while paying 50% tax).

Do I think William and Kate should be seen to do more? Yeah. Do I understand the reasons why they aren't? Yes. It's not as simple as laziness or skirting their duties - although the way things are being handled, it is cultivating that image - it's finances. The Duchy doesn't have the money to support 5 full time royals. The Queen is choosing to support her children and her cousins - who have been doing this far longer than William and Kate and should be respected for it, particularly when it comes to the Gloucesters and Kents.

That said, I don't think we can expect the Gloucesters and Kents to continue on in the same way we expect the Queen and DoE to do so. I think they're far enough removed from the direct line that it's only a matter of time before they each retire from anything other than the big family events. To me they've already done above and beyond their duty to the crown, and as they get older and have more health problems I think they'll retire (in contrast, the Queen and DoE are more likely to keep working until they can't). When this happens and they chose to retire then I'd like to see some of these funds diverted to supporting Charles' children's engagements, assuming that the current conditions persist until then.
  #1164  
Old 10-20-2014, 12:10 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,533
BP should make these things clearer - this saying nothing is hurting a lot of images.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1165  
Old 10-20-2014, 12:29 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
Honestly, I think the problem is ultimately more of a distribution one than anything.

Last year, Bertie's numbers had them at a bit more than 100 collectively. If they had arranged it so that they each did 52 engagements a year, max, with 1 engagement a week, then they would have had an appearance of regularly working. Now 2013 was a tricky year with George's birth (and 2015 will be equally as tricky), but I still think if we saw William about once a week, with a bit of a paternity leave, then they would have less of an image of skirting the work. If William were to maintain the numbers he's at this year - 119 according to Bertie's numbers - then if next year he shot for 2 or 3 engagements a week, he'd look more active while doing the same overall amount of work (although that's assuming the numbers continue; this year there was a major tour and he wasn't working; next year there'll be a pregnancy, paternity leave, and he'll be working. We should expect his numbers to drop).
  #1166  
Old 10-20-2014, 12:44 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,419
This is why I think as do some veteran royal watchers its good William and Harry hold down jobs outside the firm.

They are still contributing to society, Harry in the Army and William flying for a charity and donating his salary. Its a modern approach for this generation.

Unless the government decides to fund William, Kate and Harry directly then part-time royal work combined with full-time public service is the next best thing.
  #1167  
Old 10-20-2014, 02:17 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
It's more of a case of us deciding it's more important to see William doing stuff than Princess Alexandra, so who cares that she's devoted 60 years to the BRF she should be pushed aside. (Sarcasm)

I don't agree with the idea that the older, further down the line of succession royals should be pushed into retirement in order to allow William and Kate to do more. To me, that's ageist, and it's basically saying that the sacrifices that the Kents and Gloucesters have made in order to support the Queen aren't to be valued. I think if and when the DoK, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, and Princess Alexandra chose to step back then some of the money that's currently going to their duties should be redirected towards the duties of the Cambridges and Harry - not because I think them doing engagements is more important than the Kents, Gloucesters, or the Queen's younger children doing so is, but because it's clear that the income of the Duchy of Cornwall is not enough to support five working royals (and really, during the 80s when it was supporting two full time royals, Charles was only paying 25% tax; now he's supporting 2 full time royals, 3 part time royals, and the personal lives of 5 adults and soon to be 2 children, while paying 50% tax).

Do I think William and Kate should be seen to do more? Yeah. Do I understand the reasons why they aren't? Yes. It's not as simple as laziness or skirting their duties - although the way things are being handled, it is cultivating that image - it's finances. The Duchy doesn't have the money to support 5 full time royals. The Queen is choosing to support her children and her cousins - who have been doing this far longer than William and Kate and should be respected for it, particularly when it comes to the Gloucesters and Kents.

That said, I don't think we can expect the Gloucesters and Kents to continue on in the same way we expect the Queen and DoE to do so. I think they're far enough removed from the direct line that it's only a matter of time before they each retire from anything other than the big family events. To me they've already done above and beyond their duty to the crown, and as they get older and have more health problems I think they'll retire (in contrast, the Queen and DoE are more likely to keep working until they can't). When this happens and they chose to retire then I'd like to see some of these funds diverted to supporting Charles' children's engagements, assuming that the current conditions persist until then.
Very well said and so correct..Thank You!
  #1168  
Old 10-20-2014, 03:40 AM
PetticoatLane's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Small Town, United Kingdom
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
BP should make these things clearer - this saying nothing is hurting a lot of images.
I'm pretty sure Charles saying, "I'm too poor to pay for them to be full-time royals" would not be a great move PR-wise. In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd be disastrous.

The only way to free up the money required would be for Charles to reduce the size of his household which,as we all know, is considerable.
  #1169  
Old 10-20-2014, 03:41 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I don't the idea should be to stop the minor royals from working and supporting their charitable organizations but some of their duties could be picked up by the younger royals.

I still think the Starlight Children's Foundation and its royal patron, Princess Alexandra, could pass that role down to Catherine. I think she could bring a great deal of press attention to the very worthy cause.
Oh, that's tacky!

First you dismiss HRH Princess Alexandra as "a minor royal", stripping her of the respect owed to her as a Princess of the blood, and being the Queen's cousin to boot.

Then you decide she's passed her use-by date and decide to reward an exceptionally hardworking Princess Alexandra, for a lifetime of service to the throne and to the Queen, by giving her the shove so Catherine can add yet another little sparkler to her little posey of chores.

What is wrong with you people. You think Catherine needs more gravitas and you are right. But this is hardly the way to go about it.

The cult of youth at the expense of everyone else is very ugly and totally unappealing. And, just as an aside, I don't see Catherine bringing a great deal of press attention any of her very worthy causes to date.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #1170  
Old 10-20-2014, 04:35 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Something I'm a bit fuzzy about is precisely what this funding shortage means in practical terms. What is it curtailing? Is it stopping Kate from doing things to support her charities such as, say, attending fundraising dos?
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
  #1171  
Old 10-20-2014, 05:12 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Oh, that's tacky!

First you dismiss HRH Princess Alexandra as "a minor royal", stripping her of the respect owed to her as a Princess of the blood, and being the Queen's cousin to boot.

The you decide she's passed her use-by date and decide to reward an exceptionally hardworking Princess Alexandra, for a lifetime of service to the throne and to the Queen, by giving her the shove so Catherine can add yet another little sparkler to her little posey of chores.

What is wrong with you people. You think Catherine needs more gravitas and you are right. But this is hardly the way to go about it.

The cult of youth at the expense of everyone else is very ugly and totally unappealing. And, just as an aside, I don't see Catherine bringing a great deal of press attention any of her very worthy causes to date.
MARG, I couldn't agree more.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
  #1172  
Old 10-20-2014, 07:52 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
I don't think anyone is calling for the Kents or Gloucesters being stripped of their status but unlike the Queen and Philip they don't have to do royal engagements until they die unless they want too.

I think that it was being pointed out that Kate seems like the natural person to take over the patronage for the Starlight Foundation in the future like it was a perfect fit for William to take the FA position.




Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1173  
Old 10-20-2014, 08:29 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,533
The idea, suddenly, that Charles can't afford for Will and Kate to take on royal duties really flies in the face of the September, 2013 statement on what Will is to do next:

Press release

I don't believe this is the reason. I think the reason is that Will stomped his foot at the idea of becoming a full time royal.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1174  
Old 10-20-2014, 09:19 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,419
The funding issue isn't a rumour nor does it come from some anonymous royal "source". It was directly stated by Charles principal Private Secretary William Nye. Straight from the horses mouth.

To blame William for the fact he must rely on his father for money as the government doesn't fund him is typical of many.
  #1175  
Old 10-20-2014, 09:47 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Oh, that's tacky!

First you dismiss HRH Princess Alexandra as "a minor royal", stripping her of the respect owed to her as a Princess of the blood, and being the Queen's cousin to boot.

The you decide she's passed her use-by date and decide to reward an exceptionally hardworking Princess Alexandra, for a lifetime of service to the throne and to the Queen, by giving her the shove so Catherine can add yet another little sparkler to her little posey of chores.

What is wrong with you people. You think Catherine needs more gravitas and you are right. But this is hardly the way to go about it.

The cult of youth at the expense of everyone else is very ugly and totally unappealing. And, just as an aside, I don't see Catherine bringing a great deal of press attention any of her very worthy causes to date.
You don't know what you're talking about but whatever.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
  #1176  
Old 10-20-2014, 10:01 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
Right now William, Kate and Harry are doing around 400 engagement combined. If they went to 500 per year each as full time, that is an additional 1100 engagement to fund. That's more staff, more travel cost, more clothing, etc. The money would have to come from somewhere. The Duchy of Cornwall profit's are only so much. So the easiest solution is for William, Kate and Harry to stay part time until the Queen's death. William becomes Duke of Cornwall which pays for his family, Harry gets funded by Charles as with money from Duchy of Lancaster.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1177  
Old 10-20-2014, 07:53 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 2,964
^^^And this could be a likely scenario or HM may choose to curtail many of her duties when the DoE ends his royal engagements. While royal watchers and the press enjoy seeing the younger royals out doing public engagements, they are expensive.
  #1178  
Old 10-20-2014, 08:04 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
The Queen does a lot of her engagements at the palaces meeting ambassadors, officials, hosting receptions, etc. She isn't really doing a lot of traveling when you compare her to Anne or Charles. The meetings still would have to be done by someone most likely Charles.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1179  
Old 10-20-2014, 08:33 PM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Right now William, Kate and Harry are doing around 400 engagement combined. If they went to 500 per year each as full time, that is an additional 1100 engagement to fund. That's more staff, more travel cost, more clothing, etc. The money would have to come from somewhere. The Duchy of Cornwall profit's are only so much. So the easiest solution is for William, Kate and Harry to stay part time until the Queen's death. William becomes Duke of Cornwall which pays for his family, Harry gets funded by Charles as with money from Duchy of Lancaster.
According to Ilvebertie's number from 2013, William, Kate and Harry's numbers total only 167.

No one is asking for 500 per year from each. If full time 350-400 from William until he is POW; 250-300 for Kate.

No one is asking for Harry to go full time, he can remain part time throughout his life. Harry can stay in the low 100s.

The staff is already there that is why there was an expectation of the Cambridges going full time.

Why do they need more clothes?
Camilla wears the same thing every few weeks. Charles wears the same clothes from 20 years ago. Princess Anne still wears the clothes from 40 years ago.
  #1180  
Old 10-20-2014, 08:47 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
2013 is probably not a good year for engagement number comparison with Kate being pregnant for over half of it and no Cambridge overseas tour. 2014 WK&H are at 274 from the latest numbers post. Nov and early Dec is usually pretty active engagement wise and now that Kate is feeling better the numbers will go up.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
__________________

Closed Thread


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





Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit braganša 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 dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy murdoch new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess charlene daytime fashion princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats prinsjesdag queen anne-marie 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 royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sverre magnus 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


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 12:15 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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