Duke of Cambridge: What Now for William? Future Duties, Roles, Responsibilities

[royalistbert]

The Royal Forums 1900:

Oh that George is so lazy when will become a full time royal?

 

[soapstar]

The reason I mentioned Camilla, is because someone compared Anne to William and stated that as 11th in line, she does more than him. I just thought it was relevant to point out that the heir's wife also does less than Anne. In fact, Camilla does less than all the other senior members - annually she does around 250 or so.

I have nothing against Camilla, I think she's doing an excellent job and will make a great Queen consort. It just confuses me when the Cambridge's are called out for being lazy and not pulling their weight. I mean, if William's numbers are "embarrassingly low", than shouldn't the same apply to Camilla?

 

[TLLK]

The Royal Forums 1900:

Oh that George is so lazy when will become a full time royal?

And that Princess May has only knitted 36 pairs of socks at this point in the year. Trust me this will be the end of the monarchy if this lazy pair ever become king and queen.

 

[Rudolph]

The reason I mentioned Camilla's number is because someone compared Anne to William and stated that as 11th in line, she does more than him. I just thought it was relevant to point out that Camilla also does less than Anne. In fact, she does less than all the other senior members.

I have nothing against Camilla, I think she's doing an excellent job and will make a great Queen consort. It just confuses me when the Cambridge's are called out for being lazy and not pulling their weight. I mean, if William's numbers are "embarrassingly low", than shouldn't the same apply to Camilla?

Agree with everything!!

 

[KittyAtlanta]

The Royal Forums 1900:

Oh that George is so lazy when will become a full time royal?

LOL!!!! Good one!

 

[Cris M]

Well, everyone agrees that the Royals who work the most - The Prince of Wales and The Princess Royal - have had decades to build the robust schedule they have, so I think it's fair to give time for The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to build up their number of engagements.

The same goes for The Duchess of Cornwall, who has been a senior Royal for only nine years, and her main role is to support her husband. And I pretty much doubt she's the most irrelevant Princess of Wales in History. The previous one kept her charities only to live in a Palace without paying rent.

 

[Dman]

Well, everyone agrees that the Royals who work the most - The Prince of Wales and The Princess Royal - have had decades to build the robust schedule they have, so I think it's fair to give time for The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to build up their number of engagements.

The same goes for The Duchess of Cornwall, who has been a senior Royal for only nine years, and her main role is to support her husband. And I pretty much doubt she's the most irrelevant Princess of Wales in History. The previous one kept her charities only to live in a Palace without paying rent.

The previous Princess of Wales did not carry on official duties to live rent free. She decided to focus on a select few because she couldn't devote a great deal of time on the great amount of patronages she had.

It took years for Charles and Anne to gain the amount of work they do and a great deal of responsibility was handed down to them as well. They took on more roles when they Queen Mother gave them some of her roles and when she and Princess Margaret died, they took on more to pick up where they left off.

 

[Cris M]

The previous Princess of Wales did not carry on official duties to live rent free. She decided to focus on a select few because she couldn't devote a great deal of time on the great amount of patronages she had.

Well, I do think quality is better than quantity, so I see no reason to call the present Princess of Wales - or whatever title she uses - irrelevant.

 

[Dman]

Well, I do think quality is better than quantity, so I see no reason to call the present Princess of Wales - or whatever title she uses - irrelevant.

I never called Camilla irrelevant. She's very much relevant as she's the second lady of the land and the future Princess Consort/Queen.

 

[Cris M]

I never called Camilla irrelevant. She's very much relevant as she's the second lady of the land and the future Princess Consort/Queen.

And I wasn't talking about you.

 

[Lady Nimue]

The reason I mentioned Camilla, is because someone compared Anne to William and stated that as 11th in line, she does more than him. I just thought it was relevant to point out that the heir's wife also does less than Anne. In fact, Camilla does less than all the other senior members - annually she does around 250 or so.

I have nothing against Camilla, I think she's doing an excellent job and will make a great Queen consort. It just confuses me when the Cambridge's are called out for being lazy and not pulling their weight. I mean, if William's numbers are "embarrassingly low", than shouldn't the same apply to Camilla?

Personally, I cut Camilla a great deal of slack. I think she does fine - and more than fine - with what she does do. She came to this 'job' quite late in life. She was moving into her 'golden years' thinking life would be slowing down, not speeding up. She may also not be as robust in the limelight as someone younger - it may tire her more. We can never know what her health is really like.

William is very different since his position is vastly different from Camilla's - plus he is younger. Anyway, William's and Kate's work load has always seemed to me to be moot. That decision is being made by the Queen and Charles in consultation with William - so it is what it is because the Queen (and Charles) are okay with it being that way. I assume. If that's not the case it's not my lookout anyway. So either way I can let them be - to do whatever they want and see fit to do.

 

[Rudolph]

The reigning sovereign's children and their respective spouses are supposed to work "full-time". its the same in all royal families.

To say Camilla is getting on in years and therefore needs to be cut slack doesn't wash. She married the heir to the British throne and that comes with responsibilities. She knew what her role entails. We need to back over a 100 years to find a similar situation to William's. We only need to go back 18 years to the last Princess of Wales.

William is the Queen's grandson. Its not his fault he was born in the wrong generation for some people.

Kate does a lot more than even Harry as far as engagement totals go and yet Harry's fan club describes him as the hardest working royal.

 

[soapstar]

Compared to Sophie Wessex's figures for her first few years of being a working royal, Kate's numbers are embarrassingly low. In Sophie's first year she did 125, second year 354, and third year 175 royal engagements. I am starting to wonder what Kate actually do all day (aside from childcare).

On another point, I assume William's new flying job will only be til his father is King, however at this point, what will William actual be expected to do as DoC/Pow? The same as Charles does now?

Those numbers for Sophie are wrong. She did 26 the year she married into the BRF. 129 the next year and 134 the following. She did 327 in 2002 (the year she quit her job). After that, her numbers stayed between 140-180. She didn't go up to 200+ until 2012.

 

[Eden]

I've seen William & Catherine starting to take part in State Events like attending the Royal Reception for the Diplomatic Corps at Buckingham Palace, William has taken on role of carrying out Investitures on behalf of The Queen. William representing The Queen during the South Korean State Visit late last year and he and Catherine may start attending the actual State Banquets. Their official oversea tours are longer and Catherine is about to embark on her first solo trip to Malta on The Queen's behalf.



The Cambridge's are allowed to do more now because they are no longer held up by a full-time military life. They could have hired a new part-time nanny for Prince George but they've now hired a full-time nanny, they have an Equerry and they've moved their official court from St. James's Palace to Kensington Palace. They have setup their life and court to be able to take on more duties.



It makes no sense whatsoever to now retreat and take on a full-time job that would cause them decrease their official duties, charitable ventures and participation in royal events. William himself have expressed that his full-time job was causing him to neglect his royal life and it wasn't easy to balance things out properly.

Thanks for reminding me of all this, now what reason is there for not taking on more duties? Also, if they choose to take on royal duties part-time, why all the help? If Kate chooses to be at home full time with George why a full time nanny?

 

[Eden]

Those numbers for Sophie are wrong. She did 26 the year she married into the BRF. 129 the next year and 134 the following. She did 327 in 2002 (the year she quit her job). After that, her numbers stayed between 140-180. She didn't go up to 200+ until 2012.

Wow a woman who worked full-time and still managed to carry out so many royal duties! The crazy inhuman qualities of someone who's husband is not heir. How also did she manage once she had children?
Oh and stop talking about apples and oranges we are not talking about fruit, we are talking about people doing their share of work! Who they are, what sex they are, title they have is all irrelevant to the quantity and quality of work they provide.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Well Harry like William is a full time soldier so it doesn't really matter if Kate has done more than him, he is still working even if it's not with the RF.

 

[Lady Nimue]

To say Camilla is getting on in years and therefore needs to be cut slack doesn't wash. She married the heir to the British throne and that comes with responsibilities. She knew what her role entails. We need to back over a 100 years to find a similar situation to William's. We only need to go back 18 years to the last Princess of Wales.

Yikes! Sounds like slavery to me.

I don't have a dog in this fight, as the saying goes - it just seems to me that it's the heir that is key, and even the heir has not had a defined role, like the Vice-president of the United States. The role of heir seems to be what the heir decides to make it - and what the monarch allows. As for spouses and what-all, that's in the realm of personal choice. JMO.

 

[TLLK]

^^^Well reasoned.

 

[Eden]

[Q UOTE=Skippyboo;1688264]If people are comparing royals, it is only fair to compare them similar situations. William and Kate don't have a modern royal equivalent. Comparing William and Kate to William's parents when he was the same age as George isn't a fair comparison since they were already Prince & Princess of Wales. Also comparing Sophie of today to Kate of today isn't fair either because Sophie's kids are schooled aged and George is only one. They also don't have a continental royal equivalents since people such as Fred and Mary, Victoria and Daniel etc are the next in line.

If you look back over 100 years to the last adult heir to the heir- the future George V, he basically hunted and collected stamps whiled holed up at York cottage at Sandringham.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community[/QUOTE]


It's comparing how MUCH they work not the role, title or future titles that I am talking about! Work is work it should not be based on what title are held.
Answer two questions: what is the role of the Royal Families? Who do they represent ?

 

[Queen Camilla]

William's May 2012 interview with Katie Couric

“It’s a really difficult one because I really enjoy my time in the Air Force, and I’d love to continue it,” he said. “But the pressures of my other life are building. And fighting them off, or balancing the two of them, has proven quite difficult.”

Clearly the Queen is putting pressure on him to become full time and has for several years.

Airman Prince William could become part-time helicopter instructor - Telegraph

Rudolph,
If you want to compare numbers Camilla wins.

Eight years into the marriage Camilla was patrons of over 100 organizations. Your chosen one didn't reach 100 patrons until right before she dumped them all, more than a dozen years into her marriage.

Camilla also wins when it comes to the number of royal engagements.

Why not compare apples to apples?
Two children and the same time period. Anne vs Diana.
1984 Princess Anne with her youngest child 3 years old had 501 royal engagements.
1987 Diana with her youngest child 3 years old had 266 royal engagements.

BTW, in 1987 Princess Anne had 704 engagements. She also ran the horse trials at Gatecombe, including setting up the events and working at the Gatecombe souvenir stand.

Anne in 1987 had 3 times more engagements than Diana.
Anne in 2013 did not have 3 times more engagements than Camilla.

Eight years into the marriage Diana only had 40% the number of royal engagements as Princess Anne.

Eight years into the marriage Camilla had 54% the number of royal engagements as Princess Anne.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It is interesting that on the Continent we do not see this sort of games to see what a son here, a daughter there, an aunt over here or a cousin furtherer away does. Only in the British situation I see this fetish on numbers and even then these are often quite discutable.

Where in the Netherlands or Spain the Court would simply say: The King and Queen bring a visit to city X or city Y, in the UK even a visit to the races is counted as "work" because Her Majesty accidentally has been requested to hand over a trophy, or to shake hands with the Chairman of the Wounded Jockeys Fund, or to have a little chat with a group leading a charity for retired race horses. Tick, tick, tick, tick: Her Never To Tire Majesty has carried out 4 engagements today!

Another example, the Courts of Luxembourg or Norway would describe: Today several Ambassadors were received at the Palace to hand over their letters of credence. No more, no less. In the UK: at Buckingham Palace Her Majesty has received the Ambassador of Jemen, followed by the Ambassadors of Tunesia and of Argentina. Tick, tick, tick! Three engaments added on the Queen's workload. The sad thing is that British media only orientate on these quite discutable statistics and compare the lazy Continentals to their "hardworking" Queen, while I have no doubt that the agendas of King Felipe VI or King Willem-Alexander are equally filled with engagements, visits, seminars, audiences, meetings and whatever.

 

[Skippyboo]

It makes you wonder if the royals themselves take the numbers seriously or joke about it. I read that Anne and Philip have a friendly competition about whose office is more efficient.

In real life, most of us work because we need money for housing, car, food, kids, etc. If we were independently wealthy, we probably wouldn't be doing the same job we have now. Maybe instead, we would do something we have a interest in or take care of our kids.




Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

When you really boil everything down to basics, what is there is that in reality, none of the royal family has to "work" at anything at all. It is my understanding that it is the royals, themselves, that have chosen to sponsor, visit, support and become patrons of various charitable organizations because they wish to aid and bring attention to causes that affect their people. Their main roles in life are the preservation and support of the monarch as the head of state in a non political role. The traditions and the pomp and circumstance of a very long history is preserved and honored and kept alive. The Queen is a living, breathing connection to everything that is British that has far reaching roots in its past as well as she holds the continuity of a nation into the future with her family.

There is no pay scale. There are no set hours to report to work. There are no real perks. Instead there is the sacrifice of personal privacy, constant scrutiny of what they do and what they don't do and a need to have personal security around them at all times due to being a high target for any crazed idiot out there. This entire family could live very well into the future on their own private means and go on a permanent vacation for the rest of their lives if they chose to. Charles wasn't required to carve out the role he did as the Prince of Wales. He chose to and started the Prince's Trust with his pension from the Navy. William and Harry could very well have decided that the hot spots of the Med or the slopes and the finest eateries in the world were to be their prime focus in life. They didn't.

Perhaps instead of focusing on "work ethics" which to me is trying to fit the royal family into the mold of the everyday man that earns his living at a career or employment, it would be wiser to focus on what the royal family is accomplishing and giving to the people by the various things that they do. Think of it this way. Should the UK decide to go republic and deem the royal family no longer a necessity, the royal family itself will not be hurting but there will be a huge gap where the contributions made by the family used to be.

Sometimes we really don't know how good something is until its gone. Its my opinion that the British Royal Family gives to the nation far more than what it receives from them.

(jumps down off her soapbox and heads for the donut and coffee table)

 

[Iluvbertie]

It is interesting that on the Continent we do not see this sort of games to see what a son here, a daughter there, an aunt over here or a cousin furtherer away does. Only in the British situation I see this fetish on numbers and even then these are often quite discutable.

Where in the Netherlands or Spain the Court would simply say: The King and Queen bring a visit to city X or city Y, in the UK even a visit to the races is counted as "work" because Her Majesty accidentally has been requested to hand over a trophy, or to shake hands with the Chairman of the Wounded Jockeys Fund, or to have a little chat with a group leading a charity for retired race horses. Tick, tick, tick, tick: Her Never To Tire Majesty has carried out 4 engagements today!

Another example, the Courts of Luxembourg or Norway would describe: Today several Ambassadors were received at the Palace to hand over their letters of credence. No more, no less. In the UK: at Buckingham Palace Her Majesty has received the Ambassador of Jemen, followed by the Ambassadors of Tunesia and of Argentina. Tick, tick, tick! Three engaments added on the Queen's workload. The sad thing is that British media only orientate on these quite discutable statistics and compare the lazy Continentals to their "hardworking" Queen, while I have no doubt that the agendas of King Felipe VI or King Willem-Alexander are equally filled with engagements, visits, seminars, audiences, meetings and whatever.

Each court is different and just because the Europeans have decided to describe their workload the way they have and the British their way doesn't make one right or wrong.

The BRF by the way indicate whether The Queen has received an ambassador or a high commissioner alone or with a group - and she may do a bit of both on the one day.

I really do hate it when some posters get upset because the British way is different to the European way and then imply that the British are wrong in doing so - I am NOT pointing the finger at anyone in particular but generalising about something that does really annoy me.

It isn't a competition between the royal houses but how each one has chosen through tradition mainly to report to their people what they do each day. The British started the CC in the reign of George III and he wanted to tell the people everything that his family did and so the CC came about with the sort of reporting we see today.

Other courts prefer to say - the King and Queen visited xxxx today - fine. I see nothing wrong with that but I like the detail that the BRF have in the CC about exactly what they did on that visit e.g. met the people who work behind the scenes at the factory, watched a demonstration of the work, opened a new wing etc.

I have learnt a lot about the different members of the family and their unnoticed interests by going back through the CC - something that if all it said was yyyy visited xxxx today - wouldn't give that information.

 

[Miss Hathaway]

Princess Anne was not always the work horse she is now. In 1980, she was doing few public engagements, and after she was given an allowance raise, the public turned on her, saying she was grumpy when she did bother to turn up. Diana marrying in caused Anne to kick it in gear and thus was born "Anne the Work Horse".

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

 

[Dman]

Of course it's William & Catherine could do more charitable duties but I think more big royal roles should be handed down to them. William is now carrying out Investitures on behalf of The Queen, Catherine is about to embark on her first solo trip to Malta on The Queen's behalf. It's all a start.

 

[GrammaSueSue]

When you really boil everything down to basics, what is there is that in reality, none of the royal family has to "work" at anything at all. It is my understanding that it is the royals, themselves, that have chosen to sponsor, visit, support and become patrons of various charitable organizations because they wish to aid and bring attention to causes that affect their people. Their main roles in life are the preservation and support of the monarch as the head of state in a non political role. The traditions and the pomp and circumstance of a very long history is preserved and honored and kept alive. The Queen is a living, breathing connection to everything that is British that has far reaching roots in its past as well as she holds the continuity of a nation into the future with her family.

There is no pay scale. There are no set hours to report to work. There are no real perks. Instead there is the sacrifice of personal privacy, constant scrutiny of what they do and what they don't do and a need to have personal security around them at all times due to being a high target for any crazed idiot out there. This entire family could live very well into the future on their own private means and go on a permanent vacation for the rest of their lives if they chose to. Charles wasn't required to carve out the role he did as the Prince of Wales. He chose to and started the Prince's Trust with his pension from the Navy. William and Harry could very well have decided that the hot spots of the Med or the slopes and the finest eateries in the world were to be their prime focus in life. They didn't.

Perhaps instead of focusing on "work ethics" which to me is trying to fit the royal family into the mold of the everyday man that earns his living at a career or employment, it would be wiser to focus on what the royal family is accomplishing and giving to the people by the various things that they do. Think of it this way. Should the UK decide to go republic and deem the royal family no longer a necessity, the royal family itself will not be hurting but there will be a huge gap where the contributions made by the family used to be.

Sometimes we really don't know how good something is until its gone. Its my opinion that the British Royal Family gives to the nation far more than what it receives from them.

(jumps down off her soapbox and heads for the donut and coffee table)

Very well said and I agree completely!!!

 

[TLLK]

When you really boil everything down to basics, what is there is that in reality, none of the royal family has to "work" at anything at all. It is my understanding that it is the royals, themselves, that have chosen to sponsor, visit, support and become patrons of various charitable organizations because they wish to aid and bring attention to causes that affect their people. Their main roles in life are the preservation and support of the monarch as the head of state in a non political role. The traditions and the pomp and circumstance of a very long history is preserved and honored and kept alive. The Queen is a living, breathing connection to everything that is British that has far reaching roots in its past as well as she holds the continuity of a nation into the future with her family.

There is no pay scale. There are no set hours to report to work. There are no real perks. Instead there is the sacrifice of personal privacy, constant scrutiny of what they do and what they don't do and a need to have personal security around them at all times due to being a high target for any crazed idiot out there. This entire family could live very well into the future on their own private means and go on a permanent vacation for the rest of their lives if they chose to. Charles wasn't required to carve out the role he did as the Prince of Wales. He chose to and started the Prince's Trust with his pension from the Navy. William and Harry could very well have decided that the hot spots of the Med or the slopes and the finest eateries in the world were to be their prime focus in life. They didn't.

Perhaps instead of focusing on "work ethics" which to me is trying to fit the royal family into the mold of the everyday man that earns his living at a career or employment, it would be wiser to focus on what the royal family is accomplishing and giving to the people by the various things that they do. Think of it this way. Should the UK decide to go republic and deem the royal family no longer a necessity, the royal family itself will not be hurting but there will be a huge gap where the contributions made by the family used to be.

Sometimes we really don't know how good something is until its gone. Its my opinion that the British Royal Family gives to the nation far more than what it receives from them.

(jumps down off her soapbox and heads for the donut and coffee table)

If the emoticon allowed this would be a latte and a cruller instead of a daisy!!! You've stated it perfectly.

 

[SElizabeth]

When you really boil everything down to basics, what is there is that in reality, none of the royal family has to "work" at anything at all. It is my understanding that it is the royals, themselves, that have chosen to sponsor, visit, support and become patrons of various charitable organizations because they wish to aid and bring attention to causes that affect their people. Their main roles in life are the preservation and support of the monarch as the head of state in a non political role. The traditions and the pomp and circumstance of a very long history is preserved and honored and kept alive. The Queen is a living, breathing connection to everything that is British that has far reaching roots in its past as well as she holds the continuity of a nation into the future with her family.

There is no pay scale. There are no set hours to report to work. There are no real perks. Instead there is the sacrifice of personal privacy, constant scrutiny of what they do and what they don't do and a need to have personal security around them at all times due to being a high target for any crazed idiot out there. This entire family could live very well into the future on their own private means and go on a permanent vacation for the rest of their lives if they chose to. Charles wasn't required to carve out the role he did as the Prince of Wales. He chose to and started the Prince's Trust with his pension from the Navy. William and Harry could very well have decided that the hot spots of the Med or the slopes and the finest eateries in the world were to be their prime focus in life. They didn't.

Perhaps instead of focusing on "work ethics" which to me is trying to fit the royal family into the mold of the everyday man that earns his living at a career or employment, it would be wiser to focus on what the royal family is accomplishing and giving to the people by the various things that they do. Think of it this way. Should the UK decide to go republic and deem the royal family no longer a necessity, the royal family itself will not be hurting but there will be a huge gap where the contributions made by the family used to be.

Sometimes we really don't know how good something is until its gone. Its my opinion that the British Royal Family gives to the nation far more than what it receives from them.

(jumps down off her soapbox and heads for the donut and coffee table)

Oh my, that is the very best comment I have ever heard regarding the royal family. To be honest with you Osipi, I never thought of it that way, yes the royal family has tons of money, maybe billions who knows and they really don't need to work as they do. I have always loved Queen Elizabeth and at her age she is still a *work horse*, going out and being with the people everyday.
I wish I could give you champagne and flowers, this will have to do:

 

[Zonk]

Let's get back on topic....the subject of this thread is actually William.
I've moved several posts regarding Catherine to a new thread, which can be found here
http://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...roles-responsibilities-37233.html#post1688594 .