Prince George and Princess Charlotte, General News 2: May 2015 - May 2016

[giftluv]

As this is the first I've even thought about the Cambridge kids going to school, my gut reaction is that they'll most likely attend schools like William and Harry did at that age. It wouldn't actually surprise me though if they just went to an ordinary neighborhood school in Norfolk either.

I think a lot depends on the situation with the monarchy at the time too.

I think prince William just want to follow their mother footsteps.

 

[Skippyboo]

If they are still in their current position, I can see George going to a local school. Charlotte can't really follow the path of William and Harry because they went to all boys schools. William and Kate may want to send them to a coed school when they are little so they can be in the same school and when they are older George can go to Eton like his dad and have tea and King lessons at the castle on Sundays and Charlotte goes to Marlborough like mum and rules the field hockey pitch.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Curryong]

I think they'll go to nursery schools in London.They may well both go to Marlborough together and maybe for a short time to St George's, which is at Windsor. Eugenie, Beatrice and Louise Wessex all went there, I believe.

 

[amaryllus]

What about Ludgrove later for George?

 

[Molly2101]

I think they'll go to nursery schools in London.They may well both go to Marlborough together and maybe for a short time to St George's, which is at Windsor. Eugenie, Beatrice and Louise Wessex all went there, I believe.

I think St George's would be quite far for George and Charlotte, even if if they lived in Kensington. St George's is only up the road from Bagshot for Louise and James and when Eugenie lived in Sunninghill St George's was very close. Beatrice never went to St George's in Windsor - she remained at Coworth Park and then went to St George's in Ascot.

There are plenty of private schools in London. Garden House where Charles, Margarita and the Taylor girls went/still attend. George could attend Dulwich Prep in London before going to Eton. I imagine Charlotte would end up going to Marlborough where Kate and Eugenie both attended and where I imagine Lady Louise will go.

I imagine they have already got George's name down for a prep school as you have to register them very early on.

 

[Daria_S]

What is the average age that children start nursery school in the UK? Here, in the States, it's generally at age three, but some schools will allowance child to attend a few months before the third birthday (if the child has a December birthday, he/she can start in September). It can also depend on the school itself, because each school is different. The guidelines for elementary school are clearer, but they vary from district to district, and state to state. George just turned two, so would he be able to go to something like a center-based daycare, or a playgroup where parents are in attendance too? I've had a student in my preschool class who was from the UK, and her mother told me that she went to nursery school at the age of two. In any case, I'm just curious.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[MissP]

Compulsory education is from 4 years old. There's no requirement for children to attend nursery before then. A lot of state primary schools have a nursery which children attend on either a part or full time basis from 3 years old which a lot of children do now. There's also private childcare / nurseries which take children from a much younger age.

My niece & nephew (now 4 & 7) went to the nursery attached to their primary school from about 3 1/2.

I didn't attend nursery but went to a playgroup a couple of times a week before I started full time school at 4. But where I grew up it was very rural, my parents worked from home and this was 25 years ago so things will be a bit different now!!

 

[Daria_S]

Compulsory education is from 4 years old. There's no requirement for children to attend nursery before then. A lot of state primary schools have a nursery which children attend on either a part or full time basis from 3 years old which a lot of children do now. There's also private childcare / nurseries which take children from a much younger age.

My niece & nephew (now 4 & 7) went to the nursery attached to their primary school from about 3 1/2.

I didn't attend nursery but went to a playgroup a couple of times a week before I started full time school at 4. But where I grew up it was very rural, my parents worked from home and this was 25 years ago so things will be a bit different now!!

Thank you!


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

When I was little, I used to live in Kensington and first started to attend nursery when I was six months. I stopped attending when I was almost three to go on to primary school. As far as I know my nursery wasn't private.

Some prep (private primary) schools have nurseries/preschools now as well, I remember reading that Garden House has one. One of the prep schools near me also has a preschool.

 

[MichelleQ2]

I could see George attending a preschool in Norfolk for the next 2 yrs and then the week day base may move more regularly to London with weekends in Norfolk allowing him to start primary school in London.

 

[Queen Camilla]

Or George and Charlotte can go to school in Norfolk.

Some people are moving away from boarding schools and W&K may decide it is best their children remain day students.

 

[amaryllus]

I don't gather the British upper classes are moving away significantly though... If virtually all of George's and Charlottes peers and the people who are going to be part of the posh set 20 years hence are receiving boarding school educations it hardly seems logical or fair to deny the future leaders of the polo and luncheon set the same experiences and the chance to build the strong bonds of friendships both parents got with friends.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Having been born and bred in Norfolk and lived there most of my life, I can say that most of the vast Norfolk coastline and beaches can be virtually empty even at weekends, and you may only see the occasional dog-walker a mile or so away. At busy times like bank holidays or when the schools are off, even then you do not have to walk too far away from the beech-goers to find yourself on your own.

Unusual. Yet must have a charm. I guess being cozy at home is more attractive?

 

[Curryong]

When I was a child, growing up in Sheringham which is on the coast, the beaches used to be quite busy in the summer. However, in the past few decades more and more British people want holidays in the sun overseas, so the British seaside holiday has suffered by comparison. Norfolk has great charm though and I think it is a terrific place to holiday, especially on the Norfolk Broads.

 

[TLLK]

Curryong-Do the beaches have tide pools, fishing or other recreation fun in that area? Personally I love walking on a quiet stretch of beach so the Norfolk ones would be a welcome change from the crowded ones in SoCalifornia.

 

[Daria_S]

Curryong-Do the beaches have tide pools, fishing or other recreation fun in that area? Personally I love walking on a quiet stretch of beach so the Norfolk ones would be a welcome change from the crowded ones in SoCalifornia.

The beach day that George had with his grandmother is perfect in my book; not hot, in fact cool enough for a jacket, and closed-toe shoes, and no people to trip over every other step. I'm not a beach person, so I would not be caught at one in the summer, but on a cool fall/spring day, it could be quite lovely.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Jacknch]

From the BBC:

Prince George 'being harassed by paparazzi' - BBC News

 

[Rudolph]

Prince William and Kate have sent an open letter asking photographers not to “pursue” their children after a photographer was found in the boot of a car trying to get pictures of Prince George.

The royal couple have said there has been an “increasing number of incidents of paparazzi harassment” in recent months “and the tactics being used are increasingly dangerous”.

Their communications secretary Jason Knauf wrote the letter to leaders of media industry bodies and made it public to “inform the public discussion around the unauthorised photography of children”.

Kensington Palace also tweeted about the issue online this morning.

Aides say the couple do not want to bring up George, two, and Charlotte, three months, behind closed doors but are increasingly concerned for their safety when they are out and about.

Read more: Prince George: Palace warning to paparazzi after photographer found hiding in car boot to snap Royal tot - Mirror Online

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

From the BBC:

Prince George 'being harassed by paparazzi' - BBC News

The palace says that in recent months, photographers have:

used long range lenses to photograph the Duchess of Cambridge playing with Prince George in a number of private parks

monitored the movements of Prince George and his nanny around London parks and monitored the movements of other household staff

photographed the children of private individuals visiting the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's home

pursued cars leaving family homes

used other children to draw Prince George into view around playgrounds

been found hiding on private property in fields and woodland locations around the duke and duchess's home in Norfolk

obscured themselves in sand dunes on a rural beach to take photos of Prince George playing with his grandmother

placed locations near the Middleton family home in Berkshire under steady surveillance

It said the most recent incident, which was last week, involved a photographer who was discovered by police lying down in the boot of a rented car attempting to shoot photos outside a children's play area.

This is disgusting.

 

[Honeybees]

Sad and this is a toddler and a baby?

 

[Rudolph]

Kensington Palace ‏@KensingtonRoyal
Kensington Palace has issued a letter on the security and ethical issues around unauthorised photos of children

A letter from Kensington Palace

 

[Marty91charmed]

When I read the first twwet from KP I almost sensed that something was coming... I think the letter has fully explained why this action was needed to be made. Things seem to have escalating and the last incident of a paparazzo hidden in a boot looks like it was the last drop... Fair, totally understandable complaint and plea. I think it was a smart move to put the accent on how the pics has been taken so far rather than on P. George being photographed... all the tactics and disgusting ways just to capture a child's moment. However, I feel this is a totally losing battle, as many fights against paparazzi and unauthorised pics have taken place over they years by celebrities and famous people. The majority of these fights have ended into nowhwere, or worse, have been rejected even in tribunal. (I rembember Princess Caroline's legal action agains paparazzi). As I have already read, it is ridiculous to even think that photos of Prince George (or Charlotte anyway) won't appear in the international press for the sake of privacy, or will be censored. It is even more ridiculous to think that all the eager public won't buy the mags or will boycott the press... I feel sorry for Prince George, and all other children who have to undergoes this distress, but the palace isn't going to gain anything by fighting the world. I guess W&K may obtain more privacy and improve the situation. But it would be naive on their part to merely think Prince George'image won't be selling anymore. That is the sad and crude true. However, I wish the photographers will at least stop using those frightening and stalkings tactics, especially suirvelliance... not only they are disrespectful but also potentially dangerous and harming.

 

[Nico]

Sad but predictable ...
We see the limits of the Cambridges desperate attempt to have a "normal life" for themselves and their children. It simply doesn't work. Now it 's time for William to realize that their lives will NEVER be normal like the Middletons and that raising your children hidden behind the palace gates is not as bad after all.
Don't get me wrong this harassement is just plain wrong and disturbing, but it's not new ! And i'm affraid that the obvious reluctance from the Cambridges to be full time royals doesn't help to blur the lines even more.

 

[hernameispekka]

When I read the first twwet from KP I almost sensed that something was coming... I think the letter has fully explained why this action was needed to be made. Things seem to have escalating and the last incident of a paparazzo hidden in a boot looks like it was the last drop... Fair, totally understandable complaint and plea. I think it was a smart move to put the accent on how the pics has been taken so far rather than on P. George being photographed... all the tactics and disgusting ways just to capture a child's moment. However, I feel this is a totally losing battle, as many fights against paparazzi and unauthorised pics have taken place over they years by celebrities and famous people. The majority of these fights have ended into nowhwere, or worse, have been rejected even in tribunal. (I rembember Princess Caroline's legal action agains paparazzi). As I have already read, it is ridiculous to even think that photos of Prince George (or Charlotte anyway) won't appear in the international press for the sake of privacy, or will be censored. It is even more ridiculous to think that all the eager public won't buy the mags or will boycott the press... I feel sorry for Prince George, and all other children who have to undergoes this distress, but the palace isn't going to gain anything by fighting the world. I guess W&K may obtain more privacy and improve the situation. But it would be naive on their part to merely think Prince George'image won't be selling anymore. That is the sad and crude true. However, I wish the photographers will at least stop using those frightening and stalkings tactics, especially suirvelliance... not only they are disrespectful but also potentially dangerous and harming.

I see your point. But I know there is a growing movement in the US where celebrities go together and have actually "made" media lessen their publishing of pictures of children meaning children are fair game at the red carpet etc where the parent is giving the media a councious OK to take pictures, but paparazzi is not accepted. They have started that debate and it's going slow but things are actually happening. So if alot of UK celebrities latch on to William and Kates claim they might actually be able to get some traction.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I freely admit my all time heart warming photos come from the 2014 Australian trip where Kate, down on her knees in stockings, high heels and coat is speaking to little George (as the Prince looks on). To me that said more about the Cambridges than any of the huge grin "happy girl" poses that the Duchess gives us when she is covered by the press.
That said, the KP announcement gives props to UK/Commonwealth press and says the problem has been mostly with international news agencies. I found it odd that they did not call out the US - as our People and other magazines have published pap photos.
I noted in particular "But we are aware that many people who read and enjoy the publications that fuel the market for unauthorised photos of children do not know about the unacceptable circumstances behind what are often lovely images. The use of these photos is usually dressed up with fun, positive language about the 'cute', 'adorable' photos and happy write ups about the family. We feel readers deserve to understand the tactics deployed to obtain these pictures."
Well, that's me, isn't it? I need to rethink my position on these "photos that are out there on the internet, so why not look."

 

[Marty91charmed]

I see your point. But I know there is a growing movement in the US where celebrities go together and have actually "made" media lessen their publishing of pictures of children meaning children are fair game at the red carpet etc where the parent is giving the media a councious OK to take pictures, but paparazzi is not accepted. They have started that debate and it's going slow but things are actually happening. So if alot of UK celebrities latch on to William and Kates claim they might actually be able to get some traction.

I know, but I think that if even this movement will at last succeed, the process is going to take many many years. Fights like are not matter of days or months. And celebrities and public figures need to realize that they can limit pictures of children in the medias, but thar (sadly) their protection will always be partial. Honestly, the surveillance of a child and the monitor of his schedule is creepy, and paparazzis hidden in every imaginable place is scary especially the pursuit for a child... I condemn this kind of tactics and vile ways of taking pics, but it is pictures themselves that cannot be avoided IMO. I don't know if I made myself clear...

 

[iisuzieii]

this letter should be a surprise to no one...they pick and choose their battles...and someone obviously crossed the line for kp to issue a complaint.

 

[Honeybees]

Forgive me but wasn't Prince William instrumental in bringing about the phone hacking scandal in England? He took action after a newspaper wrote about his hurting his knee during a soccer game. He had only mentioned it in a phone call to Tom Bradbury l believe and when it was printed, got the source to be revealed. Lets not underestimate Prince William.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

this letter should be a surprise to no one...they pick and choose their battles...and someone obviously crossed the line for kp to issue a complaint.

correct, especially the bold sentence.

Nobody agrees with paparazzi tactics but they make money. KP succeeded in keeping the british media in place but they will fail with world wide internet/foreign publications as long as people are interested in such photos.

There is no law against taking a picture of a public person in a public place (I am not talking about possible tactics to take the picture). I disagree with KP's view that W&K are 'any other parents' and George and Charlotte are 'any other children'. They are not and paparazzi pictures are only the downside - the upside are the enourmous privileges those children grow up with. You can't have it all, can you.

 

[hernameispekka]

I don't think we can (and should) stop photos all together. I mean, a single mobile phone on a turist is Ok I think. But where I think the legal system can step in is HOW the pictures are taken. For ex, include paparazzi in some stalking laws. And that photographs from hidden views are illegal or something. Or photographs from closer than x meters etc.