The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement?

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

We really don't know if she is still 'ill' in some way or not - and his engagement was announced when she was ill. There may be more going on with both of them healthwise than we are being told (hopefully not but...)

The engagement was announced the day before she cancelled her visit to Swansea. However the engagement has probably been planned for months.

[wbenson]

Originally Posted by Ish

I don't understand the DoE's 1 day engagement in Canada (which is set for April). To me it seems like a long way to come for just one engagement.

While he was younger then (although in his 80s), he did the same thing in 2004 for a Duke of Edinburgh's Awards dinner.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

The engagement was announced the day before she cancelled her visit to Swansea. However the engagement has probably been planned for months.

Yes it was announced the day before the cancelled engagement but we don't know how ill she was at that time. Most engagements are planned months ahead but then again sometimes they are done with much shorter notice so it is possible that the announcement was done to suggest that there wasn't anything really wrong with The Queen.

[royal-blue]

It is highly unlikely the Queen will ever abdicate, but I can see her fully retiring if Phillip was was to die. She might spend half the year at Balmoral and half the year at Sandringham from then on.

[Iluvbertie]

I don't think she would do that as she simply can't retire. She either has to abdicate and thus give up all official roles or she has to continue being in London for all the official stuff.

[royal-blue]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

I don't think she would do that as she simply can't retire. She either has to abdicate and thus give up all official roles or she has to continue being in London for all the official stuff.

But if she retired at, say, 90 years old, and carried on with the official stuff without making many apperarances, could Parliament force her to abdicate/a Regency?

[Spheno]

Originally Posted by royal-blue

But if she retired at, say, 90 years old, and carried on with the official stuff without making many apperarances, could Parliament force her to abdicate/a Regency?

Regency Acts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by royal-blue

But if she retired at, say, 90 years old, and carried on with the official stuff without making many apperarances, could Parliament force her to abdicate/a Regency?

They didn't force Victoria to abdicate, or create a regency, and she only did the official stuff for 40 years.

So long as the official stuff is being done there is no need for all the fancy hoopla anyway for the office of monarch to continue.

[royal-blue]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

They didn't force Victoria to abdicate, or create a regency, and she only did the official stuff for 40 years.

So long as the official stuff is being done there is no need for all the fancy hoopla anyway for the office of monarch to continue.

Agreed - I honestly can't see Parliament or even Charles forcing the Queen to abdicate after 60+ years on the throne.

[democratnmonocole]

To mark the Queen's 80th birthday in 2006, Margaret Rhodes, her cousin and one of her few good friends, was interviewed. She made it quite clear that the Queen will NEVER abdicate. She would view it as her mother did of her uncle, as a betrayal of everything the monarchy means for Britain. And the Queen would never do anything to let down her parents (even when they have been deceased for ages). The Queen considers her reign a continuation of her father's. However I absolutely think the Duke of Edinburgh needs to go into full retirement. He looks ill and tired in the photos of today's Maundy service.

[padams2359]

That article was ridiculous.

[Ish]

If HM goes naked and sings "Yes We Have No Bananas" at Ascot (or anywhere else in public for that matter) I would support a regency... But I'd still be iffy on the abdication.

[Roslyn]

[Dman]

What Queen Elizabeth can learn from Queen Beatrix:
What Queen Elizabeth can learn from Queen Beatrix | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

[Rebafan81]

Haha, if she sings, I hope someone has their cellphone for video.
The only thing I like about advocating is yesterday was a celebration, a passing of the torch, instead of a state funeral where the new king would have to take on duties while saying goodbye to a parent. This made it a special memory and celebration. Which is so much better. Now Princess Beatrice can travel, enjoy her grandchildren and still be healthy enough to help her son adjust or just be his support system. I am sorry but the Dutch do it the right way in my opinion.

[Ish]

Originally Posted by Rebafan81

Haha, if she sings, I hope someone has their cellphone for video.
The only thing I like about advocating is yesterday was a celebration, a passing of the torch, instead of a state funeral where the new king would have to take on duties while saying goodbye to a parent. This made it a special memory and celebration. Which is so much better. Now Princess Beatrice can travel, enjoy her grandchildren and still be healthy enough to help her son adjust or just be his support system. I am sorry but the Dutch do it the right way in my opinion.

The thing with the Dutch ceremony is that to the best of my knowledge at no point in the inauguration does the new monarch vow to fulfill their role for life. In the British coronation they do make such a vow, and they do so before God. A religious person, like HM, is not going to take that vow lightly and say "it's been long enough, time to turn it in." (Not that that's what the Dutch do, but they do chose to retire).

If the British system is to be changed in favour of abdications then so be it, but I would rather see it happen through a change in the coronation oath that Charles and future monarchs make than by saying that HM is too old to continue reigning. Any demands for HM to abdicate on the grounds that other monarchs have done it are, in my opinion, disrespectful to HM, her vow, and her beliefs.

[CanRoyal]

Just catching up on this thread now and saw the posts about the 1 day visit of the DoE recently to Canada.

Almost always (there are exceptions) Canadian Armed Forces planes provide air travel to/from London for official visits of the Queen of Canada and the BRF. While photos of the insides of the planes are not available for security reasons, I remember that they were once described by a tv reporter as "not luxurious, but comfortable".

I checked, and indeed, the DoE arrived (and as far as I know departed) via Canada Armed Forces plane. This means that he essentially had a private plane - there were no other passengers (other than his party).

[Hilda Thomas]

Queen Elizabeth was also annointed by the Archbishop of the Church of England so she did not only take an oath.

[vkrish]

Originally Posted by Dman

What Queen Elizabeth can learn from Queen Beatrix:
What Queen Elizabeth can learn from Queen Beatrix | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

This article is totally irrelevant to the title and context of abdication.
It just goes on glorifying the British-Dutch association, just stopping short of calling Britain a Dutch colony (apparently William of Orange "conquered" Britain from Stuarts)..
There is absolutely no discussion about the differences in both monarchies and public perceptions of them in modern society..
Just the newspaper found they might not get anymore right time to sell it, so they've put it in this context..

[Rebafan81]

Originally Posted by Ish

The thing with the Dutch ceremony is that to the best of my knowledge at no point in the inauguration does the new monarch vow to fulfill their role for life. In the British coronation they do make such a vow, and they do so before God. A religious person, like HM, is not going to take that vow lightly and say "it's been long enough, time to turn it in." (Not that that's what the Dutch do, but they do chose to retire).

If the British system is to be changed in favour of abdications then so be it, but I would rather see it happen through a change in the coronation oath that Charles and future monarchs make than by saying that HM is too old to continue reigning. Any demands for HM to abdicate on the grounds that other monarchs have done it are, in my opinion, disrespectful to HM, her vow, and her beliefs.

Wasn't trying to be disrespectful to HM because there is no one who deserves more respect than the Queen. I wasn't even suggesting it, only saying it would be a nice idea. She has been a "royal" jewel in every sense of the word. I only wish it for her because it would give her a chance to enjoy some private time with the Duke and her great-grandchildren as a woman who just turned 87. She has given so much to the crown, she started so young, so I would just like to see her relax and enjoy her golden years. I just enjoyed the idea of the Dutch abdication because it was a complete celebration, but knew it will never happen in Great Britain