Royal families and Politics.

[WhitePine86LoveFam]

Today, King Charles 111 was publicly involved with a political issue.
Do any of the other royal families have any issues with monarchies involving theirselves with hot topic issues publicly?

[JR76]

Originally Posted by WhitePine86LoveFam

Today, King Charles 111 was publicly involved with a political issue.
Do any of the other royal families have any issues with monarchies involving theirselves with hot topic issues publicly?

I'd just like to make the point that King Charles was asked by the British government to receive President von der Leyen. He didn't get involved in the question of the Northern Ireland Protocol on his own accord. In the same way his mother was asked by the then prime minister to get involved in the referendum on Scottish independence by making a thinly veiled comment on the matter.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by WhitePine86LoveFam

Today, King Charles 111 was publicly involved with a political issue.
Do any of the other royal families have any issues with monarchies involving theirselves with hot topic issues publicly?

There is no problem as long as the King is in tune with the Government: the King is inviolable, the ministers are responsible. The King did what the Government requested him to do. Like his mother did receive a Nicolae Ceaucescu or a Vladimir Putin.

Anti EU-zealots attacking the King for receiving the President of that neigbouring gigantic economic powerhouse, will be answered by the Prime Minister.

[Hallo girl]

He greeted a guest of the government to his home, as has happened countless times. Do you really think all those state visits etc did not have any political leanings or trade deals dependant on the visit and the goodwill.

[WhitePine86LoveFam]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

He greeted a guest of the government to his home, as has happened countless times. Do you really think all those state visits etc did not have any political leanings or trade deals dependant on the visit and the goodwill.

I am in agreement, I only asked this question and started the thread after seeing the negative response and comments from people about the issue on social media platforms.
I am interested in the discussion of others who have a since of attachment to the Kings guest and reason.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by WhitePine86LoveFam

I am in agreement, I only asked this question and started the thread after seeing the negative response and comments from people about the issue on social media platforms.
I am interested in the discussion of others who have a since of attachment to the Kings guest and reason.

I do not trust social media platforms as too many people have an agenda.

I personally do not think that the King did anything different to what would have happened in the past. The government of the day asked him to meet a guest of the state , some people might suggest that he should not have been asked, now that is a different argument.
When you look back at some of the guests the late Queen was asked to wine and dine, then this was a cakewalk.
I also noted that one of the journalists flagging this up as a problem is Richard Kay, I rest my case.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by WhitePine86LoveFam

Today, King Charles 111 was publicly involved with a political issue.
Do any of the other royal families have any issues with monarchies involving theirselves with hot topic issues publicly?

The King met with the President of the European Commission on the advice of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, which is consistent with his constitutional role.

It is important to note that the King can make political statements when he does so on behalf of the government. In that case, the responsibility for the acts of the King lies with the ministers who advised him to make those statements.

I believe the controversy in this particular episode, if any, is not about the King's behavior, but rather whether the government should have involved him or not.

Personally I don't see any problem on that account either. The King did not negotiate the new Windsor framework related to the NI protocol with the EU; the UK government did (over the course of many months). Once the agreement was finalized, the King was asked to meet the EU Commission President as a matter of diplomatic courtesy, in the same way as he recently met the President of Ukraine or would have met any visiting head of government on an official visit to the UK.

Note that the actual status of the President of the European Commission in international law is unclear, as the EU is not a sovereign state. However, as the EU increasingly looks and acts now as a multinational federal state, Ms von der Leyen seems to be increasingly accorded the rank and precedence of a head of government in international meetings.

[A Tudor]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

I believe the controversy in this particular episode, if any, is not about the King's behavior, but rather whether the government should have involved him or not.

Yes. The issue some people were having was about the Government's role in involving the King in such a political controversial matter. The King, as a constitutional monarch, only did his job, nothing wrong with it.


It's valid to note that the Agreement was not yet voted by the MP's, which is why some concern was raised, some would argue the Prime Minister used the visit as if the Monarch was approving the deal, thus influencing some conservatives votes favorably.