The Future of the British Monarchy

[Al_bina]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

Representing the crown. And aren't all of their assignments causes? And let's not act like Andrew has been some great promoter of projects. The publicity disaster resulting from his role as trade ambassador and that interview with The Sunday Times regarding innovation and palace hasn't exactly been great representation of "delicate" assignments.

One has no idea what Prince Andrew's delicate assignments are. Well ... Prince Henry can be busy with his causes and other things representing the Crown.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

I think Charles has proven to be very pragmatic when it comes to monarchy. It was Charles who gave the British people the term ‘princess consort’. For no other reason than he thought it was good PR. If he’s willing to not have Camilla styled as Queen, limiting HRH is a piece of cake.

I have almost no doubt he’ll limit royal styles and titles during his reign. Plus it allows him to put his own stamp on things after probably 70 years of his mother as sovereign.

There has been a debate as to what will Camilla be called. I believe the part about her being known as Princess Consort has been removed from the website. He had no choice really back then. But things change. I remember Richard Palmer and other reporters reporting on the issue and submitting that question to the Palace, but was not given an answer.

And really, if he's willing to risk naming his highly unpopular wife as Queen after explicitly stating she'll be Princess Consort, I would doubt he'd want to deny his own grandchildren the HRH title unless it's what the parents want.

Like I said, I'm fully expecting the Sussexes to follow the Wessexes' example, and ask that their children be addressed as children of Duke rather than have HRH titles because I think they both realize what a burden that title is when trying to lead life as a private citizen. However, I doubt Charles is going to shake it up on that front rather than follow his mother's example.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

One has no idea what Prince Andrew's delicate assignments are. Well ... Prince Henry can be busy with his causes and other things representing the Crown.

Like Youth Ambassador for the Commonwealth? Not one of his causes.


Like Continuing the Invictus Games? One of his causes.


Neither is something to sneer at or dismiss.

[Moonmaiden23]

Camilla will be Queen when the time comes, I am sure of it.

Any other title when Charles ascends the throne would seem awkward and unsuitable.

[Rudolph]

But what I’m saying is, as much of a traditionalist Charles seems to be, he’s also very pragmatic. IMO if thought it would viewed favourably by the public, he’d limited royal styles in the blink of an eye.

George V was partially responding to public opinion with the LP of 1917.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Camilla will be Queen when the time comes, I am sure of it.

Any other title when Charles ascends the throne would seem awkward and unsuitable.

The problem with that is they've explicitly stated she'll be Princess Consort when the time comes back when they got married. And I am supportive of Camilla being Queen Consort, but just pointing out that they've kind of backed themselves into a corner here.

[Rudolph]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Like Youth Ambassador for the Commonwealth? Not one of his causes.


Like Continuing the Invictus Games? One of his causes.


Neither is something to sneer at or dismiss.

Commonwealth youth ambassador is just invented thing though. Harry’s going into his mid30s and Meghan will be 37 in August. How long they’ll be able to represent the ‘youth’ is debatable.

According to the Royal Foundation website the IG have become independent. Harry is Patron of the IG foundation but that’s different from the actual games.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

But what I’m saying is, as much of a traditionalist Charles seems to be, he’s also very pragmatic. IMO if thought it would viewed favourably by the public, he’d limited royal styles in the blink of an eye.

George V was partially responding to public opinion with the LP of 1917.

But how would that even come about in Charles' reign? I highly expect that Harry will ask his children to forego HRH status. Given that the children are likely to be born in the next few years while QEII is still around, there is little need to issue an LP. LP of 1917 was necessary as there were different families producing children still. As it stands, the only additional potential HRHs in the next two decades are Harry's children.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Commonwealth youth ambassador is just invented thing though. Harry’s going into his mid30s and Meghan will be 37 in August. How long they’ll be able to represent the ‘youth’ is debatable.

According to the Royal Foundation website the IG have become independent. Harry is Patron of the IG foundation but that’s different from the actual games.

Well, they are about as youthful as this royal family will get for the next two decades. However, is the role representing youth or working with youth and inspiring youth? There is definitely more time for that. Hate to get into politics, but during the 2016 election, Bernie Sanders was a huge inspiration to the youth of the country, and he was nearing his 70s.

And IG Foundation is what funds IG. Harry continuously to be a very visible promoter of the games as needed. And as long as there is still a need for the game, I imagine Harry will be involved and attend each year. However, I'm sure the personnel that's been hired to run the day to day is very capable. Eventually, it'll turn out to be like Sentebale where it'll have the ability to run itself with support from Harry when necessary. That's how all sustainable charity should be. That doesn't take away from what Harry has done for it and how capable he's proven himself to be in terms of creating something from just an idea. It'll be useful for other causes that he usually wants to take on as well.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Commonwealth youth ambassador is just invented thing though. Harry’s going into his mid30s and Meghan will be 37 in August. How long they’ll be able to represent the ‘youth’ is debatable.

According to the Royal Foundation website the IG have become independent. Harry is Patron of the IG foundation but that’s different from the actual games.

So you agree with Al_bina's assessment?

[Rudolph]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

So you agree with Al_bina's assessment?

Simply pointing out the youth ambassador role probably won’t be a relatively long term thing.

As great as the IG are, they have become independent of the Royal Foundation, at least according to its website.

Harry still plays a role but I think they’ll become much like the Duke of Edinburgh awards.

Prince Philip was asked in an interview if he was proud of the DoE awards. He said why should I be proud, other people do the work, it just has my name.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Simply pointing out the youth ambassador role probably won’t be a relatively long term thing.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Commonwealth youth is the focus of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. And Harry is also appointed the President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. It's clear who will be given the work relating to the youth in the Commonwealth going forward.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

The caveat is that HMQ has four children with Edward being the youngest, while Prince Charles only has two sons. Harry will be featured prominently as a representative of the monarchy, much moreso than Edward, until George and siblings grow up. Judging by the way things were done with this generation, I don't expect them to take up full time duty for another 30 or so years.

William and Kate's children are older than any future child of Meghan and Harry, so they will presumably take up full-time royal duties before their younger cousins. With William and Kate (the King and Queen), plus Harry and Meghan, and William and Kate's three children available for full-time duty 30 years from now (with George most likely, and maybe even Charlotte already married) , I am not so sure Harry and Meghan's children will be needed. I wouldn't rule out either that William and Kate might still have a fourth child who would be the same age as Harry and Meghan's firstborn.


Furthermore, although Prince Edward will be 84 and Sophie, 83 , they may still take up a few royal engagements too (as the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra still do in their 80s). And I am not even counting Beatrice and Eugenie, who will be available if needed.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

William and Kate's children are older than any future child of Meghan and Harry, so they will presumably take up full-time royal duties before their younger cousins. With William and Kate (the King and Queen), plus Harry and Meghan, and William and Kate's three children available for full-time duty 30 years from now (with George most likely, and maybe even Charlotte already married) , I am not so sure Harry and Meghan's children will be needed. I wouldn't rule out either that William and Kate might still have a fourth child who would be the same age as Harry and Meghan's firstborn.



Furthermore, although Prince Edward will be 84 and Sophie, 83 , they may still take a few royal engagements too (as the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra still do in their 80s).

Oops, I think I didn't connect that last post to your earlier posts as people moved on to talk about Harry's role.

I would never suggest Harry and Meghan's children would carry out public duty. In fact, I've been clear in multiple posts that they are likely to be private citizens and not carry HRH titles.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

William and Kate's children are older than any future child of Meghan and Harry, so they will presumably take up full-time royal duties before their younger cousins. With William and Kate (the King and Queen), plus Harry and Meghan, and William and Kate's three children available for full-time duty 30 years from now (with George most likely, and maybe even Charlotte already married) , I am not so sure Harry and Meghan's children will be needed. I wouldn't rule out either that William and Kate might still have a fourth child who would be the same age as Harry and Meghan's firstborn.


Furthermore, although Prince Edward will be 84 and Sophie, 83 , they may still take up a few royal engagements too (as the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra still do in their 80s). And I am not even counting Beatrice and Eugenie, who will be available if needed.

Currently there are 15 working royals-your scenario has way fewer than that. Either they will be cutting way back on engagements or more people will be needed.

If I were Beatrice and I wasn't wanted now, I doubt I'd be eager in 30 years to suddenly be expected to pick up the slack.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

The problem with that is they've explicitly stated she'll be Princess Consort when the time comes back when they got married. And I am supportive of Camilla being Queen Consort, but just pointing out that they've kind of backed themselves into a corner here.

Actually, the statement that "it was intended" that she would be the Princess Consort has been recently removed from the PoW's website, which was interpreted by many as Charles backing down from his "promise".


Nevertheless, most scientific polls (meaning polls with a proper random sample that makes it possible to compute estimates within a well-defined margin of error) still show that at least a plurality of the British people oppose Camilla being called "Queen". She also remains one of the least popular members of the RF , despite all the PR campaign to promote her.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Actually, the statement that "it was intended" that she would be the Princess Consort has been recently removed from the PoW's website, which was interpreted by many as Charles backing down from his "promise".


Nevertheless, most scientific polls (meaning polls with a proper random sample that makes it possible to compute estimates within a well-defined margin of error) still show that at least a plurality of the British people oppose Camilla being called "Queen". She also remains one of the least popular members of the RF , despite all the PR campaign to promote her.

I do think that's splitting hair a bit by arguing it was only intended. But regardless, it does seem like they are backing down from what was said back then regarding her title. Anyways, I'm not surprised that Charles would want to make Camilla Queen. If nothing else, for all of her support to him over the years.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Currently there are 15 working royals-your scenario has way fewer than that. Either they will be cutting way back on engagements or more people will be needed.

If I were Beatrice and I wasn't wanted now, I doubt I'd be eager in 30 years to suddenly be expected to pick up the slack.

Queen Elizabeth seems to have chosen the scenario with fewer people and engagements by not requesting the Snowdon, Phillips, York, or Wessex children to become working royals and, aside from the York sisters, not titling them Prince and Princess.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Queen Elizabeth seems to have chosen the scenario with fewer people and engagements by not requesting the Snowdon, Phillips, York, or Wessex children to become working royals and, aside from the York sisters, not titling them Prince and Princess.

I think in the case of Wessex's children, it was at the request of their parents?

[RoyalHighness 2002]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Queen Elizabeth seems to have chosen the scenario with fewer people and engagements by not requesting the Snowdon, Phillips, York, or Wessex children to become working royals and, aside from the York sisters, not titling them Prince and Princess.

Neither the Snowdons or the Phillips would have carried out engagements even if this really was the case. Since they are not royal, they could not be expected to. This has been the way for all female-line grandchildren of the monarch, except for those serving as Counselor of State.