The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[Somebody]

If Andrew had been the heir, he would'nt have been in position to do what he allegedly did ...
Spares have too much spare time so to speak.

Charles is not a controversial figure. He has still enough gravitas to be a respected sovereign. Then the Cambridges are hugely popular so i guess the Monarchy in UK is in good hands.

But indeed some apparently popular sovereigns were kicked out as well (Constantine of Greece for exemple). So if the Monarchy has to end in the UK, i presume it would be more from a political coup that a popular outburst against the soveraign and his family.

For the UK, yes, but what about the other realms. Currently, in several of those realms there is already a significant group advocating for a republic and while already a possibility (even with a popular monarch such as the queen), it seems even more likely with a less popular monarch.

Possibility to become a republic in the foreseeable future:
Australia:

In December 2016, News.com.au found that a majority of members of both houses of Parliament supported Australia becoming a republic (54% in the House and 53% in the Senate).

Barbados:

On 22 March 2015, Prime Minister Freundel Stuart announced that Barbados will move towards a republican form of government "in the very near future".

Jamaica:

Both major political parties – the Jamaica Labour Party and the People's National Party – subscribe to the position, and the current Prime Minister of Jamaica, Andrew Holness, has announced that transitioning to a republic will be a priority of his government.

Unclear (as the referendum was about many other issues as well) - but movement trying to establish republic:
St Vincent & the Grenaldines:

The proposal [i.e. a new constitution] was supported by only 43.13% of voters in the referendum, well short of the required two-thirds threshold. If approved, the proposed constitution would have abolished the monarchy of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, headed by Queen Elizabeth II,[3] and would have given more power to the opposition.

Unclear - but little indication that a republic is actively sought after:
Antigua and Barbados

The Bahamas

Belize

Grenada

Papua New Guinea

St Kitts and Nevis

St Lucia

Solomon Islands

Likely to remain a monarchy in the foreseeable future:
Canada:

the Canadian populace remains largely indifferent to the issue

New Zealand:

Public opinion polls have generally found that a majority of the population favour retaining the monarchy.

Tuvalu:

The referendum failed, with 679 votes in favour of establishing a republic and 1,260 votes to retain the monarchy. Turnout for the referendum was low.

 

[Durham]

To an observer in this realm it's interesting that attitudes seem to be different in the two next largest realms. Different histories & cultures play a part of course but I get the impression that in Canada the crown is seen as a Canadian institution whereas in Australia it is seen as the "British monarchy".

Just as impression of course but not being a citizen of either country I may be wrong. In the context of the UK only some type of cataclysmic black swan type event could lead to a republic. Not impossible but if the constitution were to be in that much crises I would think the monarchy would be the least of our problems.

 

[Curryong]

Below is an article showing poll results with reference to the monarchy in Canada. Not good news for monarchists who believe Canada will stick with the Crown no matter what.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6496234/ipsos-poll-canada-monarchy/

The main problem in removing the Queen constitutionally in both Canada and Australia (I'm an Aussie) is the actual mechanics of doing so, the hoops that have to be jumped through, not challenging monarchical sentiment. That becomes less every few years. And once Australia goes IMO New Zealand won't be too far behind, or may even precede us.

 

[yukari]

This discussion about the relation between popularity and the survival of the monarchy is surely interesting.

This article for example.

Below is an article showing poll results with reference to the monarchy in Canada. Not good news for monarchists who believe Canada will stick with the Crown no matter what.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6496234/ipsos-poll-canada-monarchy/

As I understand, the article is from Feb and poll was conducted not long after the Sussexes stepping down from their royal role. Public opinion was divided and there's noticeable "public outrage" towards BRF as reported by media (especially media in north America and Australia).

But this Covid crisis happens then we have the Queen's speech and it seems BRF is popular again.

It would be interesting to see how it be if the same survey has been conducted now for comparison (I know it's not the time though as we have more important to deal right now). But who know, maybe it would be similiar to the time around Diana's death (how the so called BRF's "popularity" bounced back). Or remember the pessimism in media over HM Golden Jubilee in 2002 and the reality of the celebration?

I'm not saying that the monarchy will remain forever, but the problem with popularity poll is how public opinion can change and be easily swayed by an event. On the other hand, the process to remove the monarchy will take longer than than how fast the public opinion can change. So unless the monarchy does something so bad that its popularity slump drastically for years or ignite a civil war or constitutional crisis, it will remain safe for another decades.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If popularity of the BRF was judged by comments in the media they are on their last legs but ... how representative of the situation are comments in the DM etc (I read a number of British media outlets across the political spectrum and ALL of them have a majority of very negative comments about the royals and especially the Queen's comments as being irrelevant and how would she know or understand what the people are suffering).

 

[Claire]

So what now

I have wanted to rekindle this thread for a while - but I am unsure if it actually fits here. I was told about two months ago that the Royal family reaction to Corona and their actions immediately after Meghan and Harry's departure - would make or break them. Understandable I saw this as very fickle and narrow sighted as well as forgetting well unresolved issues about the Duke of York, but okay.

How do you think they did ? Any suggestions for the uncertain future?

With the Queen under understandable house quarantine for the foreseeable future - is it a Regency in everything but name. Can there be a 3-way split regency?
Do you think the resurgence of the minor royals will continue going forward - must admit it is nice seeing the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexander getting top billing. I also like that Edward and Sophie are taking on a larger role, but I am concerned that it will bring about intense media pressure on the family, which they luckily have eluded so far. I do think we will see more collaborations.

I also would like them to bring Harry and Meghan back under the wing. Maybe they can do joint international or American engagements. Harry can hand out the DOE awards or Red Cross events in the Americas. As we haven't had the royal wedding, or the regular June social scene this would have been sorely missed.

What do you think ?

 

[Somebody]

I'd say it's best everyone accepts that Harry and Meghan made their decision and decided they are out; so no reason at all to include them in future engagements - that will just muddle the waters.

There was a reason the queen asked them to be either in or out and not try to have the best of both worlds.

 

[Denville]

I'd say it's best everyone accepts that Harry and Meghan made their decision and decided they are out; so no reason at all to include them in future engagements - that will just muddle the waters.

There was a reason the queen asked them to be either in or out and not try to have the best of both worlds.

yes I would say an absolute NO, to the idea of them being involved. The RF will manage, they did not want to stay, they are gone. There is no monarchy in the USA...

 

[Lumutqueen]

How do you think they did ? Any suggestions for the uncertain future?

With the Queen under understandable house quarantine for the foreseeable future - is it a Regency in everything but name. Can there be a 3-way split regency?

3 way split regency to whom? The Queen is still undertaking the largest part of her role, from her home. She’s have daily meetings with the PM, she’s have phone calls and making connections with her prime ministers across the globe as well as her patronages.

The Queen is not doing, what all other royals aren’t capable of and that is seeing the public. No regency to speak of in my eyes.

Do you think the resurgence of the minor royals will continue going forward - must admit it is nice seeing the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexander getting top billing. I also like that Edward and Sophie are taking on a larger role, but I am concerned that it will bring about intense media pressure on the family, which they luckily have eluded so far. I do think we will see more collaborations.

Resurgence? I see a whole royal family doing what they always do, consistently. But now it’s being done by telephone and video calls instead of in person. I’ll have to check iluvberties figures but I bet there’s no significant uptick in any “minor royals” engagement tally.

Edward and Sophie especially are doing the role, they’ve been doing for decades. It just wasn’t being reported on.

Just so it doesn’t look like I’ve edited the post, I’ve deleted any of the H&M stuff as no doubt the speculation around then will cause another thread to be closed.

 

[Betsypaige]

I think the BRF have done marvelously well during this terrible crisis - I don’t think they could have shone themselves any better. I will say that I’ve never worried about the future of the monarchy - it’s in fine hands. This future no longer includes H and M.

Even if the Queen needed help, and they were one day to declare a Regency, it would only be Charles as Regent. Fortunately, HM is strong as an ox and seems to be doing just fine.

 

[travelguy]

Is it likely that this decade is going to be the decade we are going to get a coronation. Its very exciting and will be very exciting seeing one. Will it likely be grander then a royal wedding and bigger celebrations. Will London have decorations. Very exciting

 

[muriel]

Is it likely that this decade is going to be the decade we are going to get a coronation. Its very exciting and will be very exciting seeing one. Will it likely be grander then a royal wedding and bigger celebrations. Will London have decorations. Very exciting

Its tricky to look towards coronations and enthronements when the incumbent is fit and able to discharge her duties ably. But given the incumbent is 94 already, it is not unreasonable to assume that the next decade may well see a coronation.

I expect the coronation will be a big affair, and London will certainly be decked out for the event.

 

[Denville]

THere is no saying. Since we dont know waht will happen in relation to Covid in the future it may be that they dont have a big coronation.. Im sure Charles would like a ceremonial one but that may not be possible. And in another couple of decades its unlikely that there will be a coronation at all...

 

[travelguy]

What do you mean with Covid. Why would Covid affect anything. You do realize Covid is not going to last forever. Social distancing won't last forever either as society won't stand for it and people will eventually rebel. Give it a couple of months and there will likely be vaccine news or more drugs available but by the time the coronation happens coronavirus won't even be glanced at, it will just be a seasonal virus that people will have a vaccine for.

 

[Denville]

We don't know what is going to happen with Covid.. If people "rebel" and cause another spike in deaths, is that going to be permitted?

we dont know if or when a vaccine is going to be found, or if treatments will improve...
People will probably travel less for some time to come.. and so there wont be so many people coming to London as there used to be..
I think that Charles would like a big coronation but its not going to be anything like his mothers. And by the time Will is king, probably there wont be a coronation at all.

 

[travelguy]

Without wanting to cause an argument it just isn't realistic to expect people to socially distance forever until the end of the world. Treatments are already there for coronavirus with new drugs helping people who are on a ventilator. I'm much more positive then I was a couple of months ago and if you watch the UK science officer he said he is optimistic that the 200 vaccine projects happening around the world at least one of them will work and also other treatments that are in the process happening right now like blood plasma treatments.

Just try and remain hopeful. Viruses usually die out on their own, this one will as well. There will be better treatments. I'm 100% sure that people won't travel less, you only have to see on the news about the shops being open and the millions of people entering these shops, things are slowly getting to normal and I can assure you by the time the coronation comes I will come back on here this thread message you and coronavirus will have long gone from the back of our minds, we will be able to hold the street parties and hug each other again.

Try and remain positive, I know its difficult but its all we can do at the moment and things like I said are improving. Did you even think 2 months ago it would be 1 meter plus and cinema's will be opening. In a years time just think what will happen when they will know even more about this virus which every passing second they learn more and more about it

 

[Ista]

Time to get back on topic. Any further off topic posts will be deleted.

 

[Susan D]

I don't think that any of the monarchies is going to last because I am stunned at the indifference by young women; young men have been indifferent for decades.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

I don't think that any of the monarchies is going to last because I am stunned at the indifference by young women; young men have been indifferent for decades.

I’m sorry this is a rather mass generalisation.

I work with lots of young people on a regular basis. Many of them have a good understanding of the Monarchy and lot of respect for The Queen.

I don’t want to generalise and I’d say there are a lot of young people who probably don’t have much interest. But it’s not a fair or full picture to generalise like this.

 

[EllieCat]

I’m thinking 20 years ahead here, after all this thread is about the future of the British Monarchy. I’ve done a count of the everyone who’s has been a British Royal in the last decades from 1950 and then projected it to 2040, what I feel might be correct:
1950 – 17 Royal Highnesses (also including Monarch and spouse)
1960 – 17
1970 – 17
1980 – 16
1990 – 22
2000 – 21
2010 – 19
2020 – 24 (today’s count, but not including Louise and James who are technically RH)
2030 – 18
2040 – 11
So as you can see, with natural attrition, if the Monarchy is still going by 2040, which I hope it will, there will not be many RH at all.

 

[Blog Real]

I don't think that any of the monarchies is going to last because I am stunned at the indifference by young women; young men have been indifferent for decades.

My country, Portugal, is a repúlica, that's why I can give a different view.
In Portugal most people are indifferent to the Presidency of Repúlica. In the elections to choose the President of The Republic there is always a very high abstention.
People just don't care or don't care.
The current president, should be the most popular since democracy was restored in Portugal, but people do not have much interest in the president's agenda, and ironically although many people like him, is also much criticized, especially in recent times.
In my opinion, people generally do not care much if a country is a republic or a monarchy, as long as it does not affect the lives of the people.
Monarchies have a great chance of continuing in the coming decades, because people are not very interested in these issues, and when they are well they do not want to change.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I’m thinking 20 years ahead here, after all this thread is about the future of the British Monarchy. I’ve done a count of the everyone who’s has been a British Royal in the last decades from 1950 and then projected it to 2040, what I feel might be correct:
1950 – 17 Royal Highnesses (also including Monarch and spouse)
1960 – 17
1970 – 17
1980 – 16
1990 – 22
2000 – 21
2010 – 19
2020 – 24 (today’s count, but not including Louise and James who are technically RH)
2030 – 18
2040 – 11
So as you can see, with natural attrition, if the Monarchy is still going by 2040, which I hope it will, there will not be many RH at all.

I do not understand what you want to say with these numbers. When you look to big monarchies like Spain or Japan, or to the biggest of the medium sized monarchies (in inhabitants) like the Netherlands, they do perfectly well with just a handful royals.

In this era with 24/24 hours worldwide visibility there is no any need for Senior and Junior royals plus royals in the periphery of the royal family. After all Germany, France, Italy, Russia etc. do perfectly with a president + partner, with even the public not able to name ONE member of their president's family...

 

[Osipi]

One thing I'm certain of is that we can't predict a future based on what the climate is today. Who knows what the world will be like 10 years from now. Last year, who would ever have thought that we'd all be confined to staying at home and needing to wear face masks to go to the grocery store because of a pandemic?

 

[EllieCat]

I do not understand what you want to say with these numbers.

I just found it interesting, that's all.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I’m thinking 20 years ahead here, after all this thread is about the future of the British Monarchy. I’ve done a count of the everyone who’s has been a British Royal in the last decades from 1950 and then projected it to 2040, what I feel might be correct:

[...]

2040 – 11
So as you can see, with natural attrition, if the Monarchy is still going by 2040, which I hope it will, there will not be many RH at all.

The number was higher when I counted.

These fourteen HRHs will likely be living, considering their ages in 2040. (The older children of Queen Elizabeth would be past the average life expectancy for Britons, but they are the children of parents who have already lived to 94 and 99 respectively.)

HRH the Prince of Wales - 91
HRH the Princess Royal - 89
HRH the Duke of York - 79
HRH the Earl of Wessex - 75

HRH the Countess of Wessex - 74
HRH the Duke of Cambridge - 57
HRH the Duchess of Cambridge - 57
HRH the Duke of Sussex - 55
HRH the Duchess of Sussex - 58
HRH Princess Beatrice of York - 51
HRH Princess Eugenie of York / Mrs. Jack Brooksbank - 49

HRH Prince George of Cambridge - 26
HRH Princess Charlotte of Cambridge - 24
HRH Prince Louis of Cambridge - 21

Additionally, these five HRHs would be at an age where they may still be alive in 2040.

HRH Prince Michael of Kent - 97
HRH Princess Michael of Kent - 94
HRH the Duke of Gloucester - 95
HRH the Duchess of Gloucester - 93
HRH the Duchess of Cornwall - 90

These three persons who are not HRHs for the moment may also be HRHs in 2040, given the information that has been communicated.

Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor - 36
Viscount Severn - 32
Archie Mountbatten-Windsor - 21

Lastly, these hypothetical persons may be HRHs in 2040.

A future wife of Prince George
A future wife of the Duke of York
A future wife of Viscount Severn
A future sibling of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor


Thus, assuming that the present HRHs will remain HRHs (or HMs) and the rules remain as they are, I count between 14-26 HRHs and HMs in 2040.

 

[Claire]

I recently watched an interview with the Duke of Edinburgh in 1965 when he was asked if the monarchy has a place in modern Britain. He noted that it was 1965 and they were still there. The interview commended that in 1980 would there be a role for them. Well here we are in 2020 and they are still here. Yes Modern Britain is modernizing itself every second it seems, not certain where or if the Commonwealth will last, but for an institution that has appeared to be on its death for the whole century they have great longevity.

 

[muriel]

I recently watched an interview with the Duke of Edinburgh in 1965 when he was asked if the monarchy has a place in modern Britain. He noted that it was 1965 and they were still there. The interview commended that in 1980 would there be a role for them. Well here we are in 2020 and they are still here. Yes Modern Britain is modernizing itself every second it seems, not certain where or if the Commonwealth will last, but for an institution that has appeared to be on its death for the whole century they have great longevity.

They survive because they adapt to changing times, and continue to be relevant to the people of these isles.

 

[Mbruno]

I recently watched an interview with the Duke of Edinburgh in 1965 when he was asked if the monarchy has a place in modern Britain. He noted that it was 1965 and they were still there. The interview commended that in 1980 would there be a role for them. Well here we are in 2020 and they are still here. Yes Modern Britain is modernizing itself every second it seems, not certain where or if the Commonwealth will last, but for an institution that has appeared to be on its death for the whole century they have great longevity.

I believe the Commonwealth will last. Most of its members are already republics anyway and the Commonwealth doesn't necessarily need the British monarch as a figurehead to survive.



Whereas the Commonwealth will probably last, a different question, however, is whether the current 15 Commonwealth realms will survive in their current form or not. Most observers expect Australia and maybe Barbados, Jamaica and New Zealand to become republics during Charles' or William's reign. And once Australia in particular becomes a republic, even Canada, the oldest and possibly most loyal realm, might flip.



But, again, the monarchy can still survive in the United Kingdom even if Charles or William is no longer King of Australia, Canada or New Zealand.

 

[gerry]

I believe the Commonwealth will last. Most of its members are already republics anyway and the Commonwealth doesn't necessarily need the British monarch as a figurehead to survive.



Whereas the Commonwealth will probably last, a different question, however, is whether the current 15 Commonwealth realms will survive in their current form or not. Most observers expect Australia and maybe Barbados, Jamaica and New Zealand to become republics during Charles' or William's reign. And once Australia in particular becomes a republic, even Canada, the oldest and possibly most loyal realm, might flip.



But, again, the monarchy can still survive in the United Kingdom even if Charles or William is no longer King of Australia, Canada or New Zealand.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...ffirms-the-canadian-crowns-importance-to-our/

The Globe and Mail published an article this past weekend that will appeal to legal geeks about how the Commonwealth countries are reviewing and adopting the primogeniture amendments in British law. Canada is indeed proudly aligned with the Commonwealth according to author John Fraser, himself director of the Institute for the Study of the Crown in Canada!

 

[muriel]

I believe the Commonwealth will last. Most of its members are already republics anyway and the Commonwealth doesn't necessarily need the British monarch as a figurehead to survive.



Whereas the Commonwealth will probably last, a different question, however, is whether the current 15 Commonwealth realms will survive in their current form or not. Most observers expect Australia and maybe Barbados, Jamaica and New Zealand to become republics during Charles' or William's reign. And once Australia in particular becomes a republic, even Canada, the oldest and possibly most loyal realm, might flip.



But, again, the monarchy can still survive in the United Kingdom even if Charles or William is no longer King of Australia, Canada or New Zealand.

All fair points. The monarchy in the UK is not dependent on Australia or another of the realms retaining the Queen as their monarch.