The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #721  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:54 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
The Gloucesters are 2 and 4 years older than Prince Charles - hardly that much. It isn't like they are the same age as the Kent's.

The Duke will slow down when Charles does.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #722  
Old 02-19-2020, 12:03 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,427
We don't know whether the health of people now in their mid-70s will always be good enough to carry out dozens of engagements a year, or whether they will necessarily want to go on for as long as Charles, who may well still be reigning in his nineties.

Charles will have to perform duties as monarch. There's not the same compulsion for the Queen's cousins. Not everybody ages at the same level or maintains the enthusiasm for performing constant engagements just because others do.

If the Gloucesters decide they've had enough in their mid to late seventies and decide to retire from Royal duties they're perfectly entitled to do so.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #723  
Old 02-19-2020, 12:27 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
If either Duke went to the queen tomorrow and said they want to retire no one could blame them. And the queen certainly wouldn't. Just because she works well into her 90s doesn't mean she will expect anyone else to. 65 is usual retirement. Royals don't seem to get the retirement age.

I think it's entirely in their plate. The decision when they step back if tomorrow or ten years will be their choice.
Reply With Quote
  #724  
Old 02-19-2020, 02:05 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
We don't know whether the health of people now in their mid-70s will always be good enough to carry out dozens of engagements a year, or whether they will necessarily want to go on for as long as Charles, who may well still be reigning in his nineties.

Charles will have to perform duties as monarch. There's not the same compulsion for the Queen's cousins. Not everybody ages at the same level or maintains the enthusiasm for performing constant engagements just because others do.

If the Gloucesters decide they've had enough in their mid to late seventies and decide to retire from Royal duties they're perfectly entitled to do so.
There is an expectation that they will continue working basically until they drop if they want to keep their rent free home and the other perks of being royal.

The Duke of Kent said it very clearly a few years ago - 'we can't retire while The Queen still works' and the Duke of Gloucester was raised with the same sense of duty as the Duke of Kent.
Reply With Quote
  #725  
Old 02-19-2020, 02:50 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
Is Rebecca the one who said she wanted Meghan to be queen? She doesn't seem to have a firm grasp as to how it works.
It was Lisa Nandy and it was a lighthearted comment. I'm sure she understands how our hereditary monarchy works as she's the one who said she'd vote to scrap it.

Re: the concern for the older BRF members and their workload. If you look at their engagements, it's no more onerous than the lifestyle of busy retired people. It's visits, dinners, concerts, meetings etc. It's what my parents were doing in their 70s and 80s. My father went out almost every day until just before he died. My mother at almost 90 has slowed down but still loves going out, meeting people, visiting new places etc. Let's not kid ourselves that the work senior (as in older) BRFs do is anything like 'work' or that the British public are reliant on them to do it.

This is why I maintain that the survival of the monarchy doesn't depend on a large group of people. It only needs a handful to do what's needed. Everything else is additional, voluntary activity, which enables some BRF members to be financially supported by the crown estates.
Reply With Quote
  #726  
Old 02-25-2020, 05:28 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Posts: 29
I dont think there needs to be panic yet about the increasing ageing royalty.

There are still variables, Meghan / Harry could possibly become part of the Royal Family again which would bump up the list. After all Sophie and Edward had a change of heart and ditched their careers to become full time working royals despite their determination to independent like M&H. Different times and circumstances but point still stands that nothing is set in stone.

Also I would imagine Sophie and Edward are in the position to pick up more engagements now with both their kids are teenagers to help ease the pressure on the older royals. Both seem to be going on more solo trips.

Louise and James could follow the York girls route and still do some charities on the side.

Also you cannot totally rule out the York girls becoming full time royals later down the line. Andrew could still come back
Reply With Quote
  #727  
Old 02-25-2020, 05:53 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Edward and Sophie - didn't have a change of heart. After Edward's company lost money and Sophie's fake sheikh and company losing money they were ordered to give up their jobs and become working royals. They were causing scandals and Charles and The Queen and Philip felt it would be best if they simply opened things and cut ribbons.

I doubt that the York girls will want to become full time royals. The time to do that was after university before they become portrayed as simply holidaying girls. Andrew won't be making a come-back. He is way too tainted that even a trial and a unanimous not guilty verdict wouldn't clear him with the public - he was loathed before all of this and now he is so unpopular that he would be booed be anyone who bothered to turn up.
Reply With Quote
  #728  
Old 02-25-2020, 06:02 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
I certainly hope that Andrew wont be ever returned to royal life.. though I can see that with the sudden loss of him, H and Meghan, the RF may be in a bit of a panic..
It s true that Ed and Sophie did not have change of heart - they were forced to give up their businesses and take on royal work. However it is just as well that they did, since they seem to be doing a decent job.. and H and Meg IMO have all but burned their boats and are not likely to come back..So until the RF can re jig things so that they cut out more of the charty work and stick to absolute essentials, they do still need a few more people than the very elderly queen, Charles and Cam and W and kate. For the moment, they have a fairly busy workload and ideally It should not be suddnely dropped but with losing 3 fairly busy people, it is bound to have an effect..
Reply With Quote
  #729  
Old 02-25-2020, 06:06 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There is an expectation that they will continue working basically until they drop if they want to keep their rent free home and the other perks of being royal.

The Duke of Kent said it very clearly a few years ago - 'we can't retire while The Queen still works' and the Duke of Gloucester was raised with the same sense of duty as the Duke of Kent.
I doubt if the queen and Charles are so hard that they would expect people to "work till they drop" to keep their homes. If the Kents or Gloucesters really felt that they were not well enough to keep on going, I think there has been an arrangement that they can retire and will still get help from the Q and Charles for expenses.
Reply With Quote
  #730  
Old 02-25-2020, 07:34 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Especially as The Duke of Gloucester gave up his career as an architect when his brother died and he became the heir. And The Duke of Kent had a long military career before becomg a dedicated full-time Royal. These are not whiny, self-seeking people. They’ve sacrificed to serve their Country and Queen.
Reply With Quote
  #731  
Old 02-25-2020, 07:57 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
Especially as The Duke of Gloucester gave up his career as an architect when his brother died and he became the heir. And The Duke of Kent had a long military career before becomg a dedicated full-time Royal. These are not whiny, self-seeking people. They’ve sacrificed to serve their Country and Queen.
No, but boht of them agreed to royal duties and there was an implicit bargain that they would be helped out financially. and Im sure that if they both felt too ill or old to keep on going, Charles and the queen would continue the financial help.. and would hardy say to an 80 year old.. "you're out of your apartment if you don't do some work...". Charles knows that some of his assistants are getting on in years and not all of them will have the health that his father had to keep on going till he was 95.
Reply With Quote
  #732  
Old 02-25-2020, 09:42 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,471
They do pretty well, really. Princess Alexandra's 83 and still working with charities, and the Duke of Kent's not much younger. Long may they continue! But I'm sure no-one would expect them to keep going if it was getting too much.

I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
Reply With Quote
  #733  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:35 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They do pretty well, really. Princess Alexandra's 83 and still working with charities, and the Duke of Kent's not much younger. Long may they continue! But I'm sure no-one would expect them to keep going if it was getting too much.

I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
The Duke of Kent was 84 last October.

The Queen (and her husband) are not typical of elderly people. For whatever reason, they have been blessed with fairly good health in both body and mind.

I think the BRF was able to touch so many people/places because they had so many people working for “The Firm.” But it was an unusual situation and they will probably have to scale back.
Reply With Quote
  #734  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:37 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
No, but boht of them agreed to royal duties and there was an implicit bargain that they would be helped out financially. and Im sure that if they both felt too ill or old to keep on going, Charles and the queen would continue the financial help.. and would hardy say to an 80 year old.. "you're out of your apartment if you don't do some work...". Charles knows that some of his assistants are getting on in years and not all of them will have the health that his father had to keep on going till he was 95.
I think that even should the Gloucesters and the Kents decide that its time to retire from public duties, they would still be provided for in the same manner that they are now. A "pension" in a way. It stands to reason that for all the years of service, they'd be taken care of in their retirement years.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #735  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:48 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They do pretty well, really. Princess Alexandra's 83 and still working with charities, and the Duke of Kent's not much younger. Long may they continue! But I'm sure no-one would expect them to keep going if it was getting too much.

I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
There isn't an answer really. They will have to cut back on charities, and do less.. and when older people retire their charity work wotn be taken up by anyone else...
Reply With Quote
  #736  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:55 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,780
There may also be a move, over time, to change how the work is done. Rather than the opening of a hospital or cutting a ribbon or unveiling a plaque, there could be a move towards what we've seen a lot of the younger royals already doing with a cooperation between organizations (for example off the top of my head, the Heads Together runs) and perhaps even more that take advantage of the social networks and royal websites. That is a way to reach even more people.

The basic "seen to be believed" sponsorship and patronages of places in and around the UK will always still have their importance but I'm thinking instead of needing more people to do more engagements, its the way things are done that may actually be what changes.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #737  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:56 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtagoLass View Post
Louise and James could follow the York girls route and still do some charities on the side.

Also you cannot totally rule out the York girls becoming full time royals later down the line. Andrew could still come back
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
The Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex were expected to become full time working royals despite their young children. But it seems clear that the decision to scale back had already been agreed when the York princesses reached the age when they could have been drafted. Even if no working members had stepped back, King William would have expected only four working royals in his generation compared to the six working royals that King Charles could expect in his generation (seven if he expected the Duke of York to remarry). Had there been plans to maintain the same level of full-time members in every generation, the York princesses would already have been needed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
There isn't an answer really. They will have to cut back on charities, and do less.. and when older people retire their charity work wotn be taken up by anyone else...
As demonstrated by the York princesses and now the Sussex couple, as well as members of the extended family, numerous charities are willing to partner with a member of the British royal family even when that person is not an official "working royal".
Reply With Quote
  #738  
Old 02-25-2020, 03:46 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Edward and Sophie - didn't have a change of heart. After Edward's company lost money and Sophie's fake sheikh and company losing money they were ordered to give up their jobs and become working royals. They were causing scandals and Charles and The Queen and Philip felt it would be best if they simply opened things and cut ribbons.

I doubt that the York girls will want to become full time royals. The time to do that was after university before they become portrayed as simply holidaying girls. Andrew won't be making a come-back. He is way too tainted that even a trial and a unanimous not guilty verdict wouldn't clear him with the public - he was loathed before all of this and now he is so unpopular that he would be booed be anyone who bothered to turn up.
The fake shiekh scandal happened in early 2001, she then took a non client facing role (something like that) and I believe Edward's business did start making profit by the early 2000s. I know Charles was staunchly opposed but Philip and the Queen were initially supportive.

I do not think they were forced to quit because of the scandal, both continued working for another year after the Shiekh scandal before resigning in early 2002. In the end they decided to cut their losses and move on, it was to hard and with royal wives thin on the ground, Queen Mother / Margaret dying, golden jubilee it made logical sense. Plus Sophie's miscarriage in late 2001 probably as a big factor too. But they did quit on their terms.

So they should be commended on that they at least stepped up when they really needed too.

In Sophie and Edward's defense it seemed like a good idea at the time, proving minor royals were making their own way in the world etc but yes it was disastrous, however the careers they chose were rather complicated.

It was a very good example of why mixing royalty and business do not work. You had them work 9-5, then turn up to evening / weekend engagements etc. Which you can see why Harry & Meghan ended up in their situation.

You are probably right about no one wanting Andrew...
Reply With Quote
  #739  
Old 02-25-2020, 05:35 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They do pretty well, really. Princess Alexandra's 83 and still working with charities, and the Duke of Kent's not much younger. Long may they continue! But I'm sure no-one would expect them to keep going if it was getting too much.

I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
The Duke of Kent is older than Princess Alexandra.

He was born in October 1935 - the last grandchild born in the reign of George V.

Alexandra was born in December 1936 - the first royal born in the reign of George VI and an added reason to celebrate Christmas after that awful year - death of George V, abdication of Edward VIII and then at Christmas a new baby to celebrate (and she shared her birthday with her Aunt Alice - Duchess of Gloucester as both were born on Christmas Day.
Reply With Quote
  #740  
Old 02-29-2020, 11:23 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtagoLass View Post
I do not think they were forced to quit because of the scandal, both continued working for another year after the Shiekh scandal before resigning in early 2002. In the end they decided to cut their losses and move on, it was to hard and with royal wives thin on the ground, Queen Mother / Margaret dying, golden jubilee it made logical sense. Plus Sophie's miscarriage in late 2001 probably as a big factor too. But they did quit on their terms.
There is no doubt on me that Edward was always going to leave Ardent and became a full time royal when the Queen Mother passed. There was an agreed upon time frame with the Queen. I thought that if he has a military role - this is when he would have left there.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla parker bowles, camilla parker-bowles, camilla's family


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1678 08-15-2021 08:22 AM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 797 05-31-2021 02:27 PM
Future of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 122 09-27-2020 08:03 AM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 42 09-25-2020 03:53 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii family tree genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchists monarchy mongolia names plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida thai royal family unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:27 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×