The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[Durham]

Since Harry has withdrawn from royal work, I think he would refuse if asked. I also don't think he would be asked to be regent. However, he relates well with children andl loves George, so if that ever came to be there would be good rapport between them.

?? Any regent serves as the de facto head of state. Nothing to do with child care!!

 

[Durham]

I think there should be a relative, such as the surviving parent, on a regency council.. or an uncle/aunt if there are none.

You could have a relative on a regency council I suppose along with two or three other eminent Britons. I'm not sure that many people would be happy with a member of the royal family serving as de facto head of state just by reason of being related to a child monarch.

 

[Denville]

You could have a relative on a regency council I suppose along with two or three other eminent Britons. I'm not sure that many people would be happy with a member of the royal family serving as de facto head of state just by reason of being related to a child monarch.

As I said, on a regency council, not necessarily as sole Regent..

 

[Somebody]

You could have a relative on a regency council I suppose along with two or three other eminent Britons. I'm not sure that many people would be happy with a member of the royal family serving as de facto head of state just by reason of being related to a child monarch.

Isn't that child also the monarch because they are related to the previous monarch? Maybe in this case it would be helpful to have the rule that instead of having the 'first in line' (which is now problematic as the first two adults in line are no longer serving as senior royals) have the rule that any royal highness in the line of succession (or any of the first X adults in the line of succession) could be called upon to serve as regent/de facto head of state? In that case, Edward or Anne would suddenly be likely options. (not sure by whom and how it should be determined though)

 

[Denville]

Isn't that child also the monarch because they are related to the previous monarch? Maybe in this case it would be helpful to have the rule that instead of having the 'first in line' (which is now problematic as the first two adults in line are no longer serving as senior royals) have the rule that any royal highness in the line of succession (or any of the first X adults in the line of succession) could be called upon to serve as regent/de facto head of state? In that case, Edward or Anne would suddenly be likely options. (not sure by whom and how it should be determined though)

Since the monarchical system is defined by who is related to the last King, I agree about your first point. I think a Regency council would be teh best option, in the case of a child monarch, consisting of some nominated member of teh RF, members of the Government etc....

 

[Durham]

Isn't that child also the monarch because they are related to the previous monarch? Maybe in this case it would be helpful to have the rule that instead of having the 'first in line' (which is now problematic as the first two adults in line are no longer serving as senior royals) have the rule that any royal highness in the line of succession (or any of the first X adults in the line of succession) could be called upon to serve as regent/de facto head of state? In that case, Edward or Anne would suddenly be likely options. (not sure by whom and how it should be determined though)

Yes indeed but they are but that just goes with the territory of being a monarchy. I don't think it therefore has to automatically follow that someone who isn't the monarch can exercise the powers of the monarch just because of a family link.

It all sounds a bit medieval. The last regency act was passed in 1953 when attitudes towards the monarchy were very different.

 

[Durham]

Since the monarchical system is defined by who is related to the last King, I agree about your first point. I think a Regency council would be teh best option, in the case of a child monarch, consisting of some nominated member of teh RF, members of the Government etc....

Yes I agree. Ideal if they were completely non political figures. Similar to the sort of eminent citizens chosen as GG's in Commonwealth Realms.

 

[Osipi]

While I do think it's possible, in a situation like the one presented, that there would be a Regent named for a King George VII that was a minor (I think the choice would end up being Catherine), but the Regent wouldn't have sole control. There would still be a Privy Council to advise the Regent. Perhaps even the Councillors of State would be drawn into supporting the King on matters. No matter who the Regent ended up being and made decisions for a minor King, they wouldn't make the decisions alone and unadvised. Just like the Queen listens to her Privy Council and her Prime Minster on matters of state.

One thing that did happen that is kind of similar to what we're looking at here is that when Diana died, Sir John Major was appointed as a "special guardian" over the boys in legal and administrative matters while the boys were minors. This was supposedly done at Charles' request.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...jor-special-guardian-princess-diana-royal-spt

 

[Somebody]

It seems important to distinguish between being the Regent (i.e., de facto head of state until the heir turns 18) versus making decisions about the future king (which I would presume would primarily be the responsibility of his mother).

I don't think many decisions have to be made 'for' the minor king as even the queen always follows the advice given (even when it's clearly wrong as we saw last year with the Brexit debacle). So, that wouldn't be any different for a Regent than it is for the Sovereign.

 

[travelguy]

So as we enter 2021 what do you think this year will be like. Prince Philip turns 100 of course and The Queen 95. I would expect Charles to do even more

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It seems important to distinguish between being the Regent (i.e., de facto head of state until the heir turns 18) versus making decisions about the future king (which I would presume would primarily be the responsibility of his mother).

Correct. The Regency Act stipulates:

During a Regency, unless Parliament otherwise determines,—

(a)if the Sovereign is under the age of eighteen years, and unmarried, His mother, if she is living, shall have the guardianship of His person;​

Interestingly, it uses the gender-specific term "mother" rather than for example "surviving parent". I wonder if, at the time the Act was enacted, a widowed father would have automatically been given guardianship of his children? It would seem strange to me if Queen Elizabeth II had died leaving young children and the Duke of Edinburgh had lost his guardianship over them.

 

[TLLK]

So as we enter 2021 what do you think this year will be like. Prince Philip turns 100 of course and The Queen 95. I would expect Charles to do even more

For now I believe that any official foreign travel be it outgoing or incoming is unlikely happen for the first six months of 2021. The PoW has been his mother's representative overseas for a few years now so this will impact his calendar as well as the calendars for other members of the BRF: Camilla, Cambridges, Anne, Wessexes etc..


As for July through September, we'll have to see if foreign travel will be possible ie: Anne attending the Olympics in Tokyo.



As for domestic travel and visits, I expect that those will be curtailed for a few months, though perhaps by Spring it might be possible. IMO the Court Circular will continue to list all phone and virtual visits throughout the year.

 

[Betsypaige]

For now I believe that any official foreign travel be it outgoing or incoming is unlikely happen for the first six months of 2021. The PoW has been his mother's representative overseas for a few years now so this will impact his calendar as well as the calendars for other members of the BRF: Camilla, Cambridges, Anne, Wessexes etc..


As for July through September, we'll have to see if foreign travel will be possible ie: Anne attending the Olympics in Tokyo.



As for domestic travel and visits, I expect that those will be curtailed for a few months, though perhaps by Spring it might be possible. IMO the Court Circular will continue to list all phone and virtual visits throughout the year.

I think we’re going to see more dual engagements with Charles, Camilla, William and Kate. There was an article some weeks ago about how well that one engagement (where Charles pushed William in a wheelchair/basketball) went went, so much so that the courtiers are looking to do more of those. I can’t find that article, unfortunately...Of course most of these engagements will be virtual, I’m sure.

 

[Denville]

I doubt it. They dont usually work together, as they can get more done if they split up.... It was a rare one for Will and Kate to do an engagment with Charles and Camilla.

 

[Osipi]

Personally, I think in 2021 and beyond (after the "normalcy" from the pandemic resumes) that we're going to see a lot of things that seriously point to a soft transition between monarchs and a lot of that will be focused on the idea of "Team Windsor" as the Queen slows down even more and Charles steps up with the backing of the entire "Firm".

With the Queen reaching 95 and the DoE celebrating his 100th birthday this year, these two people deserve to rest more and smell the roses (or in the Queen's case, the stables).

I'll call 2021 and onwards "The Transition Time". ?

 

[Betsypaige]

I doubt it. They dont usually work together, as they can get more done if they split up.... It was a rare one for Will and Kate to do an engagment with Charles and Camilla.

And I said that the article indicated otherwise...that that one engagement went so well that courtiers were going to schedule more. This is my prediction - I’m not going to debate you on it.

 

[TLLK]

I think we’re going to see more dual engagements with Charles, Camilla, William and Kate. There was an article some weeks ago about how well that one engagement (where Charles pushed William in a wheelchair/basketball) went went, so much so that the courtiers are looking to do more of those. I can’t find that article, unfortunately...Of course most of these engagements will be virtual, I’m sure.

I agree that in the coming years that we will see more joint engagements with the four which includes the official events associated with state visits when those are allowed to resume. Should the Queen's health begin to decline and she reduces her schedule to an even greater degree, then I believe that we'll see even more planned for the four.


As for 2021 it will likely depend upon what in-person engagements are permitted.

 

[REAL COUNTESS]

The future of the British Monarchy is secure, unless some Politician think the country is better of as a Republic?. Who would like to stand for 2 hrs. and wait on them, if they can see the Queen or other members of the RF.

 

[Osipi]

Standing to see a politician is quite low on the totem pole. One of the greatest things about the monarchy is that the Queen and the RF represent *all* the people whereas politicians tend to spout their opinions and gravitate one way or the other along party lines. Lately that's been a *huge* problem in the US as i think everyone and their pet parakeet realize by now.

The UK has the Queen and the RF. The US has um... a flag. Reminds me of the time this guy here wrote a letter to the Queen asking her to *please* take us back! The Queen did reply to him and told him "no".

https://indianexpress.com/article/t...lizabeth-ii-to-take-back-america-she-says-no/

 

[Muhler]

Quite ominously, that looks like standard reply #134. To be printed out.

I.e. it's not the first such letter... ?

 

[QueenMathilde]

I think the queen will work until she dies. She take that oath seriously. I wouldn't look for Charles to be much more in charge than he is now. And I think they're trying to give William a break so they're not piling too much on him.

 

[Alison H]

It depends on her health. If, hopefully, she remains in reasonably good physical and mental health, then she'll carry on. But someone in her mid-90s is not going to be doing overseas tours, or even long walkabouts, or busy days involving multiple engagements, in the UK, so the younger royals - and Charles and Camilla aren't *that* young - will inevitably be doing more. When things get back to some sort of normality.

 

[travelguy]

So I was thinking with the sad news on Philip I read on the BBC News that heirs to the throne only get ceremonial funerals and not state. I thought that for example if William went before Charles that it would be State. It also interests me if other members such as Anne, Richard, Edward (Duke of Kent), and Prince Michael would get ceremonial funerals and what Camilla and Kate would have?

 

[Darius1]

I understand that the precedent is that consorts receive a Ceremonial Royal Funeral. The Queen Mother's was the most recent example. Philip's will be the same minus the London Procession and public Lying in State.

 

[Biri]

Sovereigns - State funerals
Their Spouses - ceremonial (broadcast on TV)
Other Members of the RF - private (not broadcast).

 

[travelguy]

Do we think that when Charles becomes king he will really slim down the monarchy as much as some people think. I actually am not sure he will

 

[Somebody]

Do we think that when Charles becomes king he will really slim down the monarchy as much as some people think. I actually am not sure he will

If he wouldn't want to, he needs to find replacements for quite of few of the queen's cousins sooner or later: the duke of Kent is expected to retire - he said he wouldn't do so as long as his cousin, the queen, is still working (replacement by Beatrice?); the duchess of Kent is already basically retired; princess Alexandra might decide to retire as well (replacement by Eugenie?). The duke and duchess of Gloucester might retire at some point (replacement by Louise and James?)... So, yes, I do think he will slim down the monarchy: he doesn't have much choice, unless he decides to ask his nieces and nephew to step in (partly because his younger son and wife decided they weren't interested).

 

[Sandy345]

I somehow don't think Prince Charles envisions the York Princesses in his idea of the scaled down monarchy. I also think James and Louise may live relatively private lives and not do royal work.

 

[Fijiro]

The slim down monarchy for Charles may end up being Charles & Camilla, Andrew, William & Kate, Edward & Sophie. Seven full time working royals is not a bad number; the other European monarchies do it with less.

 

[Somebody]

The slim down monarchy for Charles may end up being Charles & Camilla, Andrew, William & Kate, Edward & Sophie. Seven full time working royals is not a bad number; the other European monarchies do it with less.

I assume you mean Anne instead of Andrew...

I expect the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester to stick around as well if Charles would ask them to. The Duke of Gloucester is only 4 years older than Charles himself (so only 3 years older than the Duchess of Cornwall). And the Duchess of Gloucester is only 1 year older than Camilla and 2 years older than Charles.

Aug 1944: Duke of Gloucester
June 1946: Duchess of Gloucester
July 1947: Duchess of Cornwall
November 1948: Prince of Wales

The Duke of Kent however was born in October 1935; and his sister Alexandra in December 1936. So, that's more than a 10 year age gap. So, I hope as 85 and 84 year olds they will feel free to retire once Charles becomes (permanent) regent or king.