The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:17 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,262
To me, this seems redundant as the Queen's intention to cut down was announced before Prince Philip's resignation. Just as Prince Philip was supposed to slow down and it ends up that he spends most of his time at Sandringham because at Windsor he still gets sucked back in, so it is with HM.

It was announced back then that she would slow down and she didn't so now she is divesting herself of some of her favourite causes and assigning various members of her family to inherit the cause. That way she would not be sucked back in (theoretically) and, more importantly, she gets to decide who gets what.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-16-2019, 02:21 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post

It was announced back then that she would slow down and she didn't so now she is divesting herself of some of her favourite causes and assigning various members of her family to inherit the cause. That way she would not be sucked back in (theoretically) and, more importantly, she gets to decide who gets what.
I don't think anything has changed radically. Over the last 5-10 years, small and measured changes have been taking place on an ongoing basis, with responsibilities being passed on and patronages passed down regularly. Not convinced about the "favourite" causes though.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-31-2019, 06:56 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
...I think by the time Charles is King there's going to be a need for other Royals to help out...certainly by the time William is King. There's no way by the time it's down to William they could carry out the engagements going on currently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Larisa View Post
I have a feeling people are forgetting how old Charles is. The man is 70. This means that it is highly unlikely that the Sussex children will be old enough to do royal duties while Charles is alive.

It’s King William who will decide about Harry’s kids. And in 30 years it is quite possible that George, Charlotte, Louis + spouses will all be working royals. This would make it at least 10 full time working royals, probably more with Edward and Sophie. I really don’t think the UK needs more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
The queen has had 4 children, Charles only two. That is a totally different situation. If Anne and Edward & Sophie didn't exist, Beatrice and Eugene would be doing Royal duties nowadays along with William & Harry. Okay, William already has 3 children, but nowadays doing Royal duties is not all young people hope to do for a living. Maybe Charlotte wants to become a marine biologist or decides to study arithmetic to become a teacher like one of the elder Spanish infantas? Or a model like Theodora Greece and Nicolai of Denmark? Edward & Sophie hoped for a different way of life at first than being working Royals. Back then it was very difficult, but times have changed and nowadays a prince or princess studying cinematography to become a director? Why not?
If the British royal family feels it is necessary to avoid the working royal family becoming smaller, they will inevitably need to plan on adding the York princesses as working royals when Queen Elizabeth II, the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra retire or pass away, as the likelihood is that the Prince of Wales' grandchildren will not yet be of age to perform duties full time at that point.

However, I am in agreement with Princess Larisa's appraisal that it appears likelier that the British royal family feels secure with the expectation that the number of working royals will shrink.

See Somebody's precise calculations, which use the assumption that the current working royals will remain active until age 85:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Taking a cut-off point of 85 years (it seems that most royals stay quite active until about that age; for example, the Duke of Kent at age 83 took on 92 engagements so far this year; comparable to his 10 year younger cousin the Duke of Gloucester):
- by January 2019 there are 15 full-time royals;
- by January 2029 this number will most likely drop to about 12 (still more than enough imo),
- 10 years (2039) the numbers will be at a relatively low point (if Charles is king at that point it will be 8-9 active royals; if it's William, we're talking about 7 - the Cambridge kids are in their early 20's and can take on an engagement here and there but most likely will focus on their studies);
- another 10 years (2049) later the numbers are going up again to 9-12 full-time royals (depending on whether the Cambridge kids have spouses that become active full-time royals) which should be more than sufficient;
- another 10 years down the line (so in 40 years/2059), we're still at 9-10 full time royals.
- by 2069 (50 years from now), we might get to another low point with William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan all being in their mid- to late eighties and only George and his siblings fully active; however, as king and queen William and Catherine will most likely still take on quite a large amount of engagements; and by that point George hopefully has grown children of his own supplying another generation of royals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Indeed, nobody is needed right now. If they want to stay at about the same number of active members the York princesses should be added sometime in the next 5 years or so; as Harry only recently started full-time it would be perfectly reasonable to start while in their mid-thirties).

The same reasoning applies to H&M's children: they won't be needed by the time they are old enough to start royal duties as the BRF will have adjusted to a smaller number (going from 15 to about 12 in the next 10 years and going down to about 8-10 in 20 years and stabilizing at that point.

Of course, if the next 20-30 years show that 8-10 full time royals is not enough, they will first call upon the York princesses, probably the Wessex children and in 30 years on the Sussex children to help out. However, that seems an unlikely scenario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I decided to look back to see what the numbers of active members were 10 and 20 years ago:

Jan 2009: 13 (excluding the Cambridges, Sussexes and adding the duke of Edinburgh & duchess of Kent)
Jan 1999: 11-12 (excluding Camilla, the Wessexes, the Cambridges, the Sussexes; and adding the duke of Edinburgh, duchess of Kent, Queen-mother, princess Margaret; I am not sure how active the Queen Mother was aged 99)

Going back to the start of her reign:
The queen started with 7 active members (not counting queen Mary who passed away a year later): herself, the duke of Edinburgh, the queen-mother, the princess Margaret and the duke and duchess of Gloucester and the dowager duchess of Kent as active members.
She purposefully enlarged that number to include 3 more members in the next 10 years, raising the number to about 10 (as expected:) the duke of Kent and therefore also the duchess of Kent, and (not-necessarily expected:) princess Alexandra.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-31-2019, 08:54 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,889
I think back at the start of the Queen's reign there was probably a need for more royals, remember the Queen mother didn't go back to royal duties immediately and the Queen had a lot of overseas travel to do often by sea and certainly for longer tours than now.

To me back then tours lasted weeks not days so having more people then than now probably works out the same in the end, IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-31-2019, 04:47 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,641
The premise though is that the BRF will continue to do around 4000 engagements per year. I suspect the intention is to not only cut back the number of working members of the firm but also the total number of engagements.

Of course if everyone did 500 - as Anne and Charles do now - then they only need 8 anyway - Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry, Sophie, Andrew, Edward and Anne makes 9.

Go forward 20 years and George will be 25 - as old as the Queen was when she became Queen so old enough to do 500 and replace Camilla.

Two years later Charlotte could replace Charles.

Then Louis replaces Anne

George's wife replaces Andrew

Louis' wife replaces Edward

etc etc etc
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-31-2019, 05:26 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The premise though is that the BRF will continue to do around 4000 engagements per year. I suspect the intention is to not only cut back the number of working members of the firm but also the total number of engagements.

Of course if everyone did 500 - as Anne and Charles do now - then they only need 8 anyway - Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry, Sophie, Andrew, Edward and Anne makes 9.

Go forward 20 years and George will be 25 - as old as the Queen was when she became Queen so old enough to do 500 and replace Camilla.

Two years later Charlotte could replace Charles.

Then Louis replaces Anne

George's wife replaces Andrew

Louis' wife replaces Edward

etc etc etc
I doubt that George and Charlotte will do 500 engagements a year when their parents aged 36 don't even do half that amount
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 03-31-2019, 06:18 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,847
I fully expect the Cambridge children to be given some years to ease into being full time royals the same as their parents.

I don't think it likely they will hit 25 and turn into full time royals the next day.

The Wessexes, Andrew and Princess Anne will either be very aged or gone.

That leaves 5 Cambridges and 3 Sussexes (unless they have one more child..then 4)..so a max of 9 core members...5 of which may not even be full time royals at that point.

So there will either be a reduction of engagements or a request for Harry's kids to go full time at some point..and they will be HRH's after Charles is King...unless their parents decide to go the way of the Wessexes.




LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 03-31-2019, 06:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
I doubt that George and Charlotte will do 500 engagements a year when their parents aged 36 don't even do half that amount
I am not saying they will but they could.

If they are really going to keep up the number of current engagements with a smaller workforce then that workforce is going to have to do more.

They have to either increase the number of engagements per person OR reduce number of engagements overall to about half what they do now as a family.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 03-31-2019, 06:23 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,847
Bertie do you think we will see at least one of the York girls (Eugenie?) go into more of a working Royal position? Her event with Andrew this last week made me wonder.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 03-31-2019, 07:07 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,641
No I don't think they will ever be working royals.

Beatrice even had a solo mention in the CC last year for an event but that is a once a year type thing.

If Andrew had his way they would be it seems - and both girls have done the odd engagement with him but the plan going forward seems to be to cut them out totally with even suggestions that Charles intends on cutting out Andrew and possibly Edward and Sophie, but not Anne.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 03-31-2019, 07:08 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
I doubt that George and Charlotte will do 500 engagements a year when their parents aged 36 don't even do half that amount
...they do - together. xx

Some things are clearly going to change in the future. Whether for better or worse remains to be seen. Although, I do find some 'accepted' notions to be rather humours or rather optimistic.

Once William ascends, it'll be down to him, Catherine, Harry and Meghan & likely George/Charlotte/Louis starting to become part time working royals (I am unsure why people seem to believe that they would not be following their parent's example of a very soft and slow entry into royal working life.)
Maybe William will tap Bea and/or Eug for a role akin to Princess Alexandra, where they are active for a handful of patronages, but not actually anything close to full time.


I very much doubt Harry and Meghan will be keen to have their children be working royals. I would actually bet good money on the opposite. While I see them be dedicated and important assets to the BRF for the decades to come, I am quite certain they'll nurture their children to find their own paths apart from the family.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 03-31-2019, 07:42 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
No I don't think they will ever be working royals.

Beatrice even had a solo mention in the CC last year for an event but that is a once a year type thing.

If Andrew had his way they would be it seems - and both girls have done the odd engagement with him but the plan going forward seems to be to cut them out totally with even suggestions that Charles intends on cutting out Andrew and possibly Edward and Sophie, but not Anne.
Do you really think Charles will cut the Wessexes and Andrew loose? I have to say that would kinda surprise me. I figured he would let them continue as they are...or at least part time royals.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-31-2019, 07:54 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I fully expect the Cambridge children to be given some years to ease into being full time royals the same as their parents.

I don't think it likely they will hit 25 and turn into full time royals the next day.

The Wessexes, Andrew and Princess Anne will either be very aged or gone.

That leaves 5 Cambridges and 3 Sussexes (unless they have one more child..then 4)..so a max of 9 core members...5 of which may not even be full time royals at that point.

So there will either be a reduction of engagements or a request for Harry's kids to go full time at some point..and they will be HRH's after Charles is King...unless their parents decide to go the way of the Wessexes.




LaRae
The choice between a reduction of engagements, an increase in the number of engagements per person, a request for more family members to become full time royals, or a combination of these choices will happen before any of the Sussex children, or even the Cambridge children, turn 25.

The Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Kent already are retired, and as Queen Elizabeth II is 92, the Duke of Kent is 83, Princess Alexandra is 82, the Duke of Gloucester is 74, the Duchess of Gloucester is 72, the Duchess of Cornwall is 71, the Prince of Wales is 70, and the Princess Royal is 68, there will inevitably be more retirements (or deaths) before even Prince George (the eldest of Prince Charles' grandchildren) turns 25.

If the British royal family's choice is to request more family members to become full time royals (instead of reducing engagements or increasing the number of engagements per person), it is the York princesses and perhaps (if they remain healthy and willing at that point) Prince and Princess Michael of Kent who will be on hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloep View Post
Once William ascends, it'll be down to him, Catherine, Harry and Meghan & likely George/Charlotte/Louis starting to become part time working royals (I am unsure why people seem to believe that they would not be following their parent's example of a very soft and slow entry into royal working life.) [...]
Most on this forum do seem to expect them to follow their parents' example, given the above discussion.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-31-2019, 08:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Do you really think Charles will cut the Wessexes and Andrew loose? I have to say that would kinda surprise me. I figured he would let them continue as they are...or at least part time royals.



LaRae
I am getting more and more convinced that Charles really only wants his own direct family as working royals and thus excluding his own siblings although Anne has no doubt told him what she thinks and he will let her do her own thing.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-31-2019, 08:53 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I am getting more and more convinced that Charles really only wants his own direct family as working royals and thus excluding his own siblings although Anne has no doubt told him what she thinks and he will let her do her own thing.

That is really interesting. I don't think Charles is going to rock Anne's boat. If nothing else I'd think the Queen would of had a word about it...and why not. She probably is one of the most efficient working royals and wouldn't be surprised if she cost the least amount of money.

It seems like we do see less of the Wessexes already but I know they tend to be overlooked by the media.

I wonder what Charles's plan is then...is he going to cut engagements back or increase workloads...maybe both.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 04-01-2019, 12:51 AM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,001
I got the impression in the press this weekend the Charles wanted Andrew out as he gives a bad impression on the monarchy, but these are very unreliable sources. The general impression was it appears Charles has forgotten his own failings and only remembers his brothers'. And of course his children have amble time to make messes themselves.


But I do agree that the Yorks and Wessexs are already moving into their new roles as the Gloucesters and Kents of this generation. Sophie and Edward have already arranged their staff and charities accordingly. Andrew will have to follow suit regardless of his preferences. Odd if you consider the amount of engagements they do in comparison to the Sussexs and Cambridges. I have actually attempted to do an age and life stage comparison on engagements of the royals, was never able to do it. Either way it is not as if the Wessexs and Duke of York are doing nothing. Can Charles ask them and the Gloucesters, Kents, ect to stop doing engagements?
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 04-01-2019, 01:31 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,641
Yes as he is the one who funds them via either the Sovereign Grant or the Duchy of Lancaster.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 04-01-2019, 01:54 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Yes as he is the one who funds them via either the Sovereign Grant or the Duchy of Lancaster.
I think Charles will allow those that work for the "Firm" now, to gracefully slow down and then eventually bow out but continue to support them as the Queen does now just for the fact that they've given long years of service to the monarchy.

I also believe that as the new reign begins, engagements are going to be more compartmentalized than they are now with each royal having their own primary area of focus. I can see Andrew continuing and focusing on his Pitch at the Palace schemes, Edward and Sophie concentrating on The Duke of Edinburgh Award, the Sussexes focusing on the Commonwealth and so forth.

Perhaps even what we see as singular patronages such as hospitals, museums and galleries and the military will all be under an umbrella with perhaps the Prince's Trust and the Royal Foundation merging into a giant, overhead machine encompassing more and more that draws organizations and incentives and projects into working with others with similar goals.

I believe that perhaps a day of engagements where in the morning, a royal opens a hospital wing, has lunch with another charity/foundation, attends a reception at a gallery and then a dinner with another cause are going to be more streamlined. Streamlining also makes it much easier for the work the monarchy does to encompass issues and causes globally rather than just in the backyard of London and the UK.

Perhaps, as time passes and Harry and Meghan's children grow up and have children of their own, we'll be seeing the minor royals following in Beatrice and Eugenie's footsteps as being part and parcel of the British Royal Family but the causes and the charities that they do take on will be their own personal endeavors and not through the "Firm". The minor royals (as with Andrew and Pitch, Beatrice and Eugenie and Edward and Sophie with the DoE Award etc), they're personally giving back to the people and supporting causes on their own rather than working for the monarchy.

Perhaps I'm having a caffeine induced pipe dream but it makes sense to me.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 04-01-2019, 06:37 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
But I do agree that the Yorks and Wessexs are already moving into their new roles as the Gloucesters and Kents of this generation. Sophie and Edward have already arranged their staff and charities accordingly. Andrew will have to follow suit regardless of his preferences.
This is very interesting. How are Anne's staff and charities organised, in comparison?
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 04-01-2019, 07:33 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
I got the impression in the press this weekend the Charles wanted Andrew out as he gives a bad impression on the monarchy, but these are very unreliable sources. The general impression was it appears Charles has forgotten his own failings and only remembers his brothers'. And of course his children have amble time to make messes themselves.


But I do agree that the Yorks and Wessexs are already moving into their new roles as the Gloucesters and Kents of this generation. Sophie and Edward have already arranged their staff and charities accordingly. Andrew will have to follow suit regardless of his preferences. Odd if you consider the amount of engagements they do in comparison to the Sussexs and Cambridges. I have actually attempted to do an age and life stage comparison on engagements of the royals, was never able to do it. Either way it is not as if the Wessexs and Duke of York are doing nothing. Can Charles ask them and the Gloucesters, Kents, ect to stop doing engagements?
I’m not sure how Andrew, Anne, or the Wessex are moving into Gloucester or Kent’s territory other than the press is not reporting much on them? Although that’s more on the press than anyone else. They are very active members of the BRF.

How are the Wessex charities and staff organized differently? The Queen supports her other children’s and her cousins’ work because they don’t receive an income like Charles does.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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 of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 119 03-24-2020 10:41 AM
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1530 03-22-2020 02:01 PM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 768 02-15-2020 03:49 PM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 39 11-29-2017 09:53 AM




Popular Tags
aristocracy armenia belgian royal belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife cyprus denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; dutch history dutch royal family dutch royals felipe vi future games germany haakon vii hill house of bernadotte house of glucksburg house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau jumma kent list of rulers lithuania lithuanian palaces mailing marriage mbs monaco christening monarchism nobel prize norwegian royal family official visit pakistan palestine popularity prince charles prince daniel prince harry princely family of monaco princess elizabeth pronunciation queen paola romanov family rown royal tour shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history thailand tracts united kingdom unsubscribe usa videos


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:42 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×