The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[Lilyflo]

There isn't the same wish for the monarchy's ceremonials as there used to be. I don't think it has much to do with slavery etc., simply that people just aren't that interested in the same way.

Please don't put 2+2 together & make 5 because I didn't say the above. I did not say that a reduced wish for the monarchy's ceremonials is related to slavery etc.

My comment was in response to Darius (which I quoted to be clear) and was about people liking a reminder of our previous "grandeur and status" and I'm saying that reminder isn't what everyone wants. People support having a monarchy for a range of reasons.

 

[Queen Claude]

The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall provide a good chunk of the funding for the activities of the British Royal Family. If the BRF is slimmed down it means that the respective Dukes have more money to line their pockets.

I don't think that it was ever intended for Eugenie to be a working royal other than perhaps a patronage or two and a handful of engagements.

As the oldest child, it was expected for Beatrice to become a working royal and she seemed keen about it, but her "position" was eliminated even before she started the job. She was reportedly not happy about not being able to become a working royal but that was years ago. Who knows if she still hankers to be a working royal or if she has other goals and desires.

Right now, William and Kate are the only working royals in their generation and IMO the BRF has to figure out if that is sufficient, particularly during the reigns of Charles and William. If it is considered insufficient, then they have to figure out how to deal with that. I suspect that William, even though he does not control any purse strings at the moment, will have considerable say over whether or not other younger royals will be conscripted to take on royal duties.

 

[Darius1]

Some of the public might like that reminder but not everyone does because a lot of that grandeur and status was gained by means that are shameful eg slavery, piracy, imperialism, racism, theft and buckets of bloodshed. The monarchy is also a reminder of entrenched privilege, deference and immense wealth, which isn't to everyone's taste either.

I'm a monarchist despite all of the above but I know many people who aren't and others who just tolerate them because the idea of President (insert your own dismal politician) is worse.

Charles and his advisers have their ear to the ground and they'll do whatever it takes to remain relevant and if that involves slimming down the working family, he won't hesitate (and neither will William).

The Windsors are indeed the great survivors and will do whatever is necessary to remain relevant. I just hope we do not end up with some little glum monarchy or a little glum nation in the North Sea!

 

[Fijiro]

If the Windsors insist on maintaining the same workload they have now and if they refuse to bring in Beatrice and Eugenie even on part time basis then they will have to start giving George royal engagements as soon as he graduates from university. Of course he will go through military training like his dad but he can do royal work on his breaks from training. Unfortunately George will not have the luxury William got being part time royal and part time air ambulance pilot. For the younger siblings they can look to what the Bernadottes are doing. Only pay them per engagement that they take on they can also do this for the york girls..No i do not think Charlottes husband would be needed as full time working royal. Both husbands of the current princess royal did not become working royals her Current husband may take on some royal engagements but thats it. And about the Commonwealth. Well what about it? it's not like they are touring the commonwealth every year. But here is an idea to satisfy the commonwealth when george graduates university why dont they send him to tour the commonwealth himself....
For Future grandchildren of William. Charlottes kids should be like princess anne kids and louis kids should be like the wessex kids.

After Prince Charles, member countries that form the Commonwealth of Nations will most probably elect a new Head since this position is not hereditary and doesn’t have to be a British Monarchy. If that happens, then Prince William will just have to deal with the 16 Commonwealth Realms. In that case, I think William, Kate, Anne, Edward, and Sophie as full time working Royals will be sufficient. George, Charlotte, and Louse will grow up to become fulltime working Royals.

 

[Eskimo]

I think Charles wants a slimmed down Monarchy with just the Monarch, Consort, Heir and Spouse as full time working members. They are in decent shape right now with Anne, Edward and Sophie and the Queen's cousins pinch hitting when needed. The work they do will need to be adjusted to accommodate the numbers available at any given time.

IMO, Harry will be drafted back in (with future spouse) after a period of rehabilitation. George will need to start doing royal duties part time while in University and full time not soon after. Work load needs might necessitate George getting married sooner than his father and grandfather did. Charlotte might do royal duties before marriage but I cannot see Louis being a full time royal. I doubt in 20 years there will be much appetite to have all three of the POW/Monarch's children on the public payroll. Esp. if Anne, Edward and Sophie are still around doing royal duties.

 

[Osipi]

When you stop to think about it, the monarchy, the British Royal Family, the castles and the palaces (including Windsor Castle which was originally built by William the Conqueror in 1070), the Royal Collection, the many ancient traditions that are still being upheld (the parliamentary hostage for the State Opening of Parliament comes to mind) and the Royal Archives all add up to encapsulate the continuity of the British people. It is the living, breathing testimony of British history. The politicians that wheel and deal and make the laws on how the country is run is more along the "flavor of the day" issues that are affecting the here and the now.

The British monarchy, to me, will remain relevant to the people because its a reminder that life in the UK is based on continuity. The royal personalities will come and go but rather than obliterate the monarchy, they'll add their own "special spice" to the soup called a history of over 1,000 years old whereas a President of a Republic will change like the wind compared to the long lasting stories of how the UK got to where it is today.

Losing the monarchy would be like cutting the heart out of the UK. I say this as an American that would rather have the continual flow of history in my country than the constant need to rewrite it, politicize it and sometimes even destroy it. ?

 

[Susan D]

The British Monarch is not wanted in the Commonwealth countries and I think it's right if the junior Kents and Gloucesters and Yorks are all in private life.

 

[Osipi]

The British Monarch is not wanted in the Commonwealth countries and I think it's right if the junior Kents and Gloucesters and Yorks are all in private life.

Answer me a question then. If the Commonwealth nations don't want anything to do with the British monarchy, why did they vote to have Charles as the head of this organization called the Commonwealth of Nations when the Queen passes back in 2018?

"“We recognise the role of the Queen in championing the Commonwealth and its peoples. The next head of the Commonwealth shall be his Royal Highness Prince Charles, the Prince of Wales,” they said."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/20/prince-charles-next-head-commonwealth-queen

 

[Somebody]

I think Charles wants a slimmed down Monarchy with just the Monarch, Consort, Heir and Spouse as full time working members. They are in decent shape right now with Anne, Edward and Sophie and the Queen's cousins pinch hitting when needed. The work they do will need to be adjusted to accommodate the numbers available at any given time.

IMO, Harry will be drafted back in (with future spouse) after a period of rehabilitation. George will need to start doing royal duties part time while in University and full time not soon after. Work load needs might necessitate George getting married sooner than his father and grandfather did. Charlotte might do royal duties before marriage but I cannot see Louis being a full time royal. I doubt in 20 years there will be much appetite to have all three of the POW/Monarch's children on the public payroll. Esp. if Anne, Edward and Sophie are still around doing royal duties.

The princess royal is turning 70 this month, while she might still do some royal activities if her brother is on the throne at that point, I do think her workload will have been reduced considerably. So, not really a reason for the younger Cambridge siblings not to get involved.

I assume William and Catherine will talk things through very extensively with all three of their children before a decision is made. As I'm sure they don't want another Harry. So it should be clear from the beginning whether they'll be full-time royals or not; and if not, what minor role they might have in supporting their father and brother.

 

[Somebody]

The British Monarch is not wanted in the Commonwealth countries and I think it's right if the junior Kents and Gloucesters and Yorks are all in private life.

Who are you thinking about with the 'junior Kents and Gloucesters'? The non-royal heirs of the current dukes? They aren't royal and won't be upon becoming the next dukes, so they surely will continue as is. The York princesses on the other hand are royal highnesses but so far haven't been involved, so unless Charles and William decide they truly need them (more likely within the UK than in the Commonwealth imho - but still unlikely), I don't expect them to get extensively involved but instead might show up at state banquets and other larger family gatherings (garden parties) etc where the numbers count.

 

[Durham]

Losing the monarchy would be like cutting the heart out of the UK. I say this as an American that would rather have the continual flow of history in my country than the constant need to rewrite it, politicize it and sometimes even destroy it. ?

Well it would certainly be a very different constitutional reality. I think the heart is in the culture (of each home nation) but I get your point. The monarchy is (for a majority at least) a unifying symbol & a living link to the past although in an ancient land it isn't the only one. There is also a long & honourable history of republicanism & radicalism. The USA came about in part because of that tradition.

 

[Osipi]

Ahhh... the kids never do grow up to be the way you wanted them to be and how you perceived them to be. Such is life.

 

[Durham]

Bolshy teenagers thinking they know best. The other kids hung round for a bit longer & listed to mum.

 

[Denville]

The British Monarch is not wanted in the Commonwealth countries and I think it's right if the junior Kents and Gloucesters and Yorks are all in private life.

YOu mean the children of the 3 Royal dukes, all of whose children ARE in private life???

 

[Denville]

Well it would certainly be a very different constitutional reality. I think the heart is in the culture (of each home nation) but I get your point. The monarchy is (for a majority at least) a unifying symbol & a living link to the past although in an ancient land it isn't the only one. There is also a long & honourable history of republicanism & radicalism. The USA came about in part because of that tradition.

Its interesting, but I would say it has lasted because the RF have been ruthlessly pragmatic and done what was necessary to survive. Those who tried ot hold back the forces of change, like Charles I, were gotten rid of.
And because most British are not that ideologically minded and tend to stick with it because it seems to work reasonably well.... if that changes, they are gone.

 

[Durham]

Its interesting, but I would say it has lasted because the RF have been ruthlessly pragmatic and done what was necessary to survive. Those who tried ot hold back the forces of change, like Charles I, were gotten rid of.
And because most British are not that ideologically minded and tend to stick with it because it seems to work reasonably well.... if that changes, they are gone.

Yes that's all fair comment.

 

[Jacknch]

A number of posts have been deleted either because they were political or drifted away from the topic of the thread. These deletions include responses to those posts.

Please note that this thread is NOT a platform for political rants or assessments on the state of the British economy. Thank you.

 

[tommy100]

The princess royal is turning 70 this month, while she might still do some royal activities if her brother is on the throne at that point, I do think her workload will have been reduced considerably. So, not really a reason for the younger Cambridge siblings not to get involved.

I assume William and Catherine will talk things through very extensively with all three of their children before a decision is made. As I'm sure they don't want another Harry. So it should be clear from the beginning whether they'll be full-time royals or not; and if not, what minor role they might have in supporting their father and brother.

Anne keeps saying she will follow her mother and father's example on slowing down with age i.e. not doing so. I suspect she will be around for a long while yet. TBH I think Charles will be happy with Anne and the Wessex's working as they are so discreet and go about their duties quietly it won't hurt having them on side. They may not do as they have done, going on foreign tours etc but visits in the UK to charities and organisations I see happening until they call it a day. Edward and Sophie will still have the Duke of Edinburgh Awards to work for anyway. The recent docu about Anne and the reception to it showed most people if they have an opinion, see her as hard working and an asset so why ditch her and face the bad press of being the "mean, self centered big bro" who seem to want all the attention to himself. I've always had the impression Charles found Andrew and his high profile antics and desire to have Beatrice and Eugenie on full time royal duties as the main issue to rallying agains and that is no longer an issue (well is now a different issue). I'm honestly of the belief no HRH's will be told not to work if they still want to but that there will be greater limiting in the future to those that are expected and asked to undertake duties.

That said I think some royals will take HM's passing as a chance to step down or slow down. the Duke of Kent is said to have commented that he "can't stop while HM goes on" or words to that affect.

 

[Betsypaige]

Anne keeps saying she will follow her mother and father's example on slowing down with age i.e. not doing so. I suspect she will be around for a long while yet. TBH I think Charles will be happy with Anne and the Wessex's working as they are so discreet and go about their duties quietly it won't hurt having them on side. They may not do as they have done, going on foreign tours etc but visits in the UK to charities and organisations I see happening until they call it a day. Edward and Sophie will still have the Duke of Edinburgh Awards to work for anyway. The recent docu about Anne and the reception to it showed most people if they have an opinion, see her as hard working and an asset so why ditch her and face the bad press of being the "mean, self centered big bro" who seem to want all the attention to himself. I've always had the impression Charles found Andrew and his high profile antics and desire to have Beatrice and Eugenie on full time royal duties as the main issue to rallying agains and that is no longer an issue (well is now a different issue). I'm honestly of the belief no HRH's will be told not to work if they still want to but that there will be greater limiting in the future to those that are expected and asked to undertake duties.

That said I think some royals will take HM's passing as a chance to step down or slow down. the Duke of Kent is said to have commented that he "can't stop while HM goes on" or words to that affect.

Does anyone really think Charles would ask his sister to step down? I don't see that at all. Aside from the fact that she's an asset, and that he'll need the help.......he's also apparently the closest to her. Winnowing down the BRF in terms of working royals is one thing, getting rid of nearly everyone is quite another. In any case, with Harry and Meghan gone, Charles' plan to thin the herd has likely been scuttled.

 

[Mbruno]

IMO, Harry will be drafted back in (with future spouse) after a period of rehabilitation. George will need to start doing royal duties part time while in University and full time not soon after. Work load needs might necessitate George getting married sooner than his father and grandfather did. Charlotte might do royal duties before marriage but I cannot see Louis being a full time royal. I doubt in 20 years there will be much appetite to have all three of the POW/Monarch's children on the public payroll. Esp. if Anne, Edward and Sophie are still around doing royal duties.

I don't think being "on the public payroll" is much of an issue in the UK as it is in the continent. The main difference here is that the BRF is largely self-funded by surplus revenue from real estate portfolios, be it the Crown Estate (which funds the Sovereign Grant), the Duchy of Lancaster, or the Duchy of Cornwall. They don't get money from the general state budget funded by taxation, so there is really no proper "payroll" so to speak.

 

[Osipi]

Does anyone really think Charles would ask his sister to step down? I don't see that at all. Aside from the fact that she's an asset, and that he'll need the help.......he's also apparently the closest to her. Winnowing down the BRF in terms of working royals is one thing, getting rid of nearly everyone is quite another. In any case, with Harry and Meghan gone, Charles' plan to thin the herd has likely been scuttled.

Anne is like her father and most likely would take the attitude when death comes calling, she'd tell him to "naff off. I've things to do today!"

 

[Alison H]

I don't think for a minute that Charles would ask Anne to step down. He wouldn't dare, for one thing - she'd tell him where to shove his suggestion! She's also seen as being very hard-working, and Save The Children and other charities would struggle to replace her and so they'd be furious.


As things are, we don't know what lies ahead. Tourism and the arts have been very badly hit by all this: we don't know when theatres will be able to reopen, and places like the British Museum and the Tate Gallery rely heavily on visitors from abroad, and not many people are travelling at the moment. The Royals can have a big part to play in promoting them all as the world tries to rebuild.

 

[Darius1]

I don't think for a minute that Charles would ask Anne to step down. He wouldn't dare, for one thing - she'd tell him where to shove his suggestion! She's also seen as being very hard-working, and Save The Children and other charities would struggle to replace her and so they'd be furious.


As things are, we don't know what lies ahead. Tourism and the arts have been very badly hit by all this: we don't know when theatres will be able to reopen, and places like the British Museum and the Tate Gallery rely heavily on visitors from abroad, and not many people are travelling at the moment. The Royals can have a big part to play in promoting them all as the world tries to rebuild.

The role played by the principals throughout the pandemic has been exemplary - from The Queen's rallying broadcast, the various Zoom meetings with key workers, the Wessexs' volunteer work have all absolutely managed to hit the right note.

 

[Denville]

I don't think being "on the public payroll" is much of an issue in the UK as it is in the continent. The main difference here is that the BRF is largely self-funded by surplus revenue from real estate portfolios, be it the Crown Estate (which funds the Sovereign Grant), the Duchy of Lancaster, or the Duchy of Cornwall. They don't get money from the general state budget funded by taxation, so there is really no proper "payroll" so to speak.

There is still a public perception, which may not be quite accurate but is still going to be taken into account. The public are increasingly thinking "cut the costs" and "get rid of the ones who aren't that important to the job". The recent events with 2 "spares" is making people think "do we need the spare working, since it seems as if these last 2 have gotten into trouble.. or shown a lack of willingness to fit in."
I'm not saying that Harry's behaviour is anything like as awful as Andrews.. but it is probably partly fueled by his feeling that he doesn't want to go on working for the firm for life, without a chance to have a life of his own and make some income of his own..
And the public response to that is likely to be "well, let him go then... if he wants a life of hs own outside the RF, let him go away and make his own income.."
the charity work isn't vital... it can be cut down and when one of the workers who was deemed "essential" has walked out of his own accord, I think the public will be more eager for the RF to cut back...

I don't think for a minute that Charles would ask Anne to step down. He wouldn't dare, for one thing - she'd tell him where to shove his suggestion! She's also seen as being very hard-working, and Save The Children and other charities would struggle to replace her and so they'd be furious.


As things are, we don't know what lies ahead. Tourism and the arts have been very badly hit by all this: we don't know when theatres will be able to reopen, and places like the British Museum and the Tate Gallery rely heavily on visitors from abroad, and not many people are travelling at the moment. The Royals can have a big part to play in promoting them all as the world tries to rebuild.

For the moment there are still several workers, and they can gradually work the RF into the next reign, and help with charities whihc may be sorely needed until the economy recovers. However, Anne's not immortal, and neither is Edward and the cousins Ed and Alexandra are very old now and in indifferent health. I think they should be allowed to slow down and stop...

 

[winifred]

However, Anne's not immortal, and neither is Edward and the cousins Ed and Alexandra are very old now and in indifferent health. I think they should be allowed to slow down and stop...

"allowed"? If they wanted to retire no one could, or would want to, stop them, after the service they've given.

 

[Denville]

"allowed"? If they wanted to retire no one could, or would want to, stop them, after the service they've given.

Its possible that they might be persuaded to go on, at a stage when they want to stop.

 

[Mbruno]

"allowed"? If they wanted to retire no one could, or would want to, stop them, after the service they've given.

The Duke of Kent's alleged statement says it all: as long as the Queen, who is older than they are, goes on, they probably feel obligated to stay as working royals. Barring any serious, incapacitating health problem, I don't see them retiring in the current reign. Once Charles ascends the throne, I am pretty sure they will be discreetly asked to step down.

 

[JR76]

The Duke of Kent's alleged statement says it all: as long as the Queen, who is older than they are, goes on, they probably feel obligated to stay as working royals. Barring any serious, incapacitating health problem, I don't see them retiring in the current reign. Once Charles ascends the throne, I am pretty sure they will be discreetly asked to step down.

I'm positive that Edward and Alexandra will be allowed to go on for as long as they want but I agree that they won't even consider retiring for as long as the Queen is still working. To them being a royal is about helping the monarch serve the nation which they've done for her entire reign.
Their formidable mother would probably rise from her grave and haunt them for eternity if she felt that they let the Queen down.

 

[Denville]

The Duke of Kent's alleged statement says it all: as long as the Queen, who is older than they are, goes on, they probably feel obligated to stay as working royals. Barring any serious, incapacitating health problem, I don't see them retiring in the current reign. Once Charles ascends the throne, I am pretty sure they will be discreetly asked to step down.

Why would they be asked to step down? If they want to go, or if their health is really poor (it already Is, I think for both Pss Alex and teh D of Kent), I am sure there would be no problem about letting them retrire...But I cant see why Charles would say "I want them to go". If they're up to doing the odd engagement, I cant see why he would say No, I don't want them doing that. If it is to do with money, he's goig to be paying them soemthing till they die anyway so its not like it will cost him more.

 

[Somebody]

Anne keeps saying she will follow her mother and father's example on slowing down with age i.e. not doing so.

Are you really claiming that the queen and duke of Edinburgh are just as active as they were 20-30 years ago?

I expect Anne to continue royal engagements as long as she can - and surely when her brother is on the throne. However, slowing down by the time she reaches 90 (if she is still alive and able to carry out royal duties) does seem far more likely than keeping up with her current speed.