The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[_Heather_]

I honestly believe that whatever is discussed or whatever plans are agreed on to be put in place will never reach the public domain at all.

Possibly. And I hope you’re right. But I genuinely believe that whether they do or not depends on who is allowed to have the information. After the jealousy, the bitterness, and the spite that the interview train wreck showed, I honestly believe that if Harry and Meghan are privy to the information, and especially if they’re not happy about it, it will be on Gayle King’s morning show posthaste or in the worst case scenario there will be an updated whine-fest with Oprah.

 

[Hallo girl]

Didn't they do something about some of them when he retired? I think they reassigned some of them to other members of the RF. Surely this isn't the first time they realize that there are 800 for which something must be done?

No I am sure they know, but I don't think they allocated all of them it was the more high profile ones they transferred over.
The point I was trying to make is that there is no way a slimmed down monarchy can swallow up a huge number of patronages, while down on numbers.
The older royals who still do a few engagements will slowly wind down, plus Harry, Meghan and Andrew all out.

 

[Osipi]

Possibly. And I hope you’re right. But I genuinely believe that whether they do or not depends on who is allowed to have the information. After the jealousy, the bitterness, and the spite that the interview train wreck showed, I honestly believe that if Harry and Meghan are privy to the information, and especially if they’re not happy about it, it will be on Gayle King’s morning show posthaste or in the worst case scenario there will be an updated whine-fest with Oprah.

There is absolutely no reason for Harry and Meghan to be included in or even informed of anything that happens behind closed doors of this summit. This is "Firm" business and Harry and Meghan have closed the door on their involvement with it. They'll be privy to as much information that we, the public are. In other words, zilch.

 

[Somebody]

I'm sure scenario one has been discussed no matter how unlikely it is. Especially when Charles got Covid.

I don't think any of the Cambridge kids children beyond George's children will be offered titles. And I rather suspect that they, Charlotte and Louis, will have rather limited roles.

Why would their roles need to be reduced only because Harry and Meghan had no sense of duty and wanted out? I would hope they will have the opportunity to support their brother George and not leave him to fend for himself (unless all three of them in consultation with their parents decide that would be best for all involved).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Note that if Prince Louis (or any other person) is granted a dukedom or other peerage, his legitimate children will have the right to use the appropriate courtesy titles of children of a peer, even if they are not given any royal titles.

 

[Kellydofc]

Why would their roles need to be reduced only because Harry and Meghan had no sense of duty and wanted out? I would hope they will have the opportunity to support their brother George and not leave him to fend for himself (unless all three of them in consultation with their parents decide that would be best for all involved).

I don't think Charlotte and Louis having a limited role would be about Harry but about the overall trend of smaller monarchies. I think that's probably where it was going anyway.

 

[_Heather_]

There is absolutely no reason for Harry and Meghan to be included in or even informed of anything that happens behind closed doors of this summit. This is "Firm" business and Harry and Meghan have closed the door on their involvement with it. They'll be privy to as much information that we, the public are. In other words, zilch.

For some information yes, you’re absolutely right. For others, including a slim down and restriction in who gets the HRH, they’ll have to be informed. There may be others things that would require them to be informed, too. I’m not sure what would be included and discussed in such a summit but I’d be almost certain that at least some of it will have to be communicated to them and I’d venture to guess that it’ll be information they won’t be happy about. I expect we’ll then get their take on it and they’ll again “have their say” to let us all know if they’re blaming decisions they’re unhappy with on racism, retaliation, jealousy, or some other ridiculousness.

 

[Betsypaige]

The Way Ahead Group: The Sequel

This absolutely sounds like something Philip would have advised Charles to do. Sit down and hash out how things will go in the future and plan for every contingency.

What was the Way Ahead group?

It could have been, no doubt. Charles has a heavy burden on his shoulders, but I know he’s up to he challenge, and I believe his father felt that way, also. I like that William has been involved all along, in last year’s Summit, and now this. He’s got to keep this family together, and he will - they all came up aces in response to COVID.

 

[Fijiro]

so who is briefing the press and the public about all this Monarchy restructuring.

/

 

[Betsypaige]

Well a few front pages are claiming Harry, William and Charles met up for almost 2 hours today (yesterday?). And according to the Telegraph there will be a summit held soon to discuss if “part time royals” can happen in the future.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...de-future-monarchy-led-prince-charles-prince/

So maybe what Harry wanted for himself might be possible for Louis, Charlotte, etc when they come of age.

I posted the Telegraph article in the funeral thread ...I must somehow have missed the part about there being potentially “part time Royals”. Even though I will always believe that HM, William and Charles handled it just fine, I like that they are flexible enough to discuss the matter. No one wants unhappy children/nieces/nephews/cousins,

I didn’t see anything about Charles, William and Harry meeting today/yesterday, just that C and H were possibly going to walk by the floral tributes to Philip. If they all met, that would be wonderful

 

[Betsypaige]

As the thread about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex nor the one on the Funeral seem to be the right place to discuss the future of the British monarchy (and to avoid discussing it in different threads; although I am now starting a third one), I thought it might be better to respond here.



That final paragraph is really the main issue: what angle will you be taken? Do you look into what is done and adjust the number of 'active' royals to that or do you start looking from the number of royals you will have available and adjust the workload.

.

It’s the chicken or the egg thing, lol. My gut told me that the best way would be to decide on the patronages first, but truthfully, that makes no sense. There are only a limited number of available working Royals, so IMO, Charles and co. will need to reduce the number of patronages to accommodate the realities of the BRF

 

[UglyAmerican]

For some information yes, you’re absolutely right. For others, including a slim down and restriction in who gets the HRH, they’ll have to be informed. There may be others things that would require them to be informed, too. I’m not sure what would be included and discussed in such a summit but I’d be almost certain that at least some of it will have to be communicated to them and I’d venture to guess that it’ll be information they won’t be happy about. I expect we’ll then get their take on it and they’ll again “have their say” to let us all know if they’re blaming decisions they’re unhappy with on racism, retaliation, jealousy, or some other ridiculousness.

If their own HRHs were being stripped, they'd have to be informed of that, but I don't think that's likely... yet. But if this is about whether Charlotte's and Louis's children will have titles, that could easily be kept quiet until those children come into being, which may not be for another 20+ years. I don't see any need to inform Harry of it. Though perhaps announcing it before they've had the chance to meet their future spouses might be wise, lest one of them marry someone who takes it as a personal slight and tries to claim it was based on antipathy towards them personally. It's hardly urgent, but if William and Charles and the Queen are all on the same page about it, maybe there's no benefit to waiting.

What do you think they'd be discussing that he'd need to be informed of? To hear Harry tell it, he was cut off from all the perks a year ago. He's not getting any money or official security. I would imagine he's long since lost whatever diplomatic travel documents he might have had. We know he's lost all of his patronages, honorary titles, and other official roles. Maybe he'll still be allowed to pop in for a visit if he wants, but that seems to be the extent of his current and expected future involvement.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Well a few front pages are claiming Harry, William and Charles met up for almost 2 hours today (yesterday?). And according to the Telegraph there will be a summit held soon to discuss if “part time royals” can happen in the future.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...de-future-monarchy-led-prince-charles-prince/

So maybe what Harry wanted for himself might be possible for Louis, Charlotte, etc when they come of age.

I posted the Telegraph article in the funeral thread ...I must somehow have missed the part about there being potentially “part time Royals”.

I've highlighted it in bold:

Royal sources explained that the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge, with the help of the Queen, would now have to decide whether the monarchy should continue with its traditional model of thousands of engagements each year, spread out between a broad base of full-time and part-time working royals, or cut down the number of engagements and patronages and use fewer members of the family to fulfil them.

One source said: “The question is whether you start off by deciding how many patronages and engagements there should be, and then work out how many people are needed to achieve them, or whether you decide how many people there should be, which will dictate how many engagements and patronages they can take on.”​

In view of the wording, I am not sure whether "part-time working royals" is being presented as part of the "traditional model" or as a modification to it.

I don't think they'll make any specific announcements about the future reign of Charles III or whatever his name might be, including titles for the Sussex kids whilst his mother is still reigning and hopefully will do so for a few more years yet. More like "how do we handle being down three members and HM passing more and more of the day to day work" with a "Way Ahead" look privately.

I think they'll leave the HRH issue because of the drama surrounding the false security and racism accusations and let that die down.

Agreed. I see nothing in the Telegraph article that would hint at titles being on the agenda for discussion.

 

[Osipi]

What was the Way Ahead group?

It could have been, no doubt. Charles has a heavy burden on his shoulders, but I know he’s up to he challenge, and I believe his father felt that way, also. I like that William has been involved all along, in last year’s Summit, and now this. He’s got to keep this family together, and he will - they all came up aces in response to COVID.

Here's a link to an article from the Express that pretty much explains the now defunct Way Ahead group from the 1990s.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ilip-prince-charles-diana-windsor-castle-fire

 

[Betsypaige]

Here's a link to an article from the Express that pretty much explains the now defunct Way Ahead group from the 1990s.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ilip-prince-charles-diana-windsor-castle-fire

Thanks ! I’m going to read this later!

 

[_Heather_]

What do you think they'd be discussing that he'd need to be informed of?

If the LPs are being altered to restrict the HRH in such a way that it will impact whether Archie and the new baby receive them then they’ll have to be informed. And frankly, I’d not be at all surprised if that decision is made and carried out sooner rather than later. In addition, I imagine there may be discussion of some sort of plan like we see in Sweden about those in the line of succession needing to be raised in the UK in order to remain in the line of succession. If the unthinkable were to happen and somehow Harry, Archie, and the new baby would find themselves much closer to the throne, it would not go down well with anyone for children raised in the US to suddenly be sitting on the throne. These are two issues that come to mind that could be discussed and Harry and Meghan informed. There may be others but I’ve no idea what they might be unless they involve their HRHs or Harry’s place in the line of succession.

 

[Betsypaige]

From Richard Kay:

Kay says in the article that the Summit and Charles/Harry walk to view floral tributes are “wide of the mark”. That could be true of the latter, but I do believe the former.

Before Charles tried to reunite his sons, he has to reconcile with Harry.

By sending his car away he was laying down his first act as the Royal Family's new paterfamilias. The others had to follow and did.

What it demonstrated was that, for all the military precision and formality of the funeral behind which bereavement could seek refuge, there was a willingness to show that the Windsors were as bereft as any family losing a loved one.

Clambering into cars to travel silently back to the castle might have preserved royal dignity, but going by foot allowed us to see them in all their vulnerability.

....

This week Charles has been concentrating on the wider family, speaking to them all and sharing memories of his father.

He has asked them all to pull together to help the Queen. Many watching on were shocked by the Queen's apparent frailty at the funeral but the prince knows that his mother will not slacken her pace.

Life for her revolves around Windsor Castle. All being well, next year will mark her platinum jubilee, 70 years on the throne, and it is already being planned.

For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life.

There was palpable tension at Windsor on Saturday.

Some reports yesterday said that neither his aunt Princess Anne nor his uncle Prince Edward acknowledged Harry before or during the service.

If there is to be a dividend from the sadness of Philip's death, Charles will fervently hope that it will come thanks to his decision to send away the cars and force his sons to start to bury their differences. An awful lot depends on it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...stroke-Charles-just-reunite-warring-sons.html

 

[Osipi]

In regards to this quote from Richard Kay, I think things will go differently. "For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life."

I don't see Harry ever being reintegrated into "royal life" in any way, shape or form connected to the monarchy or the "Firm" or anything to do with patronages and engagements and duties. He may reestablish familial ties with his father and his brother and some of the family but to the public eye, he'll be just another member of the monarch's "extended family". Maybe invited to Trooping and to the Christmas Lunch at Buckingham Palace and even Sandringham up until Charles passes.

Its possible that by the time William is king, Harry and his family will be regarded much in the same vein as King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother regarded the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. It's possible but then again, fences could be mended by then and they're on cordial terms.

Never though, in a million years, will the Sussexes be having any kind of a "royal life".

 

[Sionevar]

In addition, I imagine there may be discussion of some sort of plan like we see in Sweden about those in the line of succession needing to be raised in the UK in order to remain in the line of succession. If the unthinkable were to happen and somehow Harry, Archie, and the new baby would find themselves much closer to the throne, it would not go down well with anyone for children raised in the US to suddenly be sitting on the throne.

This would definitely be a good idea, IMHO. I'm actually surprised a condition like this hasn't been introduced already. Although, it was maybe a case of not doing anything until there was a need. With Harry and Meghan moving to the US, the need has now arrived.

 

[Betsypaige]

In regards to this quote from Richard Kay, I think things will go differently. "For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life."

I don't see Harry ever being reintegrated into "royal life" in any way, shape or form connected to the monarchy or the "Firm" or anything to do with patronages and engagements and duties. He may reestablish familial ties with his father and his brother and some of the family but to the public eye, he'll be just another member of the monarch's "extended family". Maybe invited to Trooping and to the Christmas Lunch at Buckingham Palace and even Sandringham up until Charles passes.

Its possible that by the time William is king, Harry and his family will be regarded much in the same vein as King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother regarded the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. It's possible but then again, fences could be mended by then and they're on cordial terms.

Never though, in a million years, will the Sussexes be having any kind of a "royal life".

I think Kay worded that poorly because I agree, and I don’t think Charles expects all that, either. I think he probably meant more integrated with the family - I mean, just because he lives in America doesn’t mean he can’t keep in touch regularly with his family

 

[Sunnystar]

I'm sure scenario one has been discussed no matter how unlikely it is. Especially when Charles got Covid.

I don't think any of the Cambridge kids children beyond George's children will be offered titles. And I rather suspect that they, Charlotte and Louis, will have rather limited roles.

Beatrice and Eugenie are private and are likely to remain so as will Louise. If anyone is going to step up it is going to be Edward and Sophie. I have no doubt that's why we've seen more of them during Covid. I REALLY think they're going to take over the Harry and Meghan role for the foreseeable future. Where the family goes when George et all are older remains to be seen. But I don't think they'll expect all the Chambridge children to be working royals their entire lives.

Of course you can't plan for every scenario but the royal family has been doing this for centuries so you can bet they've planned for a lot of them, including Charles and William dying prior to Elizabeth and George being crowned the next monarch or even George dying and Charlotte becoming Queen after her great-grandmother. It would be nuts but I bet someone, somewhere has planned for it just in case.

The meeting they're currently having, however is likely planning for the most likely scenarios which include Charles becoming the next king and Harry not ever being part of the working family again. It's also going to look ahead to what to do in regards to William's children so something like the current situation doesn't happen again. Perhaps if you raise the children to know they'll never be working royals they'll be better adjusted as Louise and James seem to be.

I suppose most of this discussion belongs in the "Future of the British Monarchy" thread and will be moved there eventually but with regard to Charlotte & Louis - in no way do I believe the plan is for them to be sidelined as working royals when they are adults. If that were the case then we would not be seeing them at some of the events they've been at - like walking the red carpet in December or the Attenborough video questions, and even, a couple years ago, the opening of the garden Kate helped design at the Chelsea flower show. They are clearly being groomed to be comfortable in the media spotlight and will, eventually, learn how to do walkabouts.

My guess is the plan from the "Way Ahead" group was to have the children of the monarch and direct heir as working royals but that children of the monarch's younger children (ie - the York, Wessex and Sussex kids) would not ever be earmarked for the royal working life regardless of whether or not they had HRH status. Spouses - hard to say, though I lean toward the spouses of the monarch's children were probably expected to be working royals - and this might very well change given that 60% of the married-ins who were working royals in the last two generations have flamed out spectacularly (Diana, Sarah & Meghan vs. Sophie & Kate, with Tim not being a working royal at all).

 

[Iluvbertie]

so who is briefing the press and the public about all this Monarchy restructuring.

/

There is an element of reasonable guesswork here based on what we were told happened after The Queen Mum and Princess Margaret died.

Andrew or Edward said that they all sat around the table and discussed who should take on each patronage.

With over 1000 to be reallocated it makes sense to discuss the entire issue - do we reallocate those and if so to whom? Do we restructure going forward?

In addition to those 1000+ patronages it is likely in the next few years that those of the Kent's will also have to be looked at.

I wouldn't even be surprised to hear that the Kent's 'retire' except for some very close patronages e.g. The Duke and his military and masonic connections.

Whether there is any 'source' of not I have no idea but it does make sense. There have been some upheavals in recent years and it is probably better to set up the approach for the next 20 - 30 years now rather than have things continue ad hoc or wait until The Queen dies and have to deal with it then.

 

[Claire]

To be honest I was under the impression such a body was already established and underway. There is a number of people that think that Charles will be a King by committee. This will in many ways determine who is in and who is out.

Personally I expect Charles to set up or have an advisory board in both church and government.
As someone here has mentioned I expect Charles to do what the Dutch monarchy did and pull all charities and patronages and start from scratch.
However first they need to do a few housecleaning.

1. Finances - I expect there will be some house moving. Charles were very adamant that they must not be seen to be aloft and greedy. I think there will be the selling off of some small estates and the move of some to government buildings. There will also be a committee set up into the royals investment and financial doings for scrutiny. I expect Windsor and BP to be opened to the public more often.
2. Working royals - how many and what are they doing? Princess Alexander and Duke of Kent's retirement ? Part time royals and how to deal with the Montecito royals . Personally I feel that will have Harry back within 3 years. I do not see a scenario where they bring on Beatrice and Eugenie and not have Harry ? Too much bile for Charles to swallow. So then it will be how to work with Harry and Meghan's requests/ demands. Although Sophie appears keen to take on more work, Edward appears very reluctant so Charles is going to have to mend some bridges.
3. Andrew - I expect that before July we will have word that he is talking to the FBI and that there is progress been made. It is an open wound and needs to be taken care of now.
4. Titles - They will need to agree on the formalizing of the agreements regarding the Wessex children and indeed all children not destined to be in direct line. So Beatrice and Eugenie, Kent, Gloucester might have their removed. Archie and Baby Sussex will never have theirs given. Louise and James' situation will just be ratified.

Does anyone see anything else ?

 

[Estel]

4. Titles - They will need to agree on the formalizing of the agreements regarding the Wessex children and indeed all children not destined to be in direct line. So Beatrice and Eugenie, Kent, Gloucester might have their removed. Archie and Baby Sussex will never have theirs given. Louise and James' situation will just be ratified.

Does anyone see anything else ?

I don't see any of this titles thing happening at all.

 

[Iluvbertie]

To be honest I was under the impression such a body was already established and underway. There is a number of people that think that Charles will be a King by committee. This will in many ways determine who is in and who is out.

The Way Ahead group was disbanded about 15 or so years ago.

Personally I expect Charles to set up or have an advisory board in both church and government.

There is an advisory board in the church - it is called the synod.

There is an advisory board in the government - it is called the cabinet.

As someone here has mentioned I expect Charles to do what the Dutch monarchy did and pull all charities and patronages and start from scratch.

I agree - all will be told 'sorry you will no longer have a royal patron' while the many that are named for a royal e.g. The Prince's Trust will be disbanded.

However first they need to do a few housecleaning.

1. Finances - I expect there will be some house moving. Charles were very adamant that they must not be seen to be aloft and greedy. I think there will be the selling off of some small estates and the move of some to government buildings. There will also be a committee set up into the royals investment and financial doings for scrutiny. I expect Windsor and BP to be opened to the public more often.

How much more can they open Windsor - it is open most days of the year now - other than Christmas Day or days when there is a major royal ceremonial taking place.

Buckingham Palace - can only be opened more if it is no longer the home of the monarch or any other royals which would also mean the other 100 or so people who live there would also probably have to lose their homes.

Currently quite a few staff live in at BP. The palace is opened when the Queen is away for her summer holidays - and so are the rest of the family.

The rooms they open are ones that are used many times when family are in working mode not just the monarch.

They could turn BP into a museum and simply move everything elsewhere.

Charles has actually suggested that one way to stop the whinging from the public would be for the monarch to NOT sign over the income of the Crown Estate - which happens at the start of each new reign. He will do it when the time comes but he has suggested that in the past.

He wants a smaller working royal family but no reduction in the Sovereign Grant which funds the official work of the royal family - something doesn't add up.

2. Working royals - how many and what are they doing? Princess Alexander and Duke of Kent's retirement ? Part time royals and how to deal with the Montecito royals . Personally I feel that will have Harry back within 3 years. I do not see a scenario where they bring on Beatrice and Eugenie and not have Harry ? Too much bile for Charles to swallow. So then it will be how to work with Harry and Meghan's requests/ demands. Although Sophie appears keen to take on more work, Edward appears very reluctant so Charles is going to have to mend some bridges.

I can see the Kent's retiring due to health reasons but for no other reason. The Duke of Kent was asked about retirement some years ago and he replied he said he couldn't retire until The Queen did.

I don't see any more royals in William's generation other than himself and Catherine. Harry has made his bed, Beatrice and Eugenie were told a decade or so back they weren't going to be wanted or needed and so have built careers for themselves. If the York girls, who were raised to work for the royal family and have been HRHs since birth aren't wanted or needed then I doubt that Louise will take on a title she has never had to fill a need that others have been told isn't there. What a way to split the family.

Edward has been the third/fourth hardest working royal for the past decade or so and has done more this year than anyone other than William. He is far from reluctant. Once he gave up his job, in 2001 he has taken to royal duties competently. Charles doesn't need to build bridges with Edward.

The one Charles had always had an issue with is Andrew, even when he was the third/fourth hardest worker Charles preferred to hardly see him and once referred to his daughters as 'twits'. That is the bridge that has no hope of being repaired, sadly as Charles would do well to have the support of all his family, when the time comes.

3. Andrew - I expect that before July we will have word that he is talking to the FBI and that there is progress been made. It is an open wound and needs to be taken care of now.

Andrew will talk to the FBI when they get organised and send agents to the UK to interview him in the offices of his lawyers and under the UK's PACE rules. That is the standard approach when one law enforcement organisation wants to interview a witness in another country.

If the FBI want to arrest him they need to issue an arrest warrant and be able to prove that the crime is also a crime in the UK and if not - no extradition.

4. Titles - They will need to agree on the formalizing of the agreements regarding the Wessex children and indeed all children not destined to be in direct line. So Beatrice and Eugenie, Kent, Gloucester might have their removed. Archie and Baby Sussex will never have theirs given. Louise and James' situation will just be ratified.

This could be easily done without stripping anyone. George V's LPs didn't strip UK royals of their titles if they no longer met the new criteria.

Given the allegations about race and this issue it won't be able to be dealt with until the next generation unfortunately without stripping people who have been HRH for 85+ years i.e. the Duke of Kent. What a nasty way to repay a lifetime of service and of giving up personal ambitions for the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester and Princess Alexandra.

 

[UglyAmerican]

This would definitely be a good idea, IMHO. I'm actually surprised a condition like this hasn't been introduced already. Although, it was maybe a case of not doing anything until there was a need. With Harry and Meghan moving to the US, the need has now arrived.

I can see the need for it, but I'm not sure it's worth it. Would it apply to anyone besides H&M's and Lady Davina Windsor's children? Cutting out the only children with nonwhite parents would be terrible optics, for no practical benefits. I might agree with the rule in theory, but this isn't a good time to do it. Meghan managed to convince half the US that the family was racist against Archie just because it followed the rules that had been in place for more than a century - can you imagine if they'd really changed the rules just to cut him out?

If something awful happened and it became relevant, Harry himself would still have been raised in the UK, so I guess he'd still be king (if he wanted). If his children were grown by then, would they be cut out? What if he lived to be 100 and his children grew up in the US, but then moved to the UK when he was crowned and lived there for 50 years as adults before his death? Obviously none of this is going to happen, but I think a more nuanced rule would be better. Maybe something like "must have lived in the UK for the past X years." Even that would lead to a lot of bickering about what counts as "living" somewhere.

Personally I feel that will have Harry back within 3 years. I do not see a scenario where they bring on Beatrice and Eugenie and not have Harry ? Too much bile for Charles to swallow. So then it will be how to work with Harry and Meghan's requests/ demands.

Why do you think he'll be back in three years? The only scenario in which I can see Harry even wanting to come back is if he and Meghan split up. Even then, child custody issues would probably mean he'd have to remain in the US if he wanted to see his kids regularly.

 

[Betsypaige]

To be honest I was under the impression such a body was already established and underway. There is a number of people that think that Charles will be a King by committee. This will in many ways determine who is in and who is out.

Why would Charles be King by committee? I don't see that at all. His mother isn't Queen by committee, nor was her father or his father, etc....

Charles called his own nieces "twits"?

 

[Alison H]

Surely no-one's going to strip anyone of an existing title - any changes will only affect future generations.


I think the issue's more about the work. The Duke of Kent's 85, and Princess Alexandra's 84. I hope they have many more years of good health to come, but there's a limit to how much work you can realistically expect people in their mid-80s to do. When there was a shortage of working royals in the past, more distant relatives such as Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone, helped out, but that was in the days when upper-class women spent their time doing charity work anyway.


The problem's what to do if they want to reduce the number of patronages. "Our charity's had a royal patron since Queen Victoria's day and now we've been told we're being dropped," isn't going to make a very good headline.

 

[Denville]

I can see the need for it, but I'm not sure it's worth it. Would it apply to anyone besides H&M's and Lady Davina Windsor's children? Cutting out the only children with nonwhite parents would be terrible optics, for no practical benefits. I might agree with the rule in theory, but this isn't a good time to do it. Meghan managed to convince half the US that the family was racist against Archie just because it followed the rules that had been in place for more than a century - can you imagine if they'd really changed the rules just to cut him out?

I
Why do you think he'll be back in three years? The only scenario in which I can see Harry even wanting to come back is if he and Meghan split up. Even then, child custody issues would probably mean he'd have to remain in the US if he wanted to see his kids regularly.

I suppose it is possible. Depends on how much harry likes the US when life goes back to normal and how his marriage to Meghan goes. He mgiht begin to regret being on cool terms with his family. he might get fed up with their american lifestyle. Now he will have to work and I dont think that Harry knows what it is like to work for pay.. and it may be difficult for him and put strains on their marriage. But I agree that if he did break up with Meghan he would probalby at least spend a lot of time in the US to keep close to his children...and even if he did come back to royal duties here it might be with the proviso that he also had several months of bieng in the US.

 

[Claire]

I expect that Harry and Meghan will be back for family events - jubilees, Trooping, Christmas and Easter as soon as covid allows. I expect that they will be at Garden Parties next, commonwealth and other thanks giving's and then after about 3 years - appearing at some engagements for the royals.
It is just if they allow Beatrice and Eugenie to be half royals - many people will shout to the hills. It seems a better option to find a working solution with H&M about how they can be half royals in the structure.
Of course they can simply say no half royals - only working with full time royals.