General News for Charles III and Queen Camilla, Part 1: September 2022-


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't seem to have an option for "search titles only". Where should I be looking? Sorry to be a bit dim!
 
In the upper left-hand corner of the search form (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/search.php), there is a box labeled "Search by keyword". At a bottom of that box, there is a drop-down menu with two options to choose from: "Search Entire Posts" and "Search Titles Only".

Please don't hesitate to ask if you should have any further questions - most users probably have missed it as well! :flowers:
 
Iluvbertie said:
Currently there aren't that many working royals:

The King and Queen Consort (73 and 75)
The Prince and Princess of Wales (both 40)
The Earl and Countess of Wessex (58 and 57)
The Princess Royal (72)
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester (78 and 76)
The Duke of Kent (87)
Princess Alexandra (85)

There is no need to 'cut' anyone'. Nature will do it for him over the next decade when in all likelihood those numbers will be reduced through illness or death.

There are now 11 and I can see that being reduced to 9 in a year or so ... as I expect the Kent's to retire shortly after the Coronation, if not before.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Gloucester didn't retire when they turn 80 as well so in 4 years I can see the number down to 7 by which time there will only be two working royals under 60.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is little reason to 'cut' as it will happen organically: the Duke of Kent previously specifically stated that he would go on (at least as long as) the queen was going on - as she was 10 years his senior. So, the Kent siblings are very likely to retire within the next year.

I expect the Gloucesters to continue undertaking some royal engagements for the time being as especially the Duchess seems fit for her age, so able to undertake the occasional engagement - that probably wouldn't be taken on by someone else otherwise.

And other than that it will be up to his wife, heir (and wife) and 2 of his siblings (and wife).
 
Thanks - I can see the search box now.

As the article says, there’s going to be an issue with charities and other organisations which have always had royal patrons, with there being so few working royals to go round.
 
Alison H said:
Thanks - I can see the search box now.

As the article says, there’s going to be an issue with charities and other organisations which have always had royal patrons, with there being so few working royals to go round.
Click to expand...

True but that's just the way the cookie crumbles. The public are not keen now on having a large number of royals doing duties, and using up money, and will accept that there are only going to be a small number of royals who are out there in public and being patrons of charities. Having a large pool of working royals has good points but also bad ones.. n that it means that there are bound to be some who feel frustrated at not being able to have a normal life and job, and who are tied to royal duties, but who have no hope of ever becoming the monarch and who will slide down the line of succession as time goes by... It also means that if a royal gets into some kind of mess or trouble, it is worse if he or she is one of hte working royals.
 
From the Royal Family's website:

Some of Her Majesty’s Patronages were well-known, such as Cancer Research UK and The British Red Cross Society, and many had Royal Charters, while others were smaller bodies working in a very specialist area or on a local basis such as Norwood, a Jewish charity which supports vulnerable children and their families, children with special educational needs and people with learning disabilities and autism.

In all, The Queen held Patronages with over 70 education and training organisations, over 60 sports and recreational organisations, over 30 faith organisations and over 40 arts and cultural organisations.

Her Majesty was Patron of a number of hospitals, including Great Ormond Street and the Royal Melbourne Hospital, and higher education institutions such as Glasgow Caledonian University and Birmingham University.

That's over 200 organisations. OK, in a lot of cases she didn't actually do very much other than lend her name, but, as the newspaper article said, royal patronage can make a big difference in fundraising etc.

From The Queen's Accession onwards, The Duke of Edinburgh played a leading role in many aspects of national life.

Over the course of his life, His Royal Highness was associated with 992 organisations, either as President, Patron, Honorary Member or in another capacity, with special interests in scientific and technological research and development, the welfare of young people, education, conservation, the environment and the encouragement of sport.

I assume he wasn't associated with all 992 at the time of his death!
 
UK Queen Consort Camilla slips into Bengaluru on wellness visit

BENGALURU: The United Kingdom’s Queen Consort*Camilla landed in Bengaluru on a private visit for her first overseas tour. She came by a British Airways flight Thursday, travelled by road for nearly 40 km from Kempegowda International Airport to*Soukya, a tony holistic health and wellness centre near Whitefield. She’ll be undergoing rejuvenation therapies during her nearly 10-day visit.

According to sources, 75-year-old Camilla, wife of King*Charles III, was accompanied by a few friends and escorted by members of Royalty and Specialist Protection, an elite force of Scotland Yard. Police sources said, “There were strict instructions not to publicise her trip as it’s a private visit. No public engagement programmes or interactions have been scheduled during her stay.”

(...)
Click to expand...
 
:previous: I see absolutely no privacy will be afforded Camilla and as a result, I believe this will be the last time she has the liberty nor the confidence to visit this particular place again. Actually, to be honest, I am surprised that the country and the retreat had not been identified until now by the media. Worse, it looks like the retreat itself couldn't resist the publicity.

Throughout her marriage, Camilla has visited "a retreat" for rest, for holistic care that invigorates her and keeps her in the good health and spirits we have come to expect as she more than adequately acquits herself as a hard-working royal and more importantly, supports her husband, our King.

She really is an amazing woman, at a time most professional women are winding down and the hardest thing comfortable country housewives are doing is spoiling their grandchildren (much to their children's chagrin). But here's Camilla, stepping out into the spotlight to support Charles as Prince of Wales and now King. That is some incredible spotlight burning on her, enough so that it eclipses all the other royals claiming harassment.

But here is our brand new Queen, taking a breather for the work ahead after the royal year from hell and she gets busted by the Spa! You know, sometimes life just sucks.
 
MARG said:
:previous: I see absolutely no privacy will be afforded Camilla and as a result, I believe this will be the last time she has the liberty nor the confidence to visit this particular place again. Actually, to be honest, I am surprised that the country and the retreat had not been identified until now by the media. Worse, it looks like the retreat itself couldn't resist the publicity.

Throughout her marriage, Camilla has visited "a retreat" for rest, for holistic care that invigorates her and keeps her in the good health and spirits we have come to expect as she more than adequately acquits herself as a hard-working royal and more importantly, supports her husband, our King.

She really is an amazing woman, at a time most professional women are winding down and the hardest thing comfortable country housewives are doing is spoiling their grandchildren (much to their children's chagrin). But here's Camilla, stepping out into the spotlight to support Charles as Prince of Wales and now King. That is some incredible spotlight burning on her, enough so that it eclipses all the other royals claiming harassment.

But here is our brand new Queen, taking a breather for the work ahead after the royal year from hell and she gets busted by the Spa! You know, sometimes life just sucks.
Click to expand...

I am not sure the information has been released by the resort. It could just be a member of staff, or she probably got photographed there when arriving. The resort has been discreet for many years, no reason for them to change their policy now.

Hope Camilla and her team have a good time.
 
I have seen some suggestions of tours to the Commonwealth realms next year and in 2024 with other Commonwealth countries to follow. The rest of the world will have to wait.

I have also heard maybe a visit to France and maybe to Washington as an added day or two after a full visit to Canada.

The realms and the Commonwealth will come first especially as Charles is King of some many countries (15 in all) and Head of the Commonwealth. That body is in the process of adding a few new countries (and their presidents have been visiting Charles in the UK this past week) so more than likely a visit to parts of Africa to formally welcome these countries to the Commonwealth will be ahead of visits to other countries although France has been muted for the first State Visit abroad but that still mightn't be for a few years.
 
Iluvbertie said:
I have seen some suggestions of tours to the Commonwealth realms next year and in 2024 with other Commonwealth countries to follow. The rest of the world will have to wait.

I have also heard maybe a visit to France and maybe to Washington as an added day or two after a full visit to Canada.

The realms and the Commonwealth will come first especially as Charles is King of some many countries (15 in all) and Head of the Commonwealth. That body is in the process of adding a few new countries (and their presidents have been visiting Charles in the UK this past week) so more than likely a visit to parts of Africa to formally welcome these countries to the Commonwealth will be ahead of visits to other countries although France has been muted for the first State Visit abroad but that still mightn't be for a few years.
Click to expand...

If King Charles visits the US after a full visit to Canada, will he visit as King of Canada rather than King of the UK? I believe his mother did that once when Eisenhower was President.
 
Last edited:
He could do as either but I suspect as King of the UK ... although it would be nice for him to visit sometimes as King of one of his other realms.

It would depend on who the US invited to visit - was it the King of the UK or the King of Canada?
 
Mbruno said:
If King Charles visits the US after a full visit to Canada, will he visit as King of Canada rather than King of the UK? I believe his mother did that once when Eisenhower was President.
Click to expand...

Yes she did. In 57 & 59. The second was a combined trip with the opening the St Lawrence Seaway.

It's entirely up to the Canadian Government. Their king, their choice.
 
Last edited:
Durham said:
Yes she did. In 57 & 59. The second was a combined trip with the opening the St Lawrence Seaway.

It's entirely up to the Canadian Government. Their king, their choice.
Click to expand...

It would be up to the US government - who would they be inviting - The King of the UK or The King of Canada.
 
Iluvbertie said:
It would be up to the US government - who would they be inviting - The King of the UK or The King of Canada.
Click to expand...

But surely the GG represents Canada abroad not the king. So the US would invite them not the king. If the Canadians want their king to represent them overseas then they would decide that. I'm not even sure it would be politically acceptable in this day & age. Anymore than it would be for Australia.
 
Durham said:
But surely the GG represents Canada abroad not the king. So the US would invite them not the king. If the Canadians want their king to represent them overseas then they would decide that. I'm not even sure it would be politically acceptable in this day & age. Anymore than it would be for Australia.
Click to expand...

The US government issues the invitation and that invitation would say who they wanted to come - the GG or The King of Canada.
 
Iluvbertie said:
The US government issues the invitation and that invitation would say who they wanted to come - the GG or The King of Canada.
Click to expand...

I can't foresee any scenario in which the US would invite the king of any of the realms other than the king of UK without first checking with the realm concerned. So in this case liasing with Ottawa. And only then issuing an invitation with the agreement of the Canadian Government.
 
Last edited:
As an Australian I don't think I would be too happy with Charles visiting lots of other countries before he visits Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc

In Australia we will have at some point in the not too distant future another vote for a Republic and the optics that we are less important than Europe or the US by 'our' King in terms of visits gives free ammunition to the Republican movement.
 
That's great news for the Royal Marines. Apart from Edward viii & Harry Sussex all Captain Generals have served with the RN. Indeed two saw active service in the navy.

A great honour indeed for the RM's to have The King himself as their Captain General.;)
 
Last edited:
I don’t know whether this is the correct thread at all for this (if I am sorry Mods) but a new poll is out regarding the public’s view of King Charles since his accession. The DM has an article on it, with somewhat misleading headlines.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ritons-say-opinion-Charles-improved-King.html


Public opinion has moved slightly on Charles, but it appears underwhelming to me for a new monarch. Maybe I’m missing something but Charles comes in approval ratings below Harry. And Camilla isn’t mentioned.
 
Is there a direct link for the poll rather than the DM? I've not come across this polling company & the rf before.

Be interested to see the questions & their methodology. Also whether they've done a poll like this before so comparisons over time can be made.

Yougov has been asking these sort of questions for a long time now so it will be interesting to compare their data when they publish a new poll.

Edit - I think the main takeaway from this poll is that roughly six in ten think HM will a good king. Considering the doom & gloom forecasts before the death of the late queen that figure's not too shabby. And for supporters of the constitutional monarchy who may well have apprehensive about the accession of the new king that's encouraging.
 
Last edited:
If you Google the company’s name various polls come up on the royals, British political parties etc, but I agree they are not names known to me. I haven’t been able to find the polling data for this. I wanted to see Queen Camilla’s approval rating, actually.
 
Curryong said:
If you Google the company’s name various polls come up on the royals, British political parties etc, but I agree they are not names known to me. I haven’t been able to find the polling data for this. I wanted to see Queen Camilla’s approval rating, actually.
Click to expand...

Thank you Curryong.:flowers:

Might have a dig around later! I think the truth is that HM will probably never attain the popularity levels of the late queen. We all know the historical reasons for that.

I think the important question is whether who the king is at the present time impacts the monarchy itself & so far I don't see any evidence that it does. Supporters of the monarchy can make a distinction between supporting the monarch & liking or not liking him personally.
 
Last edited:
Look it at this way it's the amount of people that don't have an opinion on him that's interesting part. I think a lot of people haven't made their minds up either way.
 
royalistbert said:
Look it at this way it's the amount of people that don't have an opinion on him that's interesting part. I think a lot of people haven't made their minds up either way.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's true. At least they're open to the possibility that HM will turn out to be just fine as the monarch & no one needs to worry.;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ista
General News for Charles III and Queen Camilla Part 2, February 2024-
2 3
Replies
60
Views
13K
winifred
W
Marengo
General News for the Wales Family 2: March 2024-
5 6 7
Replies
190
Views
30K
Blog Real
Blog Real
Marengo
Queen Camilla Jewels 2: February 2024 -
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
Catharina
Catharina
JessRulz
Charles III and Queen Camilla, Current Events Part 1: September 2022-
2 3 4
Replies
102
Views
16K
iceflower
iceflower
An Ard Ri
King Philippe, Queen Mathilde and Family, General News 3, Dec 2023 -
Replies
21
Views
3K
Adda
Adda

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom