Prince William's Suitability to be King

[shady lady]

I think people are questioning when they will do more, including some foreign official travel, now that Catherine is clearly fit enough to travel abroad ( including long haul to Mustique) and even ski, which requires a degree of physical fitness. This has reignited the question of the suitability of both of them to sit on the throne, not just William. Many people are perceiving a reluctance to do royal duties, myself included.

Are they? Has it? I haven't noticed anything myself

 

[sophie25]

Are they? Has it? I haven't noticed anything myself

Yes, there are a lot of social media sites where people are questioning their work ethic, including this one.

 

[shady lady]

Yes, there are a lot of social media sites where people are questioning their work ethic.

Well, I wouldn't take that too seriously. They're probably just people who don't like The Prince and Princess of Wales for reasons which have nothing to do with their "suitability" and are looking for an opportunity to have a go at them.

 

[Hallo girl]

Yes, there are a lot of social media sites where people are questioning their work ethic, including this one.

Are these the same SM sites that had plenty to say when Catherine was ill.

 

[sophie25]

Well, I wouldn't take that too seriously. They're probably just people who don't like The Prince and Princess of Wales for reasons which have nothing to do with their "suitability" and are looking for an opportunity to have a go at them.

Well it is up for debate, personally I have nothing against them but I think they could do more, especially since they are clearly fit enough to do the unofficial activities they are doing.

 

[TLLK]

I’m curious…what triggered this new round of speculation about HRH The Prince of Wales’s suitability? I don’t mean in this thread, as it’s dedicated to the topic, but in general. Of course, internet’s gonna internet, but it seems more persistent than usual? Is is being talked about in traditional press? Has there been complaints from a significant amount of the British people? Is it because of the third holiday? How is different than any other year for him?

I believe it's because the Wales' children have been on their spring break and apart from the paparazzi photos and football match, there's been little to discuss about them.

 

[Ghost]

There’s one more point in all this discussion which goes wayward from suitability to the eternal “number of engagements”.
How much are they asked to do? Before January last year, this recent visit to Italy was tentatively discussed to be made by the Waleses. Even before Italy there were discussions about a visit to Australia (maybe also New Zealand) and there was the argument that first these countries have to be visited by the new monarch and only afterwards by the heir.

We know that these visits are made at the request of the governments - the one of the visited country and the British one.

So I think that for foreign visits to talk about reluctance is too narrow.

 

[tommy100]

Yes, where there is an absence of duties to fill the appetite it leads to discussions about them not doing much, which leads to discussions about suitability. If William is going to do things a different way and do less out and about public engagements he, and his staff, need to be prepared for this discussion to come up time and time again. Why? Because basically since WW2 the UK has been use to having a sovereign who goes out and doe a lot of public duties. I'm not saying its right or wrong for William to not do that -just that it leads some to thing he isn't doing much or working hard which in turn leads to these sort of discussions.

 

[Luc122]

Prince William is still learning, and King Charles himself had more than 30 years to prepare for the role. Granted it seems the Prince is more reluctant to share certain events with the public, media training is an art that he is still learning. I do believe that as King Charles ages, Prince William will in turn step into more of those duties but there is really no timeline.

Prince William Hid Kate Middleton Cancer Diagnosis

 

[duke of poliganc]

The Waleses' current popularity stems more from their image as a young couple with adorable kids and Catherine's fashion sense, rather than meaningful work. While Diana faced similar scrutiny over her fashion choices, she leveraged that attention to bring awareness to important causes like HIV and landmines.

Focusing on family life is admirable, but it's unlikely to sustain long-term popularity. People typically don't favor royals solely for being good parents. Celebrity-style fame isn't sustainable; Prince Andrew's popularity, for instance, waned as his reputation shifted from war hero to "Flying Andy" due to perceptions of laziness.

If the Waleses' idea of modern royalty is working behind the scenes on select issues, it could fuel arguments for abolishing the monarchy. With billionaires already donating to philanthropic causes, people might question why they need to subsidize royals for similar work. Why pay for palace maintenance, security, and expenses for "celebrities" when others, like Elton John, raise awareness for HIV for free?

 

[Muhler]

Some would probably think that 300 engagements a year, in whatever form is sufficient while others think it's too little. It's my impression that this is a discussion that goes around in circles and will continue to do so.
QEII and by extension the rest of the BRF did it her way throughout her reign, with Diana, at times doing things her way. (Which we can discuss endlessly was good or bad, but she did things slightly differently.)
It's my impression that King Charles, by and large, continue doing things in the same way as his mother. Can't really blame him, it's pretty much what he has been doing all his adult life and overall the British seem satisfied with that approach.
However the world is changing.


What I question is: Is King Charles relevant/appealing to the under 35 year olds? It's not my impression that King Charles use the media platforms or in any particular way address the youngest segments of the population. And they are after all the future.
Okay, it's fair enough that King Charles doesn't appeal much to the youngest segments of the population, given his age, his habits, his other obligations to the rest of the population and him probably being unused to using other platforms to reach the younger age groups.

But if King Charles cannot or does not appeal that much to the younger segments, someone else must. And given the lack of working royals within the BRF, that predominantly means W&K and their children when they are old enough.
But we must expect W&K to take over more and more and to an ever more dominant role within the BRF in regards to the public and that will happen within the next ten years.
Because W&K will be the king and queen for the under 35. They will grow old with W&K and the youngest will grow up under W&K.

So if you were an advisor to W&K, how would you advise them?
How should they approach their role within the BRF in order to stay relevant for the upcoming generations?
What should they do differently, if anything?
Should they focus on quality over quantity? Because it can be difficult to do both. Especially if they are - what do you call it? - home-people.
Are there any causes they could put focus on?

And finally a little pet-thing of mine: Get that royal yacht build. The BRF can do a cruise of the British isles lasting weeks, and bring their home with them. With UK being an island kingdom they can cover pretty much anywhere coming in by sea. - As well as being useful abroad.

 

[hereditarytitles]

Some would probably think that 300 engagements a year, in whatever form is sufficient while others think it's too little. It's my impression that this is a discussion that goes around in circles and will continue to do so.
QEII and by extension the rest of the BRF did it her way throughout her reign, with Diana, at times doing things her way. (Which we can discuss endlessly was good or bad, but she did things slightly differently.)
It's my impression that King Charles, by and large, continue doing things in the same way as his mother. Can't really blame him, it's pretty much what he has been doing all his adult life and overall the British seem satisfied with that approach.
However the world is changing.


What I question is: Is King Charles relevant/appealing to the under 35 year olds? It's not my impression that King Charles use the media platforms or in any particular way address the youngest segments of the population. And they are after all the future.
Okay, it's fair enough that King Charles doesn't appeal much to the youngest segments of the population, given his age, his habits, his other obligations to the rest of the population and him probably being unused to using other platforms to reach the younger age groups.

But if King Charles cannot or does not appeal that much to the younger segments, someone else must. And given the lack of working royals within the BRF, that predominantly means W&K and their children when they are old enough.
But we must expect W&K to take over more and more and to an ever more dominant role within the BRF in regards to the public and that will happen within the next ten years.
Because W&K will be the king and queen for the under 35. They will grow old with W&K and the youngest will grow up under W&K.

So if you were an advisor to W&K, how would you advise them?
How should they approach their role within the BRF in order to stay relevant for the upcoming generations?
What should they do differently, if anything?
Should they focus on quality over quantity? Because it can be difficult to do both. Especially if they are - what do you call it? - home-people.
Are there any causes they could put focus on?

And finally a little pet-thing of mine: Get that royal yacht build. The BRF can do a cruise of the British isles lasting weeks, and bring their home with them. With UK being an island kingdom they can cover pretty much anywhere coming in by sea. - As well as being useful abroad.

I agree to most of your points, but I'm afraid that the royal yacht will not be built again. I remember how very sad the late Queen was, when the yacht, that beautiful ship, was put out of service. The reason as far as I remember was, too expensive and British taxpayers didn't want to pay for it.

British members will and should correct me, if my memories or impressions are wrong.

 

[shady lady]

The Waleses' current popularity stems more from their image as a young couple with adorable kids and Catherine's fashion sense, rather than meaningful work. While Diana faced similar scrutiny over her fashion choices, she leveraged that attention to bring awareness to important causes like HIV and landmines.

Focusing on family life is admirable, but it's unlikely to sustain long-term popularity. People typically don't favor royals solely for being good parents. Celebrity-style fame isn't sustainable; Prince Andrew's popularity, for instance, waned as his reputation shifted from war hero to "Flying Andy" due to perceptions of laziness.

If the Waleses' idea of modern royalty is working behind the scenes on select issues, it could fuel arguments for abolishing the monarchy. With billionaires already donating to philanthropic causes, people might question why they need to subsidize royals for similar work. Why pay for palace maintenance, security, and expenses for "celebrities" when others, like Elton John, raise awareness for HIV for free?

With respect, I completely disagree, especially with the highlighted comment above. There is far more to the Prince and Princess than that. I think it's a question of what people choose (or choose not) to see.

Here's a good example of what could be described as "meaningful work":

Their Royal Highnesses The Prince and Princess of Wales visit Southport. - Merseyside Lieutenancy

Their Royal Highnesses visited Southport recently to meet with the bereaved families of the three little girls killed in the incident in July. This meeting was naturally in private. Their Royal Highnesses also met with the Yoga Teacher injured in the incident and some of the emergency responders...

www.merseysidelieutenancy.org.uk

Try telling those parents that with the Wales it's all about image and fashion sense, rather than "meaningful work".

 

[blooms_rulers]

With respect, I completely disagree, especially with the highlighted comment above. There is far more to the Prince and Princess than that. I think it's a question of what people choose (or choose not) to see.

Here's a good example of what could be described as "meaningful work":

Their Royal Highnesses The Prince and Princess of Wales visit Southport. - Merseyside Lieutenancy

Their Royal Highnesses visited Southport recently to meet with the bereaved families of the three little girls killed in the incident in July. This meeting was naturally in private. Their Royal Highnesses also met with the Yoga Teacher injured in the incident and some of the emergency responders...

www.merseysidelieutenancy.org.uk

Try telling those parents that with the Wales it's all about image and fashion sense.

Yeah, but how often do they do that? Queen Elizabeth once said "I have to be seen to be believed." William and Catherine are not seen. They aren't out there. And while that might make them great parents and a great couple, it doesn't necessarily make them great heirs or eventual sovereigns.

 

[duke of poliganc]

With respect, I completely disagree, especially with the highlighted comment above. There is far more to the Prince and Princess than that. I think it's a question of what people choose (or choose not) to see.

Here's a good example of what could be described as "meaningful work":

Their Royal Highnesses The Prince and Princess of Wales visit Southport. - Merseyside Lieutenancy

Their Royal Highnesses visited Southport recently to meet with the bereaved families of the three little girls killed in the incident in July. This meeting was naturally in private. Their Royal Highnesses also met with the Yoga Teacher injured in the incident and some of the emergency responders...

www.merseysidelieutenancy.org.uk

Try telling those parents that with the Wales it's all about image and fashion sense, rather than "meaningful work".

I don’t say that what you mentioned is wrong but for instance if you asked a young British under 30 who is not a royal watcher about their opinion of the William or Catherine would they be able to point out a cause that they can link to both of them?

 

[PrincessofEurope]

I think in the last decade, William has proven he is more than capable for the role of King. His support for key causes close to his heart is evident in the passion he shows for topics and his desire to bring about change.

Do I wish they (The Wales') did more away days to all parts of the country - Yes. But there has been a move away from this style of monarchy in the last number of years.

I think of areas of the UK that have never had a visit by William or Kate - the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man etc and I do believe this is poor. I read recently that is Anne that will visit the Channel Islands to mark the 80th anniversary of their liberation following WW2 and this I believe is a failure on the Wales' part not to step up and do these sorts of duties.

I also think that William needs to be seen on more overseas tours to Commonwealth countries.

Undoubted there are areas where William and Kate need to step up. But when the time comes for them to be King and Queen, I do see the country supporting them and that they will do a fantastic job.

 

[shady lady]

Yeah, but how often do they do that? Queen Elizabeth once said "I have to be seen to be believed." William and Catherine are not seen. They aren't out there. And while that might make them great parents and a great couple, it doesn't necessarily make them great heirs or eventual sovereigns.

Again, completely disagree. They are "out there" if people want to look, and are understanding enough to make allowances for both serious illness and raising a young family.

IMO being great parents and a great couple (as you describe it) is a pretty good sign for things to come; but people with an agenda will always find reasons to pick fault.

I don’t say that what you mentioned is wrong but for instance if you asked a young British under 30 who is not a royal watcher about their opinion of the William or Catherine would they be able to point out a cause that they can link to both of them?

I don't know. I haven't asked. Probably not if they're not royal watchers to start with, but perhaps they could. Or they might just think they're a great couple who will make a fantastic King and Queen, because they're kind, relatable, understand the meaning of the words loyalty, respect and duty, know how to behave appropriately and aren't complaining all the time.

No one has to "prove" why they like and admire them if they do, any more than I do.

 

[duke of poliganc]

I saw a interview with the princess royal when she was asked about how is she able to do that number of engagements in her 70’s and she gave a great explanation that living in the modern world is actually helping her do more as she is able to use modern transportation to go to another city doing 4-5 engagements there and be home by evening so it wouldn’t take more than 4-6 hours to visit more than one place and do more engagements!

 

[hereditarytitles]

I can only look at this from the outside, as I don't live in the UK. I don't think you can compare the commitment of the late Queen and that of her husband with today. Times, both politically and culturally, have completely changed everywhere. The royal successors have to adapt, and I think they have understood that. Besides, I don't think it's necessary these days to have every monument or plaque dedicated by a royal member. I remember that Prince Philip, whom I liked very much, often made fun of it. Nowadays, it is much more important that the royal offspring take care of real problems, make them public, because it can raise public awareness due to their prominence.
Perhaps William and Kate are not as diligent as other European royals. But you also have to remember that Kate's cancer has taken its toll on the young family. And it doesn't look like she's fully recovered yet. Kate did an incredible amount before she became ill, perhaps more than William. But that's just my impression, which is of course limited.

 

[duke of poliganc]

There is 260 working days in a year if for a 100 of those days William and Catherine do between 3-4 engagements each that would be 300-400 engagements for each of them and that would still give them 250 days a year where they are focusing on their family!

 

[Rael]

Yeah, but how often do they do that? Queen Elizabeth once said "I have to be seen to be believed." William and Catherine are not seen. They aren't out there. And while that might make them great parents and a great couple, it doesn't necessarily make them great heirs or eventual sovereigns.

I beg to disagree. They are seen and are out there, just not in the way the other royals do and not in the way you want them to. They are seen in person, at train stations, at stadiums, at school games, at pubs, meeting well wishers on formal engagements etc, they are seen on TV at emotive sports events e.g. Wimbledon and Football games, at significant national events e.g. Holocaust remembrance day. Kate's annual carol service. Their videos are often broadcast on TV. Their projects are well-covered. If anything their public profile is higher than any other royal and it has nothing to do with fashion or young family. They are in their mid-forties.

I always go back to objective polls because they don't support some of the discussions that go on here though it's fine for people to air their opinions. Consistently, William and Catherine are the only two royals to have more than 50% favorability with all age categories. They are the only ones that have more than 50% favorability with ages 18 - 24. I don't believe the 65+ category like them because of Catherine's fashion. They have high favorability across all political leanings and income bracket. That consistency across demographics suggest something a bit more durable and resilient. People keep trying to find flippant reasons for why the Waleses are popular aside from the most obvious durable reason - Brits value their approach to their duties and don't agree with royal watchers or the royal rota that number of engagements matter that much. Has nothing to do with glamour or fashion or youth.

William and Catherine have survived Harry and Meghan's public attacks, the negative coverage of the Caribbean tour, the hulabaloo over his not going to Australia for the women's worldcup, the mother's day picture lunacy, the steady criticism of the royal rota over their engagement count etc. Yet, the polls stay stable. They remain the most liked royals. Catherine has not appeared at a glam event since late 2023. The polls remain stable. This tells me actually that they are respected by the public and their polling is based on strong foundations. That's why all these attacks and perceived missteps don't register. Their political capital with the public is strong and robust.

It's okay for people to air their opinions but they remain opinions of one or a group of people except we see objective evidence e.g. polls or a study that demonstrate that particular opinion is widespread. It's one thing to say this is what I think but it's another to say as a matter of fact that William and Catherine are not seen which is a categorical statement not backed by objective evidence. Happy to be corrected.

Something else on their being seen: Lord Ashcroft did a focused group study for Daily Mail before the coronation where 67% said the Monarchy needed to modernise. Change is never comfortable for people used to a certain way of doing things and I think royal watching forums like these are more likely to be sceptical of new approaches to royal duties which is fine and reasonable, but evidence so far does not support some of the categorical statements being made. William needs to modernise the monarchy and make it relevant to his generation. He needs to take a timeless principle - I need to be seen to be believed - and adapt it in the way that speaks to modern Britain and his generation. While Charles, other royals may be seen at organised engagements, sometimes, with children waving flags or the royal being taken round a factory, it's not the only way to be seen. While W&C do those engagements as well, often linked to a key theme or project e.g Earthshot. They are also 'seen' by joining the masses at a football stadium to watch a match and going through the rollercoaster of emotions. For the category of people that would never go to a garden party or read about an engagement (the unreached), William is reaching them. They will have their stories/memories of sitting a few feet from the future King at a significant game. There are many minority kids that will have the memory of playing a game with the future King or Queen or taking a selfie with them. There are people that will remember meeting them at their children's games or participating in Earthshot junior programmes or through Kate's children's programme at the RHS. There are youths that are meeting him through the Earthshot youth programme etc. There are many men that don't pay attention to royals that his 5 minute appearance punditing on TNT did more to win over than 500 engagements. He will shortly be appearing in an episode of Clarkson's Farm. He is going to where the unreached are and inserting himself in the issues they care about, whether football or homelessness, appearing where he is not expected, and often where flag waving is not expected. He is not putting all his eggs in the basket of the old style of doing engagements where he is the center of attention and the royal reporters curate how his engagements are presented, keep count and inform the public. He is charting his direct path to the public and experimenting with a different way of 'being seen to be believed' whether in person or using old and new media. It may or may not work in the long term but he is responding to the monarchy needing to evolve and modernise to survive and all objective evidence point to the fact it is working so far. In fact, that ability to take a risk, retain the timeless principles but seek to make it relevant to his generation speaks more to his suitability to be King than a risk averse approach of sticking to the old ways whether relevant or not to a changing Britain.

I don’t say that what you mentioned is wrong but for instance if you asked a young British under 30 who is not a royal watcher about their opinion of the William or Catherine would they be able to point out a cause that they can link to both of them?

Most young people will be able to tell you William or Catherine's causes more than they can tell you any causes of Anne or Sophie or Edward.

Most Brits (and non-Brits) know about Heads Together, SHOUT, Earthshot, Homewards, Hold Still, Early Years. They are synonymous with championing mental health for different categories, men, mothers, children and changing the conversation around these. Again, objective polling consistently ranks them only after the late Queen when the public are asked which royals have made the most impact on the nation. Occam's razor suggests the obvious reason is that the few issues they focus on and their approach is seen by the public as making an impact. With short attention spans, it's harder for people to remember any one of 400 engagements but consistent messaging around a few issues with 80 engagements, targeted at maximum exposure points, is more likely to be remembered. Quality/impact over quantity applies here.

There is also the emotive and representative element. A lot of people will value the Southport visit more than 15 engagements on random things because it's something they feel strongly about but can't do much about and there is something about the royals doing it on behalf of the public and giving comfort where politicians can't.

 

[Ghost]

Excellent, excellent post, Rael!

 

[shady lady]

Excellent, excellent post, Rael!

Hear hear!!!!

 

[Hallo girl]

I always go back to objective polls because they don't support some of the discussions that go on here though it's fine for people to air their opinions. Consistently, William and Catherine are the only two royals to have more than 50% favorability with all age categories. They are the only ones that have more than 50% favorability with ages 18 - 24. I don't believe the 65+ category like them because of Catherine's fashion. They have high favorability across all political leanings and income bracket. That consistency across demographics suggest something a bit more durable and resilient. People keep trying to find flippant reasons for why the Waleses are popular aside from the most obvious durable reason - Brits value their approach to their duties and don't agree with royal watchers or the royal rota that number of engagements matter that much. Has nothing to do with glamour or fashion or youth.

William and Catherine have survived Harry and Meghan's public attacks, the negative coverage of the Caribbean tour, the hulabaloo over his not going to Australia for the women's worldcup, the mother's day picture lunacy, the steady criticism of the royal rota over their engagement count etc. Yet, the polls stay stable. They remain the most liked royals. Catherine has not appeared at a glam event since late 2023. The polls remain stable. This tells me actually that they are respected by the public and their polling is based on strong foundations. That's why all these attacks and perceived missteps don't register. Their political capital with the public is strong and robust.

It's okay for people to air their opinions but they remain opinions of one or a group of people except we see objective evidence e.g. polls or a study that demonstrate that particular opinion is widespread. It's one thing to say this is what I think but it's another to say as a matter of fact that William and Catherine are not seen which is a categorical statement not backed by objective evidence. Happy to be corrected.

Something else on their being seen: Lord Ashcroft did a focused group study for Daily Mail before the coronation where 67% said the Monarchy needed to modernise. Change is never comfortable for people used to a certain way of doing things and I think royal watching forums like these are more likely to be sceptical of new approaches to royal duties which is fine and reasonable, but evidence so far does not support some of the categorical statements being made. William needs to modernise the monarchy and make it relevant to his generation. He needs to take a timeless principle - I need to be seen to be believed - and adapt it in the way that speaks to modern Britain and his generation. While Charles, other royals may be seen at organised engagements, sometimes, with children waving flags or the royal being taken round a factory, it's not the only way to be seen. While W&C do those engagements as well, often linked to a key theme or project e.g Earthshot. They are also 'seen' by joining the masses at a football stadium to watch a match and going through the rollercoaster of emotions. For the category of people that would never go to a garden party or read about an engagement (the unreached), William is reaching them. They will have their stories/memories of sitting a few feet from the future King at a significant game. There are many minority kids that will have the memory of playing a game with the future King or Queen or taking a selfie with them. There are people that will remember meeting them at their children's games or participating in Earthshot junior programmes or through Kate's children's programme at the RHS. There are youths that are meeting him through the Earthshot youth programme etc. There are many men that don't pay attention to royals that his 5 minute appearance punditing on TNT did more to win over than 500 engagements. He will shortly be appearing in an episode of Clarkson's Farm. He is going to where the unreached are and inserting himself in the issues they care about, whether football or homelessness, appearing where he is not expected, and often where flag waving is not expected. He is not putting all his eggs in the basket of the old style of doing engagements where he is the center of attention and the royal reporters curate how his engagements are presented, keep count and inform the public. He is charting his direct path to the public and experimenting with a different way of 'being seen to be believed' whether in person or using old and new media. It may or may not work in the long term but he is responding to the monarchy needing to evolve and modernise to survive and all objective evidence point to the fact it is working so far. In fact, that ability to take a risk, retain the timeless principles but seek to make it relevant to his generation speaks more to his suitability to be King than a risk averse approach of sticking to the old ways whether relevant or not to a changing Britain.



Most young people will be able to tell you William or Catherine's causes more than they can tell you any causes of Anne or Sophie or Edward.

Most Brits (and non-Brits) know about Heads Together, SHOUT, Earthshot, Homewards, Hold Still, Early Years. They are synonymous with championing mental health for different categories, men, mothers, children and changing the conversation around these. Again, objective polling consistently ranks them only after the late Queen when the public are asked which royals have made the most impact on the nation. Occam's razor suggests the obvious reason is that the few issues they focus on and their approach is seen by the public as making an impact. With short attention spans, it's harder for people to remember any one of 400 engagements but consistent messaging around a few issues with 80 engagements, targeted at maximum exposure points, is more likely to be remembered. Quality/impact over quantity applies here.

There is also the emotive and representative element. A lot of people will value the Southport visit more than 15 engagements on random things because it's something they feel strongly about but can't do much about and there is something about the royals doing it on behalf of the public and giving comfort where politicians can't.

Excellent post

 

[Curryong]

Actually YouGov polls, including the one for the first quarter of this year, are far more nuanced than is generally thought with regard to how the British public feels about various members of the royal family and about the monarchy as a whole.

For instance the feelings of Britons aged 18-24 towards William and Kate are in contrast to how those people 60 plus and older feel about them. Similarly, there is are a sharp contrast in how Labour voters in Britain see the monarchy as a whole to how Conservative voters feel. And those views will almost certainly hold strong in coming decades when William is King.

Will a man and woman in their fifties be able to hold on to the allegiance of under 30 year olds in another ten years, especially if the number of engagements that King and Queen choose to undertake slips down to 100 or so each annually so they are barely seen for weeks at a time at certain times of the year?

And I would suggest that 18 year olds in 2025 living in some parts of the UK don’t particularly identify with William or Kate, or their projects today, let alone in ten or twenty years time. And certainly there has been a great deal of sympathy for Kate (as there has been for the King) in the past year. Will that hold for the next ten years among Gen Zs and those in their teens now? I’m not so sure.

And those will be the generations that will be there in growing numbers in another twenty to thirty years during William’s reign, not people who are now in their sixties and seventies.

 

[Alisa]

William has the potential to make a fantastic sovereign.
I think mental health- suicide prevention..etc especially in males is a strong area that he could do well to focus more on. I recall 2 years ago when he "popped up" and joined the walk of a mother whose teen daughter committed suicide. He shined and was amazing!

However, William has always appeared to be work-shy. Regrettably he hasn't inherited his late grandmother's, father's, or aunt's work ethic. So far he has not shown that he has the stamina for the demands his role as Sovereign will require.

..... But you also have to remember that Kate's cancer has taken its toll on the young family. And it doesn't look like she's fully recovered yet. Kate did an incredible amount before she became ill, perhaps more than William. But that's just my impression, which is of course limited.

On the contrary it does look like Catherine has very much recovered. Jetting off to Mustique and the French Alps and actually skiing (a physically intense activity) bears evidence of that. If the Princess is healthy enough to do that surely she can carry out 1-3 royal engagements per week.

 

[Durham]

To be fair we don't know what her health is. We can only speculate & that strikes me as unwise considering what happened last time.

 

[Alisa]

To be fair we don't know what her health is. We can only speculate & that strikes me as unwise considering what happened last time.

We know to an extent. If she is deemed healthy enough to travel long distances and healthy enough to engage in rigorous exercise...She is certainly healthy enough to carry out a few local engagements a week.

 

[duke of poliganc]

I guess the biggest missed opportunity was that the king kept the prince’s trust and changed it to the king’s trust, just handing it over to next prince of wales would have gave a significant role for every heir to learn and prepare for his future role!

 

[TLLK]

I guess the biggest missed opportunity was that the king kept the prince’s trust and changed it to the king’s trust, just handing it over to next prince of wales would have gave a significant role for every heir to learn and prepare for his future role!

However, the current Prince of Wales has had the Royal Foundation since 2009 to assist him in learning and preparing for his future role.