Princess Eugenie, Jack Brooksbank and Family, Current Events 2: Sep 2022-


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
A lot of famous people act as patrons/ambassadors for charities.

Obviously that is true. And that is what essentially non working members of the BRF are doing. They are doing it as themselves on behalf of the charity not as representatives of the UK. Good for them.

However it does become confusing when theoretically "personal" endeavours of the Working Royals such as Early Years for Kate are folded in with the Royal Foundation and thus become "official". What makes that more official than Meghan's work for example with Smart Works or Luminary Bakery which were deemed "personal" and thus she was able to keep them even though they were in the CC IIRC? I'm genuinely curious about how they made these distinctions for some working royals beyond the obvious military and ones with National/Royal in the title. I have absolutely no objection to her or Beatrice taking on Patronages at all. Just an interesting discussion.

Does Anne have any "personal" patronages the way Meghan for example did? This is not to make it about Meghan at all but the fine line.

Apart from not representing the King the obvious difference is Eugenie isn't receiving any expenses from the Sovereign Grant or the monarch personally for carrying out this visit.
 
Last edited:
Obviously that is true. And that is what essentially non working members of the BRF are doing. They are doing it as themselves on behalf of the charity not as representatives of the UK. Good for them.

However it does become confusing when theoretically "personal" endeavours of the Working Royals such as Early Years for Kate are folded in with the Royal Foundation and thus become "official". What makes that more official than Meghan's work for example with Smart Works or Luminary Bakery which were deemed "personal" and thus she was able to keep them even though they were in the CC IIRC? I'm genuinely curious about how they made these distinctions for some working royals beyond the obvious military and ones with National/Royal in the title. I have absolutely no objection to her or Beatrice taking on Patronages at all. Just an interesting discussion.

Does Anne have any "personal" patronages the way Meghan for example did? This is not to make it about Meghan at all but the fine line.

Apart from not representing the King the obvious difference is Eugenie isn't receiving any expenses from the Sovereign Grant or the monarch personally for carrying out this visit.

Personally I think it’s all a ‘fudge.’ Eugenie may not be supported by the family BUT who pays for her home in Kensington or the the fact she also lived in Frogmore Cottage?

Presumably she takes time away from her paid job to do these things. Does she get compensation and how? Back pre Covid and when The Queen held many many functions in Buckingham Palace for people Eugenie often would be there supporting.

So this fudge fudge they have going on at the moment I don’t buy. Peter and Zara are proper non working for the firm. Beatrice and Eugenie has turned into a bit of a wink wink nudge nudge.

More Eug. Look. Y opinion is they need the help and they could do a lot worse.
 
So how is she not a working royal. I really struggle with these definitions. She visits and supports charities giving them much needed publicity and even goes around and promotes them.

That is what the royals do. Are they just trying to con us?

Working royals means royals who get funding for what they do.

They get security. They get money from the sovereign's fund to pay for their work. They have official royal calendar.

People like the York sisters do it all on their own. No funding. No support. No official recognition. Nothing. They do it as private citizens.

How is this a con?
 
The difference is - Eugenie's patronages are her own business and she is doing so as a person with enough fame and time to have an impact. The "working royals" do so on behalf of the crown and country. Beatrice and Eugenie have jobs and choose to support a few key causes close to them, just as Zara does (she is patron of Inspire, Lucy Air Ambulance, Sargent Cancer Care for children, Cancer Research UK and the Mark Davies Injured Riders Fund) or just as Lady Sarah Chatto does (she is Vice Patron of the Royal Ballet)

Only working members of the RF get their duties and work paid for, Eugenie and Beatrice have jobs that presumably pay them as well as trust funds from their parents and grandparents from private income. The late Queen may well have contributed something to them, a personal allowance or similar but if she did it will have come from the Duchy of Lancaster income(effectively the sovereign's salary and working expense account rolled into one) or her own more personal income. They do not get to claim expenses from the public funds for what they do. Simple as that. If they want to support a charity or attend a charitable event they o so knowing they have to be able to afford to do so out of their own pockets (which Im sure are deeper than yours or mine)

I think for a long time all working royals have been permitted a certain leeway in taking on some things more personal to them, but really how is that different from choosing what regiment to be honory colonel of or which royal institute or society one member of the RF should take on over another because they are more interested in it? As long as its doing public good / not for profit it is permitted, probably because it gives that working royal something interesting to look forward to amidst a large programme of less personally interesting things. The difference is most likely that if the government of the day or the sovereign felt a personal interest organisation taken on was inappropriate they would/could order the working royal to stop being linked to it but couldn't do so with Eugenie or Beatrice if it was personal (not saying the public or media pressure wouldn't make it untenable)

In other words, the working royals are public servants who do a whole host of duties and work with a whole range of charities of which a small handful may be more personally interesting to them, just as an ambassador or MP may be particularly interested in culture, science or fashion and build that into their official programme where it is supporting their country's interests. Members of the RF are private persons who can, just like you or me, choose to support any old charity or causes we want in our own time. When I do so I don't act as a representative of my employers or my family I do it as an individual, so are Beatrice and Eugenie.
 
Last edited:
Personally I think it’s all a ‘fudge.’ Eugenie may not be supported by the family BUT who pays for her home in Kensington or the the fact she also lived in Frogmore Cottage?

Whilst the private arrangements of the Yorks are not made public (and don't need to), Eugenie (or Andrew) probably pays a commercial rent for the home at KP and / or Frogmore Cottage.

Presumably she takes time away from her paid job to do these things. Does she get compensation and how?

That remains a private matter between Eugenie and her employers, it really is of no concern of any of us.

So this fudge fudge they have going on at the moment I don’t buy. Peter and Zara are proper non working for the firm. Beatrice and Eugenie has turned into a bit of a wink wink nudge nudge.

I'm afraid its just not true. B & E both have charitable endeavours that they both support, no different from what some of us do in our private lives.
 
Whilst the private arrangements of the Yorks are not made public (and don't need to), Eugenie (or Andrew) probably pays a commercial rent for the home at KP and / or Frogmore Cottage.



That remains a private matter between Eugenie and her employers, it really is of no concern of any of us.



I'm afraid its just not true. B & E both have charitable endeavours that they both support, no different from what some of us do in our private lives.

Oh yes of course. When I give a couple of quid to charity they put out the red carpet to welcome me to a school and the press come.

I mean it doesn't matter either way. Does it.
 
Oh yes of course. When I give a couple of quid to charity they put out the red carpet to welcome me to a school and the press come.

The press go where the York girls go, it has nothing to do with the charity. The charity will alwy benefit from the attention.
 
The press would also have rocked up if David Beckham or Ed Sheeran or Kate Winslet had visited the charity. That wouldn't make them working royals!
 
Sarah, Duchess of York has told Hola TV that the baby is due at the end of May - not sure what Eugenie and Jack think of her announcing it! - so it could be any day now.
 
Sarah, Duchess of York has told Hola TV that the baby is due at the end of May - not sure what Eugenie and Jack think of her announcing it! - so it could be any day now.

Of all the things that Sarah has done over the years, I am sure this is probably not the most embarrassing or annoying!
 
Eugenie can give birth at any moment
 
is there an announcement that she's in labour?
 
:previous:

No official one. A "source" mentioned it at Twitter last night. It is entirely possible though that the baby is on its way.
 
But Eugenie herself said on her Instagram account that she is due in summer - and this season starts on 22 June.
 
:previous:

And her mother said during an interview "But the baby is due by the end of May, I think. So it's any minute now" (see for example here)

In the end it doesn't matter: the main point is that it arrives sooner or later safely, healthy and happy ;)
 
I thought I read somewhere that Eugenie had a c section for August which was necessary due to the corrective surgery she had previously for her scoliosis. Perhaps she has had baby number 2 in the last few days and is waiting to be home and settled before announcing.
 
Yes I read that as well. If that was true (and it sounds likely) then Eugenie should have been booked into a hospital to have her c section rather than going into labour, one would think.
 
Yes I read that as well. If that was true (and it sounds likely) then Eugenie should have been booked into a hospital to have her c section rather than going into labour, one would think.

Sometimes Baby has other ideas! Some women do go into labor before their scheduled c-sections, and depending on the reason for that choice sometimes they have one, and sometimes they deliver naturally. It's up to the woman and her doctors.
 
Sometimes Baby has other ideas! Some women do go into labor before their scheduled c-sections, and depending on the reason for that choice sometimes they have one, and sometimes they deliver naturally. It's up to the woman and her doctors.

Yes. I’ve had three C-sections, the first an emergency after a 12 hour fruitless labour! I was booked in in good time for the last two and I hope Eugenie will be too.
No news so it seems Phil Dampier’s Tweet about Eugenie being in labour was a false tip anyway.
 
To mark their fifth wedding anniversary Eugenie shared a wonderful video with a lovely family photo at the end:


** instagram video **
 
The video is beautiful, you can see the sheer delight and happiness on their big day. Jack's face when he saw her on their wedding always sticks with me.

And of course the wonderful picture at the end of the family of four.:flowers:
 
Sorry, Eugenie has always struck me as being way to much like Fergie in courting the limelight.
 
I think it’s a lovely video and the Brooksbanks appear to be a lovely couple with a very sweet family.
 
Princess Eugenie and Julia de Boinville launched the second season of their Anti-Slavery Collective podcast Floodlight today:


** instagram video **
 
Back
Top Bottom