Royal Gossip
August 17, 2017, 06:59:07 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Transition to Charles' Reign II  (Read 18800 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13946



« Reply #360 on: August 06, 2017, 10:14:33 pm »

But she has to deal with gov issues and many many other things. She may remain sharp but at 95 I am sure she will want to relax and you just don't have the same vitality. Though I do not think she will abdicate or be incapacitated. I think Charles will assume the day to day activities. And she will do the rest. But if one day she cannot even do that they will have to declare Charles regent.
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
danifaul
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1194


Sorry for the spelling errors..


« Reply #361 on: August 06, 2017, 11:05:56 pm »

Quote
The shake-up is also seen as a response to the increasingly chaotic rivalry between the separate households – Kensington Palace, run by the young royals, Clarence House, home to Charles and Buckingham Palace itself. Consultation and co-ordination are felt to be in short supply.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4764356/Palace-shake-turned-royal-shambles.html

finally   thumbsup
Sometimes there seem to be three monarchies..... nervous  imagine when the queen dies.

About new KP team members:
-Catherine Quinn
I liked the change for Kate, let's see Harry.
Logged

Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35928


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #362 on: August 06, 2017, 11:15:41 pm »

I'm horrified at how fractured the BRF is; Charles is organized and has a full agenda, but WKH seem determined to engage in power plays and refuse to get into a simple royal routine. I do believe that Philip is retired because he can't cope anymore with the nonstop chaos.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6524


« Reply #363 on: August 06, 2017, 11:56:39 pm »

But she has to deal with gov issues and many many other things. She may remain sharp but at 95 I am sure she will want to relax and you just don't have the same vitality. Though I do not think she will abdicate or be incapacitated. I think Charles will assume the day to day activities. And she will do the rest. But if one day she cannot even do that they will have to declare Charles regent.

She always has had advisors. But I think she will just make Charles regent  if it comes to her stepping down and still keep the title of Queen until she passes on. At this stage, Charles is no spring chicken so I hope William, Kate and Harry do more work. If Charles becomes regent, the younger generation will obviously need to take up more duties to. I hope they step up to the plate.
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13946



« Reply #364 on: August 07, 2017, 12:15:59 am »

I'm talking more about gov matters than anything else. I am not sure how much work she does but I think a lot if she has to keep up with everything so that would be a better job for Charles. The problem is if he can do it without being regent or not.
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6524


« Reply #365 on: August 07, 2017, 12:23:53 am »

George IV got to be Prince Regent. Since the QUeen expressed a wish not to abdicate, I think it feasible for Charles to become PRince Regent.  I also do not think Charles would want the precedence of abdication because he might find himself pressured to step down when he does not feel ready.
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8611


Harryite #21


« Reply #366 on: August 07, 2017, 03:28:45 am »

Charles really messed up his own transition because he broke away from his parents and set up his own court. He laid down the idea that it's ok to establish your own court and to set your own adgenda away from the queen, so now that he has to right the ship of Wills doing the same and making a mess of it which in turn messes up his idea of a slimmed down monarchy. Wills dragging the Midds in and Harry getting into one mess after the other after he proves that he does very well when he's focused and passionate about something like Invictus Games, Charles can't rely on them to have his back and carry on. As I've said ad nauseum, what's going on now regarding getting rid of "yes" people and inexperienced staff around Wills and Harry is way too late because the public's had enough and both Wiils and Harry have are way too old to be playing games and messing with the people's goodwill towards them by using Diana's death and any other excuse they could come up with. Ok, so it's not far fetched to believe that this Harry/Mehgan rubbish is a diversion so Charles can put out more important fires like what Wills has gotten into with the Midds (see members only section) and the mere cheapening of the royal family regarding Prince Andrew and his nasty under age prostitute scandals and the shifty business people he seems to keep company with, but when is it going to end? Will it be worth the trouble in the end or are we seeing the end of the Windsors?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2017, 03:36:51 am by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35928


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #367 on: August 07, 2017, 03:44:01 am »

With Charles, I understand his own office and staff, but thing is, he has had no business building his own faction and his own son has been his karma. William should have been taken under HM's wing and orders and same with Harry; neither have proven their ability to run their lives responsibly.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2185



« Reply #368 on: August 07, 2017, 06:18:58 am »

Separate courts is normal between the monarch and the heir. It is why they have separate duchies to fund them as well. The last time there was a situation with an adult heir though George V was very much part of his father's court and remained that way because he was largely dependent on his father for money while William and Harry aren't. They are independently wealthy thanks to their inheritance from Diana.

The main reason the Queen didn't set up a separate court was that she didn't have access to a separate fund as she wasn't entitled to the income of the Duchy of Cornwall as she was only ever the heiress presumptive and thus not the eldest son of the monarch who is also the heir apparent. (Victoria and George III faced the same issues regarding income for the same reason - weren't entitled to the income of the Duchy of Cornwall as they didn't met the dual requirements of eldest living son and heir apparent - this issue will need addressing if George's first born child is a girl but until then they can let is stay as is).
Logged
Tatiana
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


I come from a long line of Monarchists.


« Reply #369 on: August 11, 2017, 06:33:28 am »

  The Queen will never allow Charles to be Regent, she makes a vow and she keeps it.  The only way he can be Regent is if she "off her head", and there is no sign of that .   George I and George II had separate courts , as did Prince Frederick.. pretty standard stuff in the RF.
Logged

CathyJane
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4265


« Reply #370 on: August 12, 2017, 03:46:57 am »

I'm going from memory so it's possible I'm wrong, but didn't the last two Kings start life as the younger brother? So maybe, history will repeat itself and Harry will be the next King.  dontknow dontknow
Logged
leogirl
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3195


« Reply #371 on: August 12, 2017, 05:40:24 am »

That only worked in the past because the older brother didn't have any kids. Or the kids he had were by a mistress and the legitimate kids didn't survive. Harry is fifth in line to the throne and the two people immediately ahead of him are 30 years younger than he is.
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2185



« Reply #372 on: August 12, 2017, 07:20:10 am »

George V became King because his older brother died before he married or had children. Albert Victor was only ever 2nd in line to the throne and never the heir himself - in William's position but never in Charles.

George VI became King when his older brother abdicated.

The last time someone closer to the throne than Harry had a child and the brother still succeeded was George IV being succeeded by his younger brother William but that was because he was in a loveless marriage, with one child who herself died in childbirth with her child.

The only way Harry becomes King is if William, George and Charlotte are killed. Given how close Harry is to his older brother surely no one would want him to lose basically his entire family just so he could become King?
Logged
HRHOlya
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506



« Reply #373 on: August 12, 2017, 11:15:11 pm »

Charles the Prince Regent? Amid major palace shake-up, is the Queen preparing to abdicate and make Charles the king in all but name?

    Queen Elizabeth has vowed that abdicate is something she will never do
    Yet with Queen now aged 92, and Duke of Edinburgh choosing to retire last month, plans are afoot which, would see Charles appointed King in all but name
    Palace sources have indicated that Queen has told inner circle that, if she is still on the throne at 95, she will ask for the Regency Act to come into force


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4785166/Is-Queen-preparing-abdicate.html
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2185



« Reply #374 on: August 12, 2017, 11:24:16 pm »

  The Queen will never allow Charles to be Regent, she makes a vow and she keeps it.  The only way he can be Regent is if she "off her head", and there is no sign of that .   George I and George II had separate courts , as did Prince Frederick.. pretty standard stuff in the RF.

I am not so sure that she won't hand over to Charles and have him officially appointed as Prince Regent while she remains HM The Queen. She won't be breaking her vow in doing that - she may even be really keeping it. Afterall it was 'to serve' all the days of her life - not necessarily to 'reign'. She may feel that the best way for her 'to serve' her people is to have Charles serve as Regent while she is there to show her support for her eldest son. She won't abdicate I agree on that but asking the relevant parliaments to pass the necessary legislation to created him Prince Regent is possible.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6524


« Reply #375 on: August 13, 2017, 01:29:00 am »

These "shadow king" stories have been going on for years now. Charles apparently is getting anxious. It is quite ghoulish.
Logged
FrederickLouis
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455



« Reply #376 on: August 13, 2017, 02:42:40 am »

Would Charles have a lot of paperwork to fill out stating that he would agree to be the Prince Regent?
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2185



« Reply #377 on: August 13, 2017, 03:19:04 am »

No. The law is clear - IF the Queen is incapacitated and the relevant three people tell the parliament that then he is automatically Regent.

If the situation arises where the Queen asks parliament to appoint him the same thing would apply - it would be automatic once the parliament agreed and no paperwork would be required to be signed by Charles. If it is via a request by HM then she would sign the legislation.

The precedence for this would be Edward VIII - the last thing he did as King was sign the Abdication Legislation making it into law. George VI did nothing more than be the next in line (of course this was a change of monarch but the principle is the same.)

Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6524


« Reply #378 on: August 13, 2017, 08:05:04 am »

Thankfully, the Queen is OK now.
Logged
HRHOlya
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506



« Reply #379 on: August 13, 2017, 05:57:42 pm »

According to what's written it's not about Liz being ok, but about her age. Seems like she does want to retire, at 95 apparently. I have no reason to not believe this and think it's very true and it's a way to prep the public for Charles's takeover, even if Liz is still with us and as fit as a fiddle. I also think that the plan makes tonnes of sense, she's in her 90s and anyone that old deserves to retire and have a quieter life, and apart from that visible markers have been set in motion - a turnover of staff, new plans, Phil's retirement, and articles prepping the public for the change ahead. Philip announced his retiremet at 95 and just turnt 96 when he retired, so that seems to be Liz's & Phil's magic number for when they say "enough is enough". The issue is also that no head of state (& spouse) ever became this old, so they are dealing with sth that is unprecedented, but seem to have worked out a way for themselves.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!