Royal Gossip
June 20, 2018, 08:52:46 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

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

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 [22]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Transition to Charles' Reign II  (Read 30132 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8321


« Reply #420 on: October 01, 2017, 10:27:29 pm »

Charles can't step into the role of King while his mother is still alive. And The Queen appears to be healthy and is not sick or anything. Charles has taken on more of her duties but is not King or even playing at being one.

Even if Harry's future children can't participate, they would not be of age until say. 2040 just to give an estimate. By that time William may be King and reverse what Charles' wanted and lets Harry's children work. I think it premature to apply rules to the children working, they have years ahead of them before any royal work and they need to go to school and University first.
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14679



« Reply #421 on: October 01, 2017, 10:31:31 pm »

There is no need of official announcement we've seen actions that indicates that way. Edward kids use the lady/lord title instead of their official ones of prince/princess. They wanted the same for the Yorks. The Yorks also do not work for the firm as the Gloucester/Kent did in their era.

Then the balcony scene for the jubilee.

I don't know, for me it is quite obvious. I think it is rational if and only if Charles gives the same treatment to Harry's kids.

I don't get why fewer people should appear at the Trooping. I thought like any descendant from Victoria could appear and the king of Norway did appear many years.
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
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10023


Harryite #21


« Reply #422 on: October 01, 2017, 10:46:54 pm »

Alexandrine, he did by his actions during the queen's jubilee I believe, when he, Harry Wills Camilla and Waity were the only ones on the balcony of Buckingham Plalace. From then on, there've been rumors that Andrew felt threatened and was challenging Charle's decision and bring the queen into the argument in wantinghis daughters to have official roles in the royal family;working royals.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14679



« Reply #423 on: October 01, 2017, 10:52:43 pm »

yes, that's what I meant.
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
HRHOlya
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3870



« Reply #424 on: October 01, 2017, 10:55:25 pm »

^^^^ No, not really king, he isn't going to meet the PM or open parliament, but there are ideas and changes internally said to be directed by Charles and that Liz is taking some direction, for the sake of a "smooth transition"; which is also why heirs see the red boxes since Edward, because he knew fck all when he ascended and it took them (courtiers/ men in grey) ages to get him up to speed, because Vic refused to clue him in and share anything. There is quite a good deal of substance to these rumours and why imo they can indeed be taken seriously. I also believe the "liz to retire at 95" rumours and her slowing down more and more since she turned 90. She's not going to retire per se, but what could realistically happen is that come her being 95 she'll make fewer appearances, focusing on only the important stuff like meeting the PM and the red boxes, the super important official stuff, but not travel anymore outside the UK (or likely Britain) and not head out for every plaque unveiling and ribbon cutting.

What role Harry's possible kids will have, will depend on how things will be in 20 or so years (and whether he has any to begin with), that's what I meant earlier that some ideas can be spun, but ultimately how they're going to take shape will depend on how things are once the time comes. Before that you can only speculate and draft various plans and scenarios to prepare.

^^^ Yes, imo the slimmed down bit is more or less in effect and shown with the balcony appearances, as it was said that as per Chales's plan for a slimmed down monarchy the balcony appearances were reduced to get people used to the idea/ sight. It's basically happening. Anne prepped her kids from the get-go for a life outside and Louise & James never will get abuse and won't be expected to step up (by anyone) because they use the lord & lady style instead of prince/ss, which is however not due to the Wessex's impeccable foresight, but because the monarchy was at the time of the Wessex wedding and their birth at such a low, the Winds didn't want to risk an outcry from the public, hence also the "small" wedding in Windsor instead of a bonanza in London. But ultimately it will all play into the "slimming down" scheme, even if it wasn't intended for it at the time.

^^ Seems like really only the Yorks are protesting and challenging the slimmed down idea, which is also likely why it's talked about so much, they just can't handle being sidelined so to say and go whining to the press who then constantly report on changes and slimming down the RF.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8321


« Reply #425 on: October 01, 2017, 11:04:16 pm »

I don't think she will retire at 95. She said she would not abdicate/retire.

I don't think Charles plan is realistic. Harry and William are not exactly workhorses and Kate may do very little and Meghan (if she marries Harry) as well. I think Charles if being petty about the York girls. If they are willing and don't shirk, I don't see why they can't pitch in. He may need more people for the plan of his.
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14679



« Reply #426 on: October 01, 2017, 11:08:32 pm »

They don't need to be workhorses only popular. Events are done to keep them relevant if they do few but are popular that's ok. But it is a dangerous situation, if the monarchy popularity is low there is no argument to keep them.
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: 8321


« Reply #427 on: October 01, 2017, 11:47:36 pm »

They have dedicated workers outside the "core" if they are given reduced responsibilities (e.g. Princess Anne), I doubt William, Harry, and Kate and Harry's wife can do it all. Plus Charles and Camilla are not getting any younger.
Logged
FrederickLouis
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 942



« Reply #428 on: October 03, 2017, 01:56:09 am »

Charles stated intentions should wait until he's King. The Queen is still very much alive. Why would he do this now? It would show disrespect to the Queen or he was in some sort of a "hurry."

It will all have to wait until Charles gets to be King.
@sandy, I agree that Elizabeth II could find her son's intentions a little too outgoing and premature. What if a Court procedure was changed and then changed four more times?
Logged

Really A Baron
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2433



« Reply #429 on: October 03, 2017, 10:02:36 am »

That is exactly my point.

At the Way Ahead Group - chaired by HM - allegedly Charles talked about 'slimming down' the monarchy - not when he becomes King but then - over 25 years ago. The Queen was there when the alleged comment was made. It was then leaked by a staff member to someone in the press and has taken on legs of its own as gospel.

The balcony scene in 2012 was a recreation of the Diamond Jubilee balcony from 1897 when only Queen Victoria, her son the then Prince of Wales and his children and George V's elder children were there. That they were going to be the only ones there was announced in the March and the idea of recreating Queen Victoria's balcony was also mentioned in many outlets.

The comment about the York's titles - in 1988 there was a lot of celebration about the birth of a new princess. There was no suggestion then that any child of Andrew's wouldn't have the HRH title - especially as it was pointed out that the last time a Duke of York had had a first born daughter she ended up being the present Queen Elizabeth II.

By 1999 the situation had changed so no HRH for Edward.

I do suspect that Harry will follow that example and then when there is no one left who would qualify under George V's 1917 LPs new ones will be issued to limit the HRH only to the children of the heir apparent. They also could find themselves in a situation where a younger brother of Charlotte who would be lower in the line of succession, would pass on HRH but she won't so it makes sense to limit the HRH's to the heir apparent's children only - regardless of gender.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 [22]   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!