The role of the British Monarchy, Popularity and Future discussion

[Curryong]

I think it is *Brilliant game work* of Charles to now make sure that there are more than enough counselors to be in charge if and when both he and William with their wives are out of the country at the same time......including Anne and Edward makes darn sure that neither Andrew or Harry will ever have the chance to be that...they don't have to kick them out or create drama by asking Parliament to let them go, just add more intelligent, hard working and very *loyal members* of the royal family as neither Andrew or Harry are that as they have shown by their actions and decisions while being working members of the royal family.

Both Harry, and though I am loathe to say it Andrew, were loyal members of the armed forces of GB for decades, Harry for ten years, Andrew for over twenty, while also being working members of the RF. Both of them served in war zones while HM was Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of GB.

If they had acted in a traitorous fashion they would have been kicked out of the forces. And yes, it does require intelligence (and courage) to learn to fly helicopters and to fly them in war zones, which both did (in the Falklands War, Andrew, and in Afghanistan,Harry.)

And in what way is Anne super intelligent? She never went to University. Yes she was an equestrian Olympian which does require skill and intelligence, but she never served in the armed forces so has never had her loyalty and life put into question. As for Edward,  he left his Marines training course before it was finished and then trailed around in various theatrical pursuits including a failed TV programme making business until he and Sophie were put on the royal roster after the fake sheikh debacle, leaving a large debt by their companies. Intelligent?

Anne and Edward both now appear on ceremonial occasions wearing uniforms in which they haven?t served and with ?medals? on their chests mostly celebrating their mother?s various jubilees. No military medals among them. Noble? Hardly! Signs of super intelligence? Highly doubtful!

I don?t think that believing that any member of the RF is more intelligent than others, otherwise we might start looking at Camilla for example who didn?t go to university or serve in a war zone in a very expensive piece of military equipment. In fact, between leaving school and marrying Andrew PB she didn?t do much at all!

[Nightowl]

 :ugh:    :laugh10: Now onto better things once Andrew and Harry are set aside from being counselors.  Loyalty is not something they are good at, more so Harry who betrayed his country and told lies about his family along with this wife in front of the entire world. At least Andrew has kept his mouth shut and not lied about his family. If that was my brother who lied and betrayed his family the way Harry has done, he would be out in the cold forever.......you do not lie about your family in front of the entire world ever........what Harry did in the past is slowly being forgotten as what he does now is up front for everyone to see ......NObody can ever erase that interview with Oprah....it is out there forever..........they wanted privacy, so why aren't they private people......they NEED the royal family for one reason only.....to make MONEY off anyone that has it...even books.  The royal family is still doing the job as expected and they will continue as they are LOYAL to the country and the monarchy, where H/M don't even know the meaning of the word or the meaning of TRUST which is broken. 

[Curryong]

Harry and Andrew aren?t ?set aside from being Counsellors at all. And in the future, if Charles and Camilla are out of the country and Harry is at FC at that time he?s likely to be used as a Counsellor, with William at Adelaide Cottage nearby.

Harry?s army service is not likely to ever be forgotten as it appears in every biography written on or about him and continues on in his work for vets and their families such as Invictus and Scotties.

The Wessexes have got royal duties because really they have very little to offer. The tabloids practically ignore Edward and Sophie as they consider them basically boring. So what they have got in their pasts will continue to be repeated in any biographical pieces on them. It was the greatest piece of good fortune for these two that the Sussexes left as otherwise, as the future King?s youngest brother and his wife, they would really have been on the back burner once the Queen passed.

[TLLK]

Discussion of the Oprah Winfrey interview with the Sussexes has been moved to the thread linked below. Please continue it there. Further discussion about the Interview will be deleted. Please stay on topic which is the role of the British Monarchy, it's popularity and future. Thank you[/url]

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex interviews, TV and other media events Part 2

[wannable]

I stick with my opinion and I'm 99.9% sure Charles will never (William too when it's his Kingship) allow Harry or Andrew to head anything Monarchy related, be it a Privy Council or a signature. 

Both have disgraced themselves by their own mouth.  Harry hates the monarchy, hated his job, said he was forced to work duties. Andrew's close ties with Pedo Epstein, just that fact doomed him forever.

[wannable]

Harry in a early Better Up discussion (both the Sussexes talk too much, people might forget, understandably because it is just too much to keep track) he said after the host asked him about Jobs and Mental Health, he had quit the BRF/Monarchy...Harry:''If you don't like your job, quit''.

It brought a lot of controversy worldwide, 99% of the world population can't afford to quit their hated jobs. Harry belongs (or belonged, no one knows if the couple's finances are sound) to the 1%

[TLLK]

The Counsellors of State Act of 2022 Bill has been sent to both Houses of Parliament.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-03/066/5803066_en_2.html#l1g1

    House of Commons
    House of Lords
    What's on
    Bills & legislation
    Committees
    Publications & records
    Parliament TV
    News
    Topics

Counsellors of State Bill [HL] (HL Bill 66)

Previous

Contents page1-2Last page

A

BILL

TO

Add His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Her Royal Highness The
Princess Royal to the persons to whom royal functions may be delegated as
Counsellors of State.

Whereas Your Majesty, by Your Majesty?s Royal Message to both Houses of
Parliament, has confirmed that Your Majesty would be most content, should
Parliament see fit, for the number of people who may be called upon to act as
Counsellors of State under the terms of the Regency Acts 1937 to 1953 to be increased
to include Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal and His Royal Highness The Earl
of Wessex and Forfar, both of whom have previously undertaken this role;

Now, therefore, we, Your Majesty?s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords
Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, do most
humbly beseech Your Majesty that it be enacted, and

Be it enacted by the King?s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and
consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present
Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:?
1 Additional Counsellors of State

(1)Section 6 of the Regency Act 1937 (power to delegate royal functions to
Counsellors of State) has effect as if the persons required by subsection (2) of
that section to be the Counsellors of State for the purposes of any delegation of
5
royal functions under that section included?

(a)His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex, during his lifetime, and

(b)Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal, during her lifetime.

(2)Any requirement imposed by subsection (1) is subject to the proviso in
subsection (2) of section 6 of that Act and to subsection (2A) of that section
10
(powers to except a person who is absent from the United Kingdom and
disqualification from being a Counsellor of State).

Counsellors of State Bill [HL]Page 2
2 Short title and commencement

(1)This Act may be cited as the Counsellors of State Act 2022.

(2)This Act comes into force on the day after it is passed.

[sara8150]

ROBERT HARDMAN: Princes Harry and Andrew sidelined by King's new deputising rule | Daily Mail Online

King Charles Taps Princess Anne and Prince Edward for Elevated Roles

[sara8150]

The Regency Act of 1937 lays out who stands in for a Monarch in a range of situations where they can?t exercise their functions. It came into force in the first year of the reign of King George VI, when his heir was a ten year old princess called Elizabeth. Now, George VI?s grandson has asked the House of Lords to amend it. King Charles III wants his sister and brother added to the list of those who can act as Counsellors of State. It wouldn?t be the first time the rules have been altered. Royal Central outlines what that means for the current House of Windsor.

When can a regent be appointed?

There are several circumstances in which the Act permits the implementation of a Regency. Listed first in this Act is the accession of an underage Monarch. If the throne passes to someone aged under eighteen, then a regent is appointed to rule for them until they reach the age of eighteen.

The second circumstance is the incapacity of the Monarch. If it is decided that they cannot carry out their functions, a regent is appointed until they are deemed capable of taking on their responsibilities again.

Who can be regent?

In its most simple interpretation, the Regency Act says that the next adult in the line of succession is regent providing they a British subject and resident in the United Kingdom. So in the case of King Charles III needing a regent, The Prince of Wales would step in. However, should Prince William or his children need a regent, the role would pass to The Duke of Sussex.

Adult has two interpretations in this Act. Ordinarily, a regent must be aged 21 or over. However, the heir to the throne can act as regent from the age of 18 onwards.

Who can?t be regent?

The spouse or parent of a Monarch doesn?t necessarily have a role in their regency. The role must pass to someone in the line of succession. If a regent is deemed incapable or dies in office, the next adult in the succession who meets the criteria set out, takes their place. However, the guardianship of a Monarch under the age of 18 rests with their surviving parent while the guardianship of a ruler declared incapable rests with their spouse, if they have one.

What changes have been made to the Act?

In 1953, following the succession of The Queen, a change was made that allowed The Duke of Edinburgh to rule as regent should one of their children ascend the throne as a minor. Those changes ceased to have an effect once their children had reached adult age.

What else does the Act provide for?

The role of Counsellors of State was part of the 1937 Act. This is the mechanism which allows two of five people to exercise power if the Monarch is temporarily out of action. Currently, the Monarch?s spouse and the first four adults in the line of succession can carry out the role meaning Queen Camilla, The Prince of Wales, the Duke of Sussex, the Duke of York and Princess Beatrice can all be called on to exercise the function. That?s proved controversial as three of the five aren?t working royals. Furthermore, the Duke of Sussex lives in the United States and the Duke of York has withdrawn completely from public life following a court case.

Now, King Charles has asked Parliament to amend the Act and allow his sister, the Princess Royal, and his youngest brother, the Earl of Wessex, to also be available as Counsellors of State. Both have exercised the role before.

If Parliament agrees, and it?s likely that it will and that changes will happen within months, it won?t be the first time an amendment has taken place. There was an alteration to this part of the Act following the death of King George VI with provision being made for Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother to continue to be able to exercise the function of Counsellor of State.

Inside the Regency Act 1937 ? Royal Central
Not since back to 1937 for 85 years of King George VI succession rules but Dukes of Sussex and York remain counselor of state because Harry and Andrew no longer work royals because Andrew been related to disgrace Jeffrey Epstein and Harry resigned top royals work and move to USA across pond from UK King Charles says Andrew and Harry will not stripped dukedom according to sun newspaper

[TLLK]

The House of Lords is introducing a bill to bar Princes Harry and Andrew from ever serving as Counsellors of State. Now this is taking the matter further than KCIII had proposed. IMO is a potential issue as it would effectively bar not only the DoS and DoY but also Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie from ever serving in this role. The next eligible CoS who are working royals who have carried out duties in a period of two years are of course the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wesex but then it's: the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent along with Princess Alexandra.

Lords to debate law to bar Princes Harry and Andrew from being Counsellors of State

The House of Lords will debate a change in legislation that would effectively ban Prince Harry and Prince Andrew from being Counsellors of State.
The amendment to the Counsellors of State bill, which will be debated on Monday, would look to exclude royals who have ?not in the immediately preceding 2 years undertaken royal duties on a regular basis?.
The Duke of Sussex formally stepped down from royal duties on March 31, 2020, while the Duke of York ceased to undertake public duties after his military affiliations and royal patronages were returned to Queen Elizabeth II at the start of this year.
A Cabinet source told The Telegraph that it was neither the Government, nor Buckingham Palace?s position, that the proposal would remove either of the princes from being Counsellors of State.
The prospect of the princes being called upon to sign documents or receive the credentials of new ambassadors at Buckingham Palace has been controversial for some time, with the issue first raised in Parliament last month.
Viscount Stansgate, Labour peer and son of party grandee Tony Benn, suggested in the House of Lords that it was the right moment to discuss ?a sensible amendment? with the King.
He asked whether the Government was ?happy to continue with a situation where the counsels of state and regency powers may be exercised by the Duke of York or the Duke of Sussex, one of whom has left public life and the other of whom has left the country??
The King made the specific request that the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex be made Counsellors of State, after he enacted a process agreed with his late mother to keep the family peace.
In a statement read to both Houses of Parliament last week, the King signalled his wish for the Regency Act to be amended to allow his two siblings to deputise for him when required.
The move is designed to ensure the Duke of York and the Duke of Sussex will never be called upon to act as official stand-ins, without having to formally replace them.The King's statement
The King's statement was first read to the House of Lords by Lord Parker of Minsmere, the Lord Chamberlain, who said: ?The message is as follows: ?To ensure continued efficiency of public business when I am unavailable, such as while I am undertaking official duties overseas, I confirm that I would be most content, should Parliament see fit, for the number of people who may be called upon to act as Counsellors of State under the terms of the Regency Acts 1937 to 1953 to be increased to include my sister and brother - the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex and Forfar - both of whom have previously undertaken this role.?
The monarch can appoint two Counsellors of State to conduct official business in their absence using letters patent.
Under the Regency Acts of 1937 and 1953, they are the spouse of a monarch and the next four in line to the throne who are aged over 21. This currently would include the Queen Consort, the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Sussex, the Duke of York and Princess Beatrice, only two of whom are working royals.

[PrincessOfPeace]

Whether they are explicitly excluded or not, the message is clear, they won't ever be called upon in any official capacity. 

[wannable]

Great amendment with a lot of sense. So they can keep the counsellors of state (I've heard it's much harder to take anyone out now and future/line of succession), add ons are super easy, and amendment are super easy too -  aren't doing ''duties regularly'' past 2 years to date aka working royal, excluded to being called upon.

Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Princess Beatrice

[Nightowl]

A very intelligent move by Charles, in fact perfect.  Andrew nor Harry will ever be called upon to perform those duties now yet they will stay at the bottom of the list.   :yesss:

Anne is one smart lady who suffers no fools and Edward is very hard working and extremely loyal and that is just the type of people that Andrew and Harry are........fools that just want the perks and money.

[TLLK]

The Counsellors of State Bill was passed by the House of Lords yesterday without amendment.
Transcripts of the Bill in chronological order are linked below.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-11-23/debates/07AEF617-425F-48C1-80F5-8DC3C0F0E8C7/CounsellorsOfStateBill(HL
https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-11-23/debates/605B20FA-1260-402A-8771-FE084B12EE3F/CounsellorsOfStateBill(HL

[Curryong]

The Counsellors of State Bill was passed by the House of Lords yesterday without amendment.
Transcripts of the Bill in chronological order are linked below.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-11-23/debates/07AEF617-425F-48C1-80F5-8DC3C0F0E8C7/CounsellorsOfStateBill(HL
https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-11-23/debates/605B20FA-1260-402A-8771-FE084B12EE3F/CounsellorsOfStateBill(HL

Yes, it was swiftly passed. The Governing body just stated that there was no precedent for removing any Counsellors and the King had not requested any. By the way, the bill went to the Lords first probably because the new Lord Chamberlain, the first of the King?s reign, presented it.

[TLLK]

YouGov UK's recent popularity poll after the new release of the Crown Season 5.

25 years after her death, Princess Diana is more popular than King Charles, and the monarchy | YouGov

he fifth season of hit royal drama The Crown launched last week, with this season focussing heavily on the tumultuous relationship between Princess Diana and the then Prince Charles.

To see how the late Princess?s reputation has held up over the years, we included Diana on the latest YouGov royal favourability tracker. The results show that, more than a quarter of a century after her death, Princess Diana?s legacy remains strong, and she is still more popular than her former husband and the monarchy in general.

Seven in ten Britons (72%) have a positive view of Princess Diana, including 34% who have a ?very positive? opinion.

By contrast, two thirds (67%) have a positive view of King Charles, and 60% have a favourable opinion of the institution of the monarchy in general. Only a quarter (25%) have a ?very? positive view of Charles, and just 20% say the same of the monarchy.

While Princess Diana?s ratings are overwhelmingly positive among all age groups, those aged 50 and above are more likely to take a negative view of her, at 25-26%, compared to 13% of 25-49 year olds and 9% of 18-24 year olds. Those aged 25-49 are the most likely to have a positive opinion of Princess Diana, at 79%.

Seven in ten 18-24 year olds (70%) also have a positive view of Diana, but they are more likely than other age groups to say ?don?t know?, at 21%. While on the face of it this may be unsurprising, as even the oldest amongst this age group would not be born until a few months after her death, this (lack of) awareness figure is actually the same as it is for the other top royals, demonstrating how far-reaching the late Princess?s legacy has proven.

Prince William continues to be the most popular member of the royal family, with 81% holding a positive opinion of him (including 45% with a ?very positive? view). Catherine, Princess of Wales is not far behind, on 75%. In both cases, these figures are virtually unchanged from the previous survey in late September.

Likewise, having surged following his ascension to King, Charles? favourability ratings have now stabilised, with little difference between this survey and September?s.

By contrast, Prince Harry?s popularity has dipped slightly once again, having seen a 15pt uptick following the death of his grandmother Queen Elizabeth. Only four in ten (39%) have a favourable view of the Duke of Sussex, down six points since September. The number of people holding an unfavourable view has increased by the same amount in that time, to 52%.

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex continues to be less popular than her husband, with only 28% liking her, but this figure is effectively unchanged since September.

As ever, none can match Prince Andrew?s rock bottom unpopularity. Just 6% have a positive opinion of the Duke of York, while 85% have an unpopular opinion (including fully 67% who take a ?very negative? view of him).

[Nightowl]

In regards to Diana, like so many people around the world I was one who followed her and read everything I could get my hands on and bought so many books......yet over time I learned she had issues in life like most of us do.  I think today if she is so popular it is because so many still see a perfect princess who did try to help those in need, yet she was far from perfect.  Maybe many people still live that fairy-tale of her and Charles who was not perfect at all, neither should of married each. Time to move on and just keep the good memories where they belong.

[Amabel2]

Its because she was good looking and she died so younng.  If she were still around, she'd be over 60 and people might not be reading about her in Hello Magazine any more.  If she just dabbled in charity work, what would she be famous for other than her status as a Princess?

[TLLK]

The Counsellors of State Bill has passed in the House of Commons and is now set to become law.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63824510

MPs have backed a new law allowing Princess Anne and Prince Edward to stand in for King Charles at official engagements.

The Counsellors of State Bill passed all its Commons stages and is now set to become law.

Princes Andrew and Harry remain on the list of stand-ins, even though both have stood down as working royals.

The Prince of Wales, Camilla, the Queen Consort, and Princess Beatrice are the other counsellors of state.

The legislation has been fast-tracked and cleared the Commons earlier on Thursday with MPs giving it a series of unopposed readings.

The King, the Queen Consort and Prince William are all expected to undertake overseas trips in the next 12 months- and without these additions, it was feared there could be a lack of available stand-ins for the monarch.

Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Oliver Dowden, told the Commons: "This is a Bill that supports the monarch, our head of state, in discharging his constitutional duties.

"This Bill guarantees the continuity which we in government and Parliament depend upon to serve the British people."

[PrincessOfPeace]

The Counsellors of State Act 2022 received Royal Assent yesterday evening, which means there are now seven rather than five Counsellors of State: the Queen, Prince of Wales, Duke of Sussex, Duke of York, Princess Beatrice, Princess Royal & the Earl of Wessex and Forfar.

[wannable]

The formal Counsellor of State Act 2022

[TLLK]

The Times requested a YouGov Survey after the Harry and Meghan series and after the unexpected early preview of Spare.

Megxit?s the new Brexit: a vitriolic battleground that pits generations against each other | News | The Sunday Times

[Princess Cassandra]

I'm surprised at the dramatic turn shown by the graphs. I supposed I shouldn't be; if you put yourself in the shoes of the British you can well imagine the results of so much press. I wish the media would ease up - it's like a shark feeding frenzy.

[TLLK]

Latest poll by YouGov sees the Princess Royal as the most popular member of the British Royal Family followed by the Prince and Princess of Wales respectively. For the total overall view, the DoY is still at the bottom of the poll. The rest of the poll included KCIII, the QC, the D/DssoS, EoW (No Countess).

Prince Harry?s popularity falls further as ?Spare? hits the shelves | YouGov

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf  Full View of PDF

[wannable]

Understandably in the United Kingdom where it matters for the Consitutional Monarchy.

Because of Spare, he is a curiosity with all the spilling the beans situation, so much so his Spare book interview with Stephen Colbert, Late Night Show WAS the only one that got #1 rating, 3.5 million watching (USA), hence the Offer (Neil Sean). I forgot to add that Neil said Harry told NBC he will not go to the Coronation because it is Archie's birthday, but would happily be a co-correspondent watching from home and giving his royal expertise. It is not a one hit contract, it is a role on a yearly basis, very likely Trooping of the Colour, Garter, Ascot, Opening of Parliament. Only the televised pomp and ceremony the Royal Family does.

The other 3 interviews did not, there were other programs at the same hour that got the #1 spot. Happy Valley #1 (the Happy Valley is funny versus Angry Harry trashing his family)