Prince and Princess of Wales future roles

[amabel]

oh yes forgot about him cos I don't know much about the Japanese emperor.  I think that Charles did decide to "make lemonade" out of his hving to wait for the throne. and he has done a great job with it.. WIlliam.. time will tell.. but I don't think he's so activist minded as Charles.. which has its benefits.

[wannable]

^  It does.  William went to China, Israel, Palestine, Gaza Strip.   And IMO did an excellent job, he looked and did the part, so much so, even political writer/journalists said he looked like a statesman. 

Charles criticized one way or another those countries or said something controversial as small as it may be to his not so neutral position.

[amabel]

I think William just isn't as into ideas as his father... and he's quite new to the "diplomatic tuors" part of the job, so he is going to toe the line.. Im sure when Charles was just starting his POW work, he too was more compliant..

[Yangkueifa]

It would be wonderful if he followed QE II style, no public opinions, no activism, no controversy. The Crown is to help unify the people, whatever their believes.
For example, if a royal were to make pro abortion comments, this alienates those citizens who are not pro abortion.

[Curryong]

^ Charles has made many many speeches and comments for over thirty years on the environment, architecture, town planning, alternative medicine etc, things he's passionate about. So in your opinion his reign is going to be full of controversy and activism?

[Blue Clover]

Yes, Prince William will have a good 10-20 years to wait before he's Prince of Wales.

[Yangkueifa]

^ Charles has made many many speeches and comments for over thirty years on the environment, architecture, town planning, alternative medicine etc, things he's passionate about. So in your opinion his reign is going to be full of controversy and activism?

I hope not. Where we stay, our monarch just helped to smooth over a tense transition period from an old to a new government. And he had that authority and trust of the people from both sides of the divide because he was apolitical.
I personally believe that QE II example is an excellent one to follow. We do not need to know their opinions or their passions. Their main role is soft diplomacy( which the BRF are excellent at), a symbol of unity and stability.
Charles opinions of alt medicine , for example, could be downright harmful if he were more persuasive in converting people to his beliefs.

[LouisFerdinand]

Do you think King William V would want to be the patron of British Youth Opera, Music in Country Churches, and The Alnwick Gardens Trust like his father was the patron?

[Curryong]

No, because as far as is known, William has no interest in that sort of music or in gardening.

[FanDianaFancy]

Do you think King William V would want to be the patron of British Youth Opera, Music in Country Churches, and The Alnwick Gardens Trust like his father was the patron?

Yes.
Personal interests has little to do with their royal duties.
Some of the things may personally interests them more than others.
It is their job to protect, protect, bring awareness to whatever of their country.

Ex. Sophie and the cheese factory. Does she even like cheese or that English cheese?
She put on her boots. Patted the cows. Listened to the workers. Acted interested. Made the cheese. Ate some cheese. Smiled for the cameras.

Now she was, we know, very interested and moved to tears at something for the hospital where she almost died and LadyLousie was born. She was deeply moved, interested, thankful again to staff still there and everything.

Whatever PC, PofWales has, I assume these duties will be for PW when he gets in the next position.
Maybe King Charles will keep these .


Double post auto-merged: March 11, 2019, 01:06:48 AM

It would be wonderful if he followed QE II style, no public opinions, no activism, no controversy. The Crown is to help unify the people, whatever their believes.
For example, if a royal were to make pro abortion comments, this alienates those citizens who are not pro abortion.

Or even who likes some kind of English cheese or not. See my post about Sophie at the English cheese factory.

Point is she was to make  and promote  for her country that England makes some good cheese. English people, go buy some of that cheese. Keep that English business going. Export that English cheese.

Same for Camilla at the something royal , what is it she is patron of,  English lace?

[Curryong]

I've just got a feeling that the next reign and the next will see a real falling off of the minor charities and patronages that the BRF now holds. It's been said that the Royal Foundation with its umbrella set up to encompass a range of interests under it is the way that William and Harry wanted to do it. The Queen has hundreds of charities she never visits, for which she is just a name on a letterhead. That doesn't appear to be the way the younger royals want to play it.

I very much doubt that King William will be carrying hundreds of charities that are never visited under his banner. That's the way of the 1950s when the Queen came to the Throne. And in a way Charles being a workaholic with a wide range of interests, has carried it on. And that Church music in country churches is very Charles and personal to him! If I didn't know he was patron I would have guessed it!

Will Charles, as an elderly King, be adding more of these individual and quite esoteric charities to his bow when he comes to the throne? Don't think so. His new press of royal duties has already seen him dissolving some ties with charities connected with the Princes Trust. And that is likely to continue with many of his other charities, IMO.

[TLLK]

I agree @Curryong that we'll see the BRF involved with fewer patronages in the future as it does appear that a smaller working roster is in the works. IMO the Queen's grandchildren and their spouses are going to have far fewer patronages/charities than the previous generations, but they'll be more involved in ones that are focused upon the nations and the Commonwealth.

[FanDianaFancy]

Agreed.

[wannable]

Charities that do the same thing need to merge if they want to survive.

[Yangkueifa]

Imho, the BRF does certain things very well, and, hopefully Kings Charles and William will continue to do them.
1. Promote British products. Where I stay, brands with the royal warrant are much more expensive than others, yet are perceived to be of better quality, so shoppers will still buy them. One eg Twinings tea. Marlborough college opened a branch in Asia. Before Kate, nobody here had heard of Marlborough. Fees are very high, yet it's got a waiting list and to most locals, it's referred to as  the school that Princess Kate attended, rather than Marlborough. Kate is also very popular in China.
2. Soft diplomacy. Most Asian commonwealth countries do have a positive view of British colonial reign, except maybe India. Our education systems are still somewhat similar, we love our colonial missionary schools, and send our kids to the uk for university education, paying full fees which are truly high. Royal visits generate a lot of lasting goodwill with the population.
3. Bringing attention to local problems by visits and walkabouts, especially to poorer communities in the UK. Like the recent NI and Blackpool tours. Give the people some attention, give them hope.
4. As a symbol of unity in difficult and tense times. As a neutral figurehead for the armed forces to rally to when a country is politically fractured and divided. A politically neutral head of the armed forces feels much more reassuring to the population when politics are tense.
Therefore, we do not need charismatic, activist, passionate,powerful rock star royals. We need royals like QE II, HM the QM, etc.
Most of the actual work is done behind closed doors, as per QEII meeting the pm, etc

[PrincessOfPeace]

Prince William on making his mark on father's Duchy of Cornwall legacy: 'I?ll never know as much as he does, but I?ll try my best'

Quietly, over the last year or so, the Duke of Cambridge has become a feature of Duchy life, as father and son enter a period of gradual transition which has seen them work closer than ever before.

His day-to-day life sees him read and reply to two boxes of paperwork a day, mixing his father?s ink letters with texts, emails and calls to staff across the way at Kensington Palace.

He has frequent meetings with the Queen and now speaks to his father regularly about work, making them ?the closest they?ve ever been in that sense?

While Prince Charles had, as he puts it, a ?baptism of fire? in inheriting the Duchy, William has been able to ease towards the next major transition of his adult life with his father, grandmother and grandfather on hand.

Closer to home, the influence of the Duchess is clear as the steady, supportive backbone to the family life with three boisterous children he has always craved.

[sandy]

William should not put himself down that way. He has his own gifts and can't be a clone of his father in how he thinks. He needs to have a more positive outlook to inspire people. IMO anyway.

[TLLK]

Prince William on making his mark on father's Duchy of Cornwall legacy: 'I?ll never know as much as he does, but I?ll try my best'

Thank you for sharing this @PrincessOfPeace and it's nice to see you posting again after a long absence. :welcome:

[LouisFerdinand]

Kate Middleton news: Duchess? title would change if Prince George is king for this reason | Express.co.uk   
This article declared that Catherine would have her own coronation to honor the title of Queen Consort. Would she not be crowned Queen Consort when William V is crowned King?   

:crown: :crown: :crown: :crown: :crown: :crown: :crown: :crown: :crown:

[sandy]

It is very doubtful IMO that Kate will have her own coronation. She is a consort and would be crowned after William is.

[TLLK]

Yes that would happen at William's coronation. (Do not know if he plans to use William as his name once he's the monarch.)

The article is just speculation about what would occur if Catherine was widowed.

The Duchess could be named as the queen mother, but only if she is the window of a king.

A new monarch is usually crowned when their ruling parent dies so this could be the case when George takes the throne.

The Queen mother has the same duties of the queen consort which means Kate?s responsibilities would probably not change very much if this happened.

The Duchess would stay one of the most senior members of the Royal Family.

Well AFAIK there was no coronation ceremony for QEQM after the death of George VI and the coronation of QEII. The two women were named Elizabeth so "Queen Mother" was given so there was a distinction between the two. The other option would have been "Dowager Queen."

[sandy]

The Queen Mum wanted a role for herself. She wanted to be known as Queen Mother.

[TLLK]

Yes that would happen at William's coronation. (Do not know if he plans to use William as his name once he's the monarch.)

The article is just speculation about what would occur if Catherine was widowed.

Well AFAIK there was no coronation ceremony for QEQM after the death of George VI and the coronation of QEII. The two women were named Elizabeth so "Queen Mother" was given so there was a distinction between the two. The other option would have been "Dowager Queen."

Also there was another Dowager Queen who was alive when George VI passed away-Queen Mary. So with two widowed Queen Consorts, it worked to have a distinction between the ladies.

[Curryong]

IMO the 'Queen Mother' monicker was given to the present Queen's mother purely and simply because the two women had the same forenames, and both were entitled to be addressed as Queens, one Consort of course, and one Queen Regnant.

The QM was still a fairly young woman, just 51 when her husband died. It was expected that she would resume some sort of public life, charity work at least, if not the Royal tours etc that she eventually took on, and she would still be at the centre of royal family life.

How else were courtiers and the general public going to differentiate the two? 'QEII and the other one?' 'The mum and the daughter, and pick which one we are talking about?' So everybody used a common sense solution.

It was a unique situation because the only other Queen Regnant's mother still alive at the time of her daughter's Coronation with vaguely the same name, in British history (or alive anyway) had been Queen Victoria's mother. Her mother was christened  Victoire but she had never been a Queen Consort. Her husband, the Duke of Kent, had died prematurely.
Double post auto-merged: November 08, 2019, 02:32:24 AM

There's never any separate Coronation ceremony for a Queen Consort in the modern age. Queen Consorts are 'crowned' immediately after their husbands in the same ceremony and at the same location.

In centuries past Queen Consorts did have their own 'Coronation'. For instance Elizabeth, Henry VII's Queen was crowned several weeks after her husband in a separate ceremony. Ann Boleyn, Henry VIII's second wife got her own ceremony, nearly five months after marrying Henry in 1533.

[amabel]

The Queen Mum wanted a role for herself. She wanted to be known as Queen Mother.

She did not like the title of Queen Mother very much