Re: When Charles is King . . .

[LouisFerdinand]

Are you referring to the Christmas party that the Duchess of Cornwall hosts on behalf of terminally ill children or the annual Christmas luncheon for BRF family? :xmas4:

I am referring to the Christmas party that Camilla hosts on behalf of terminally ill children.

[LouisFerdinand]

When Charles is King, could the Prince of Wales, Prince William, perform the State Opening of Parliament in his father's place?

[LouisFerdinand]

When Charles is King, do you think he will visit the Vatican?

[LouisFerdinand]

If Princess Charlotte is given the title of Princess Royal I hope that she does not refuse it. Also I hope the press does not compare her Princess Royal actions to those of her Aunt Anne.

[LouisFerdinand]

When Charles is King, do you think that there will be tours of the gardens at Highgrove House?

[LouisFerdinand]

@LouisFerdinand -By the time that Charles is king he might have turned Highgrove over to the Duchy as a gardening center.
Should Scotland become independent meaning no longer part of the UK and the monarchy, Charles would still retain ownership of his Scottish estate and would likely use it for the summer.

@TLLK, I like the idea of Highgrove being a gardening center. I have found that when people speak about plants they like to have the visual plant to see.

[wannable]

This has been leaked to the British Media today. Apparently, ''Cabinet Office 'will launch probe' as fury mounts over leak of secret plans for Queen's death''

[TLLK]

Well it's rather distasteful to publish, but to be honest it's fits the order of what I would expect having read the accounts about what occurred after two of QEII's predecessors (George V and George VI.)

[Curryong]

There isn?t that much different in the list to what happens every time a monarch dies. Operation London Bridge details have been worked out long ago. There are just a few nods to the modern age of communications and supposedly a tour of the UK by Charles afterwards, which is something new. Personally, I think the BBC will still be the first outlet to be informed, after family and the PM etc.

The real change in the modern era occurred in 1952 due to Princess Elizabeth then being in Kenya. Communication between the UK and parts of Africa were quite tenuous in those days, and it was highly unusual for an heir to be away from Britain at the moment of accession. 

IMO it would depend on what month the monarch died as to whether London would be overly full. Most people in this era of full coverage from all sorts of media would no doubt prefer to follow it from afar, rather than freeze in the streets watching a funeral in snowy January or a wet February. When George VI died there were relatively few TVs in private homes and people relied on BBC radio and their daily newspaper, a completely different world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-16767149


The Last Journey: Funeral Of King George VI (1952) | British Path? - YouTube

Many thousands will undoubtedly still come out to attend the laying out in state and the funeral, however, weather will make a difference to crowds pressing to come to London for these events.This isn?t 1952 or 1997 any more.

I can actually remember my family listening to the King?s funeral on the ?wireless? as it was known then, and watching the Queen?s Coronation on a tiny screen TV at a neighbour?s house.

[Princess Cassandra]

I suppose she is used to talk about the secession and her death, but this leak it seems so rude to me. I hope she lives to be older than her mother did. 

[sara8150]

Meghan will not move into Clarence House when Charles is King - ?No longer on the cards!? | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
Articles says Harry and Meghan will not lived in Clarence House and Charles wanted torches to his grandchildren for Prince George,Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis not Archie and Lilibet

[Curryong]

Meghan will not move into Clarence House when Charles is King - ?No longer on the cards!? | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
Articles says Harry and Meghan will not lived in Clarence House and Charles wanted torches to his grandchildren for Prince George,Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis not Archie and Lilibet

Has there ever been any evidence whatsoever, let alone tabloid talk, that Charles ever intended to hand over CH to Harry and Meghan?  Because I can?t remember any and I kept a close watch on accommodation choices.

There was supposedly one article on a mythical Herefordshire estate years ago when Harry was single, and plenty of tabloid speculation about what house the couple were going to move into before FC was chosen. And that?s it. You can?t withold something that was never offered in the first place.

Nor would the couple have probably wanted the house anyway. It?s terribly old fashioned in decor, needs a complete overhaul and costs a fortune to maintain. Charles might well stay there during his reign anyway and not move to BP. By which time Charlotte and Louis, the spares, won?t want the place either.

[LouisFerdinand]

On Day Three why does King Charles III begin a tour of the United Kingdom?

[Curryong]

This isn?t set in stone that Charles?s tour of the UK will begin on the third day after Queen Elizabeth?s death,  especially as it will be a very busy week for the new monarch. I just can?t see Charles rushing off away from London when there will be dozens of details to decide on many things, his mother not yet buried and dozens of members of royal families, Commonwealth leaders and other dignitaries flying into London to attend the funeral. However Charles will almost certainly want to visit every country of the UK and its major regions in the weeks after his mother?s death as a sort of symbolic gesture as a new monarch.

[LouisFerdinand]

Also Prince William or Catherine could be out of the country at the time and have to return.   
Are there any duties William would have to take over immediately for his father?

[Curryong]

If Charles does go on a ?tour? of the UK three days after his mother?s death, to Parliamentary leaders in Scotland, Wales and NI, it?s likely to be a very swift one. He may even do it by Zoom. This is because within four days of her death Queen Elizabeth is likely to be laid in State in either Westminster Hall or St James, allowing people to go in homage as with any laying in State. Really, basically Charles will need to be in London most of the time until after the funeral.

Depending on when the funeral will be there will be all sorts of things going on, such as Charles?s first Privy Council meeting, meeting with the PM and other officials etc plus meeting and greeting other royals coming for the funeral. Charles will have to be present for all the ceremonial stuff as monarch, William and Camilla could do some meeting and greeting.

[LouisFerdinand]

When Charles is King Charles III, can Prince William sign legal documents?

[Curryong]

I don?t know what you mean? William, a male British adult, can sign legal documents on his own account now.

He will have the same powers as POW, representing the British monarch all over the world, as Charles does now. If what is meant is signing ceremonial documentation on behalf of the monarch, King Charles, overseas, then that?s what he will do.

The role of a Prince of Wales is largely an undefined one, as with other heirs. It won?t change just because William will be in the role, though he may well have more duties and engagements than Charles did in his forties (even though Charles was a workaholic and William isn?t)  simply because Charles will be an elderly man when he comes to the throne. However, he can?t take over the monarch?s primary duties unless there?s a regency.

[LouisFerdinand]

When Charles is King, do you think he would make a royal relative Governor-General of Australia?

[Curryong]

When Charles is King, do you think he would make a royal relative Governor-General of Australia?

No I don?t. There have been no non Australian GGs (or royals in that post) since the Duke of Gloucester during WW2. There would literally be riots in the streets if such a thing was to be suggested, as Charles knows very well.

[wannable]

In Camilla Tominey's, The Telegraph other than mentioning as her main topic about the 2 younger Cambridge children, her second topic is a repeated word that everthing is going to change with how the Queen also had a gazillion charities versus Charles.

What will happen, people worried, not enough royals. It's going to shrink from quantity to quality.

'There is going to be a problem with the idea there is too much work to go around and not enough royals to cover it.'

'It does make the future of the monarchy kind of uncertain. We've got this model that the Queen has been at the head of for all of this time and we all know in the next decade, everything will change.'

[Curryong]

Well, there are going to be changes in Charles?s reign, due to necessity, because there will have to be, whether Charles or Camilla Tominey et al likes the idea or not. The truth is that there won?t be enough royals to take over the Queen?s innumerable patronages, just as there aren?t enough royals right now to take over the hundreds of patronages Prince Philip had.

The facts are as plain as the nose on your face. In Charles?s reign the vast amount of royals undertaking royal duties will shrink as the Kents retire. The Gloucesters probably won?t be long behind them, and that leaves a small core group of royals of 60 and above, Charles, Camilla, Anne and the Wessexes, with Andrew gone. That will leave precisely two working royals aged under fifty, Kate and William.

RRs like Tominey can twist it any way they like but it is clear that Charles intended Harry and wife to join the core inner circle of senior royals while his own siblings took a back step. Well, the Sussexes walked and it has left a large gap in middle aged and younger ranks.

And in spite of the hopeful bleating of older RRs every now and again that the York sisters are ready and eager to take on royal duties, it appears to me and many other observers that Beatrice and Eugenie are in fact perfectly happy with their lives the way they are, thanks.

And Louise, another candidate for fulltime royal duties according to the ubiquitous ?Royal Experts?, is almost certainly headed for University and a career of her own. As, in their turn in another 15 years or so, will be Charlotte and Louis.

Those charities who are slated to lose a royal patron now and in the next twenty years or so, may very well not agree with the contention that quantity is going to be replaced with quantity.

And, reluctant though the RRs who are constantly critical of the Sussexes, would be to admit that the departure of the couple in that under 40 royal cohort was a body blow to the lineup of senior working royals that fact is that it was.

[TLLK]

In Camilla Tominey's, The Telegraph other than mentioning as her main topic about the 2 younger Cambridge children, her second topic is a repeated word that everthing is going to change with how the Queen also had a gazillion charities versus Charles.

What will happen, people worried, not enough royals. It's going to shrink from quantity to quality.

I presume this is topic that she is discussing in her latest video.

Why Prince Charles wants to slim down the monarchy | Royal Insight with Camilla Tominey - YouTube

In this month's episode of Royal Insight, Camilla Tominey looks into why Prince Charles is likely to slim down the monarchy once he becomes king.

Earlier in the month there were suggestions the future monarch will take up residence in a flat above Buckingham Palace and further open the residence to the public.

"There's this sense that he wants a slimmed down monarchy to make sure that everybody is doing their bit and no so-called 'hangers-on'".

In the video above, The Telegraph's Associate Editor Camilla Tominey explains what a slimmed down monarchy is likely to look like and the impact it would have.

IMO this is Charles adapting to the model that other monarchies especially in Europe have had to consider over recent decades. The Dutch Royal House has definitely seen a "slim down" due to the combined effect of their Constitution limiting who is part of the Royal House (working royals) and the Royal Family. Also two of Beatrix's sisters did not seek Parliament's approval for their marriages, thus excluding them.

I have believed for many years that Charles will elect to slim things down and that Tominey's suggestions are not far off the base. 

[Curryong]

Well actually Camilla did speak to some of my points. And while I agree that, by necessity there is likely to be a slimmed down monarchy in the new reign, that is, as Camilla (and I) pointed out, going to leave a lot of charities out in the cold, as there just won?t be enough royals to go around if some of the ?press the flesh? royal visits to factories, hospitals, institutions,  around the country are going to be retained.

The big Foundation style events and podcasts aren?t going to solely cut it if old ladies and others up in Yorkshire or Suffolk or Devon, or up in Scotland or down in Wales etc enjoy royal visits and the carrying out of engagements there in person. 

And, with all due respect to the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium and so forth, these don?t comprise of three quite different countries that have to be visited. Nor do any of them (with the exception of Spain?s ?sphere of Cooperation?) have a very large Commonwealth to cater to as well.

Charles will probably wish to continue the royal link with the Commonwealth (of which he is the ceremonial head) which means that royal tours will have to continue in some form and by somebody.

I would suggest that for several years at least, there will indeed not be enough royals to go round, especially with an ageing monarch and consort. .

[TLLK]

Well actually Camilla did speak to some of my points. And while I agree that, by necessity there is likely to be a slimmed down monarchy in the new reign, that is, as Camilla (and I) pointed out, going to leave a lot of charities out in the cold, as there just won?t be enough royals to go around if some of the ?press the flesh? royal visits to factories, hospitals, institutions,  around the country are going to be retained.

The big Foundation style events and podcasts aren?t going to solely cut it if old ladies and others up in Yorkshire or Suffolk or Devon, or up in Scotland or down in Wales etc enjoy royal visits and the carrying out of engagements there in person. 

And, with all due respect to the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium and so forth, these don?t comprise of three quite different countries that have to be visited. Nor do any of them (with the exception of Spain?s ?sphere of Cooperation?) have a very large Commonwealth to cater to as well.

Charles will probably wish to continue the royal link with the Commonwealth (of which he is the ceremonial head) which means that royal tours will have to continue in some form and by somebody.

I would suggest that for several years at least, there will indeed not be enough royals to go round, especially with an ageing monarch and consort. .

I'm glad that Tominey pointed out that in person visits need to continue throughout the UK and the Commonwealth. In doing so  that will require that the remaining BRF team to be seen on a regular basis.