Sorry, I've got to speak up for him on the biscuits - Duchy Originals is a separate company from the Duchy of Cornwall and all the profits go to charity.
Sorry, I've got to speak up for him on the biscuits - Duchy Originals is a separate company from the Duchy of Cornwall and all the profits go to charity.Actually now that I think about it I am glad the Queen hasn't abdicated. Prince Charles is too greedy. He has multiple streams of income- money from the Duchy of Cornwall, selling his buscuits in Waitrose, fleecing foreign businessman for thousands of pounds in his cash for access schemes etc. That should be more than enough for him.
I think Diana was on to something when she said he would make a terrible king.
I don’t get the problem with booing a politician or head of state in any case? People have a right to protest publicly. There was no violence or disruption to other people happening. HMTQ most definitely had worse encounters in the 70 years of her reign. I mean, I can totally see people that like her as Queen and have no objection around the UK HoS set up, protesting/booing to let her know not all of her actions are going down well with the public. I also think she isn’t phased one bit by it and can very well distinguish between her role as a symbol and herself as an individual.
I do wonder how Scotland would try to set up a second referendum (not that I think there will be one in the next 10-50 years). Who is allowed to vote next time? Living in Scotland? What about Scots that live somewhere else in the UK? Does a holiday home count? Being Scottish? How are you going to „prove“ this? How far do your Scottish routes have to go back? How far back is too far?
I said before it would be so interest how they would work it out. Just look how complicated Brexit still is. What about the border? Would a phone call be international (thinking of the Island of Saint-Martin/Sint Maarten). Would you have to go through border control when you commute to work? Will your legal working rights changed at one point when one country makes new laws? What about companies with several offices in the UK? If it happens it will be a shit ton of trouble and I doubt the adult generations will reap any benefits that might come from it in their lifetime. Just like it’s impossible to determine if Brexit will be a success or a massive failure at this point. I wonder if the fact about how the Head of State is set up should be the corner objective for someone to go into this question. That’s very short sighted, you might get a Scottish monarch (unlikely) or another form of un-elected by the people HoS. I mean, the Monarchy is basically the Scottish crown taking over from Elizabeth I. So it should really be England questioning who is sitting on that throne
Yes. So do I. I voted remain but I still have to live here, as do my children for the foreseeable, so I'd rather it was a success. I dontvtbinknthe Monarchy will make a difference one way or another in relation to that in Scotland. I would think its way down the list when people are thinking about voting yes or no in a potential referendum.@Milliemoo99
Oh it’s most definitely a massive failure at the moment. Quite shocking to be honest. You wouldn’t think such miss-management is even possible with so many advisers and experts. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that people looking back in 50 years will evaluate the situation the same way.
You never know what the future brings and there is always the chance for the situation to improve and even surpass the past. I certainly hope this will happen for the UK and it’s citizens even if it will be a blow to the EU.
Problem is, it doesn't matter how terrible a king he might make. It doesn't matter if Prince George grows up to be an axe murderer. They will still be King, whether we like it or not!Actually now that I think about it I am glad the Queen hasn't abdicated. Prince Charles is too greedy. He has multiple streams of income- money from the Duchy of Cornwall, selling his buscuits in Waitrose, fleecing foreign businessman for thousands of pounds in his cash for access schemes etc. That should be more than enough for him.
I think Diana was on to something when she said he would make a terrible king.
The HRHs were given to William‘s future children before the birth of Prince George, because at that point they didn’t know if the first born would be male or female and legislation had just been introduced removing the discrimination surrounding women succeeding to the throne. If that legislation came in without the amended Letters Patent and if W&Cs firstborn had been female, she would have been Heir to the Throne but styled and titled Lady, whereas her younger brother would be behind her in the LoS but styled and titled Prince. (Under the 1917 letters patent, only the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be a Prince. All others would be just Lord or Lady)I agree actually. It was a stupid and petulant thing for H &M to complain about when it was clearly part of a plan to slim down the monarchy. I think HM should not have given HRH's to William's children either- they would have got them when Charles was King, and would have allowed Charles to say that only George was going to be expected to be a working Royal. As it is, Charlotte and Louis are going to be the ' spare' children, and we have seen the damage that has done to to other 'spares' in the past. I think only time will tell re monarchy/Republic but I think, as Great Kate said, they are safe because most people don't care about them enough to change the system. They will have to decide to give it up, which I doubt they will, because it seems only Harry doesn't know just how priveleged and lucky they are and how protected they are by the establishment.
Well that's not quite true. Read a bit about Charles the First and James the Second.Problem is, it doesn't matter how terrible a king he might make. It doesn't matter if Prince George grows up to be an axe murderer. They will still be King, whether we like it or not!
I am not so sure there are actual rules about bowing. More a guideline that if you choose to do so that’s the right way/order. No one has to bow to the Queen (or the others) and I think it’s 50/50 that people choose to or not to. The inside family dynamic is different. Everyone could just decide not to do it. It’s not as if they would be put into the tower. On the other hand, if you subscribe to the idea of being a royal family it’s pretty natural to also subscribe to the idea of a hierarchy and bowing. If you start cutting away all those outdated quirks you pretty quickly arrive at a massive question mark as to why you have them at all. That’s a problem if you try to justify it (not that that isn’t hard enough).I can't believe how archaic all the titles stuff is, especially the bowing and scraping it entails. It really needs to go, nobody should be curtseying and bowing in this day and age.
They were absolute monarchs though. There is mot the same thing at stake, and we also have a huge industry around the Royals, so all the sycophants in the press, the Royal Reporters the Royal biographers etc will do their best to minimise whatever they do. We've seen that with Andrew, where associating with paedophiles and other dodgy people is seen as the equivalent behaviour to Harry being a bit of a twat and moaning about his family.Well that's not quite true. Read a bit about Charles the First and James the Second.
I can well believe it’s true.I hope this isn't true, it feels like they are competing with the Sussexes.
EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Kate Middleton's hush-hush TV pow wow
EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge has been holding talks with TV executive David Glover who commissioned the hit Channel 4 how Googlebox.www.dailymail.co.uk
Sort of makes sense to me? Early Childhood is Kate’s big focus at the moment. Plus Charles has been involved in a few environmental documentaries, as well as stuff to do with the Princes Trust and Poundbury etc.I hope this isn't true, it feels like they are competing with the Sussexes.
EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Kate Middleton's hush-hush TV pow wow
EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge has been holding talks with TV executive David Glover who commissioned the hit Channel 4 how Googlebox.www.dailymail.co.uk
' I know everything about him' says Sarah Ferguson. I bet she does! Explains why she still lives like she is still married to him.Prince Andrew's been quizzed by Scotland Yard.
Prince William sees Andrew as a 'threat to the royal family, insiders claim | Daily Mail Online
She more than knows about him, she’s up to her bloody neck in it.' I know everything about him' says Sarah Ferguson. I bet she does! Explains why she still lives like she is still married to him.
Prince Charles also just signed an Amazon Prime video deal to make exclusive content for them. I don't know, I think they should avoid giving people the fodder to draw comparisons between themselves and the Sussexes because from the outside it's starting too look like they are in a petty rivalry.Sort of makes sense to me? Early Childhood is Kate’s big focus at the moment. Plus Charles has been involved in a few environmental documentaries, as well as stuff to do with the Princes Trust and Poundbury etc.
I think they will re-marry at some point.' I know everything about him' says Sarah Ferguson. I bet she does! Explains why she still lives like she is still married to him.
Extended members of the royal family do not have automatic right to police security, it is a decision made with the family, Home Office and Metropolitan police. The would imagine if you have a title then you might have security when you younger which could be what they are hinting at but it’s never fully explained.The thing I’ve never understood about their moaning about needing titles is they said it was so the kids had protection. Would they not have had the same protection as them whilst with them?
She could have just amended it that the first born, regardless of sex, was made HRH?The HRHs were given to William‘s future children before the birth of Prince George, because at that point they didn’t know if the first born would be male or female and legislation had just been introduced removing the discrimination surrounding women succeeding to the throne. If that legislation came in without the amended Letters Patent and if W&Cs firstborn had been female, she would have been Heir to the Throne but styled and titled Lady, whereas her younger brother would be behind her in the LoS but styled and titled Prince. (Under the 1917 letters patent, only the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be a Prince. All others would be just Lord or Lady)
I think people would have been more upset/offended by that than by the fact that all W&Cs children are Prince/Princess, so I think the Queen was right to do it. She didn’t need to do it for Harry’s potential future children as there was no discrimination inherent in their styles and titles (They would ALL be Lord/Lady, as great grandchildren of the Monarch, and then they ALL would become Prince/Princess once Charles became King).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?