Duchess Kate & William are looking to hire more nannies for George this year

wenn20909325

With Prince William away at Cambridge for the next ten weeks, Duchess Kate is left on her own during the day (and probably half of the weekday nights) with Prince George. We actually don’t know whether William is going to make the regular trek back to London every night – he managed to come home to Kensington Palace last week, but as the weeks wear on, we’ll see. So, Kate is left with the bulk of the childrearing for fussy, loud, wailing Prince George. Just Kate… and George’s nannies. At first, the palace would barely confirm that Kate and William had hired 71-year-old Jessie Webb, who was William’s former nanny, but I think Webb’s hire was confirmed after photos came out of Webb with George. I believe George has at least one other nanny too. But this story is about Jessie Webb and how she only agreed to come out of retirement for three months (?) to take care of George.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are searching for a new nanny to take on their tour of New Zealand and Australia. Their current nanny, Jessie Webb – who looked after Prince William when he was a child – has reached the end of her contract.

According to sources close to the couple, Mrs Webb, 71, came out of retirement to look after Prince George on the condition that she would work only for three months. In fact, Mrs Webb is still at Kensington Palace and William and Kate are keen to retain her services, but they are discreetly looking for extra help for the month-long trip this spring.

‘It took a lot of persuading to get Jessie to take the job in the first place, but she loves William and wanted to help out,’ said a source. ‘I can’t imagine that she will want to be travelling around the world at her age. If she does, she will need an assistant.’

The Duke and Duchess did not hire a maternity nurse after George’s birth last July. Instead the couple moved into the Middleton family home in Berkshire so that Kate’s mother, Carole, could help out. When they moved to Kensington Palace last September, they persuaded Mrs Webb to join their household.

It had been rumoured that Carole Middleton could join the tour Down Under to help look after George. However, aides insist that will not be the case. The Duke and Duchess will have a punishing schedule, criss-crossing the two countries in less than a month.

‘They need round-the-clock help for George if he joins them,’ said a source. ‘Kate might also want to think about taking a dresser or a lady’s maid. It sounds grand, but it’s actually very practical. The Queen wouldn’t dream of travelling overseas without a lady-in-waiting.’

In addition to Mrs Webb, William and Kate also have a housekeeper, Antonella Fresolone. Kate’s only luxury is her personal hairdresser, Amanda Cook Tucker, who visits the Palace. She is also expected to join the Royal tour. Carole Middleton has taken a hands-on role in caring for her grandson. According to one family friend, she visits Kensington Palace several times a week.

The friend said: ‘Carole is very involved. She often arrives without warning.’

A spokesman for the Royal couple last night declined to comment.

[From The Daily Mail]

Good God, there’s a lot of misinformation mixed with propaganda mixed with absolutely fascinating insights. The biggest problem, for me, is the continuation of this storyline that William and Kate are “just like us” and so “middle class” and “normal”. That is the root of so many of these problems. No one would care that Duchess Kate has a lady in waiting, a stylist, a personal hairdresser, five secretaries, four assistants, a press secretary, two personal trainers, five nannies and ten other staffers if only we could be done with this myth that Kate and William are just like us. They’re not like us. They’re royalty. I think we all know that they need staff.

So, Jessie Webb has only been with them since they moved to Kensington? No. That’s wrong. Webb came on board when George was just a few weeks old, when Kate and William were still living in Anglesey. Those kinds of little lies bug me – they’re so easy to disprove, I wonder why the royal propagandists even bother. Like, it’s shameful to hire a nanny? It’s not. What’s shameful is that William pitched a fit about hiring someone young, qualified and ready to stay on for the next decade as George grows up, because William wanted HIS nanny, even though this poor old woman had already retired.

My favorite parts of this story? Everything about Carole Middleton. Carole wants to travel with Kate and William to Australia and the royal courtiers are aghast. Carole drops by Kensington Palace unannounced and the royal courtiers are aghast. Carole Carole Carole Carole.

FFN_Kate_William_Baby_FFUK_072313_51162129

wenn20810665

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

122 Responses to “Duchess Kate & William are looking to hire more nannies for George this year”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Stef Leppard says:

    “I can’t imagine that she will want to be travelling around the world at her age.”

    Hahaha! She’s 71, not 95! My 70-year-old parents travel the globe regularly and highly enjoy it.

  2. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    “It sounds rather grand…” Oh please, were we born yesterday? They ARE rather grand, and of course they can’t manage a tour like that without some help. So silly.

  3. Relli says:

    I actually think its sort of sweet that William wanted his nanny, its the closest mother figure he has. My grandfather grew up wealthy and he had a great love and affinity for the woman who in his words raised him. There were like 14 children and each had their own nanny. He cared his mom but his love and affections were really for his nanny. So I can see why he wanted it that way and why she made the exception.

    • Florc says:

      Relli
      Then he would have let her enjoy her retirement instead of insisting she come back to work, no?
      And when the Prince is insistent you return to work can you really refuse after such a long career serving the Royal family?
      I hope they made it worth it.

  4. Snarkweek says:

    Mrs. webb deserves to be Dame Webb :)

  5. Cecilia says:

    awwww…Prince George really is one of those spectacular babies. Just look at him!!

  6. Ag says:

    I know that people’s physical and mental capabilities differ as they age, but I would not entrust my child to the care of someone who’s 71. At that age, you’re just not the same as you used to be, both physically and mentally.

    • Suze says:

      LOL – oh good grief. Have you been around any 71 year olds lately?

      Everyone is different. Apparently the Cambridge’s trusted Jesse Webb.

    • bluhare says:

      So much for grandparents, then. Did you read about the 100 year old woman who’s still working as a teacher?

      • fruitloops says:

        Well my mother is a kindergarten teacher, works with 1 – 2 year olds, she is 57 and is already wishing she could retire- After all the years of carrying babies around in her arms she physically isn’t able to do so as much as she could 10 or even 5 years ago.
        You really are not the same person you were when you were young, your body starts giving out whether you want it or not. It’s one thing playing with 4 year olds, caring for an infant is something completely else.

      • bluhare says:

        Your mother teaches Mensa kindergarten? 1-2 year olds?

      • fruitloops says:

        No, I just thought that that would be the best translation, obviously I was wrong, I’m sorry, not a native english speaker. Kindergarten in my country is an institution where people take their children to be taken care of while they are at work, babies need to be at least 1 year old to apply, and they can go until they start school, they are in groups depending on their age and my mother works in the 1-2 year olds group. So I’ll be thankful to learn what her job is called in english! :-)

      • bluhare says:

        Ah. That’s called day care in the US. Or perhaps pre-school for children age 3 and up. Kindergarten is the first year of schooling.

        Man, you and all the other non-native English speakers on here are so good I can’t tell! I had no idea English isn’t your first language.

      • fruitloops says:

        Well thank you, it’s good to know that the money spent on all the years of english lessons was money well spent (for my parents OFC, they paid) ;-)
        And I wasn’t trying to contradict you on your opinion, just to comment on how it’s physically harder for elderly people to take care of children as young as prince George will very soon be. I personally very much count on grandparents of my children, especially my mother, she may be a bit sick of years of wiping other people’s children’s tushies, but I count on grandparent’s general weakness for their grandchildren. ;-)

      • bluhare says:

        No worries, frootloops. What is your first language if you don’t mind me asking.

    • My daughter’s grandparents are all in their 70s. I wouldn’t ask them to look after my 3-year-old for more than a few hours; they’re all very physically fit and mentally sharp, but she’s exhausting!

      But when she was an infant, as Prince George is now? That’s when we got to have date nights, because she was so easy for them to take care of–children don’t move very fast until they’re closer to a year old!

    • tessy says:

      Good G*d girl. One of my best friends is 80, we even go hiking together. Physically she can climb over rocks and trees like a billy goat, and is younger in mind and spirit than some 30 year olds.

      • fruitloops says:

        Yes, and when I go hiking I admire those groups of elderly people I pass by.
        I only wish I still hike in their age, but the reality of it is that my husband and I start an hour after them, pass them by before we reach half of our trail, climb up to the top, take a rest and then pass them by again on our way down, they are about to approach the top.
        So yeah, billy goat an stuff… ;-)

  7. Snarkweek says:

    I know of a duchess named Kate
    She inspires adoration and hate
    For twiddling her thumbs
    but with style and aplomb
    While nannies slip in the back gate.
    Even mom is not safe from the scorn
    Especially since Georgy was born
    But she’ll give you a wink
    And not care what you think
    From Kates side she will never be torn

  8. LAK says:

    The Carole strand is what struck me as well. It’s hilarious and I love your summation of it.

    The rest is more of the same though must point out that in the initial royal propaganda reporting of the retreat to Middleton towers after George’s birth, there was a maternity nurse AND that jack of all trades Italian lady whose many duties very included nannying PG tips.

    Miss Webb joined them in Wales so really, if we throw in Carole as well, they’ve always had help with PG tips.

  9. RobN says:

    I don’t think it can really be called shameful that William wanted somebody he already knew and trusted. I think it’s pretty sweet, actually, that he has such affection for her. They take such a chance when they bring somebody into their inner circle that a known entity is a pretty valuable thing. You can be pretty sure that Mrs. Webb won’t be selling her story to a tabloid.

    As for Carole, if Kate and William have no issue with her dropping by unannounced, and who is to say she didn’t ring their private cell phones to say she was coming, then it’s not really the business of the royal hangers on.

    • My2Pence says:

      RobN. I think it would be “sweet” if he hadn’t proven for 20 years how obsessed he is with privacy, to many people to a point FAR beyond reason. He was slapped down a few years ago by the Press Complaints Commission when they felt he was attempting to restrict Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. So dragging this 71-year-old out of retirement seems to indicate less sweetness and more obsession to many of us.

      From what I understand, the term royal “hangers on” refers to those who benefit from being around royals, possibly financially or socially (Middletons, Bransons, friends of members of the royal family). Not to those of us who observe from the outside. If you meant that the Palace staff shouldn’t concern themselves with this – they are paid by the taxpayers so they have to be concerned about whether or not taxpayer resources are being used improperly.

      One of the many rumors last year was that the revamped 40 room mansion at Kensington would include an apartment for the Middleton’s to stay in. BTW, they have their own apartment less that 2 miles away. The public furor is that the Middleton family would be spending so much time in Kensington that the taxpayers would be funding them. I think that is where the (quite valid) concern comes in re. the amount of time members of the Middleton family spend being “served” by taxpayer funded staff.

      During the failure of a book launch for Pippa, it was proven that taxpayer-funded security was securing the premises of one event for Pippa – when no member of the royal family was going to be at the event. That is clearly unacceptable to the taxpayers. The Mids have their own money, either the Middleton’s or the publishers should have paid for that security. This is one example of why people are quite rightly concerned about what else the Middleton’s might be getting out of the taxpayers.

      • FLORC says:

        My2Pence
        Not to mention for the few weeks Kate stayed at her parent’s after giving birth to George her parent’s home was crawling with ground and airborn security. Plus the many upgrades done to the recently purchased home that included a new kitchen and nursery wing. Since this was for George’s security it was on the tax payers back. If they stayed in a palace where security protocol was already set up it wouldn’t have costed much. And Carole wasn’t band from visiting or that far away.

        And isn’t the curfuffle of William making his and Kate’s security cover Pippa and other Middleton’s ir book tour what lead William’s head of security to quit and move into the private secter?

      • My2Pence says:

        @Florc. Not sure if his reason for leaving was ever publicly announced. Rumor was more money at the new position.
        http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity/541675/kate-middleton-upset-after-chief-bodyguard-quits.html

        It looks like he left in March 2013, and was heading up a team of 8 before he left. Not sure how many more were added after George arrived, much less to cover the Berkshire house 24/7. He left to work at a psychiatric asylum. That just tickles the funny bone doesn’t it? Work for Bill and Kate or at a secure psychiatric hospital? Hospital please!

      • FLORC says:

        To my knowledge his true reason was never announced (total professional).
        It was assumed in a few articles that the way William was using his and Kate’s security to protect the Middleton’s and shoo paps away was below their pay grade. I can only speculate this from various articles and facts though.

        And I see the humor in it. Can’t make this stuff up!

  10. bettyrose says:

    Carole worked hard pimping her daughter for decades. Has she not earned some royal benefits?

  11. Anna says:

    ” No one would care that Duchess Kate has a lady in waiting, a stylist, a personal hairdresser, five secretaries, four assistants, a press secretary, two personal trainers, five nannies and ten other staffers” -

    - no, we would, everyone would. This is 2014, amidst a global recession/stagnation, anything that’s not ‘just like us’ would look horrible, and the Queen of England is possibly the only royal in Europe who can get away with going, well, _full court_, because she’s got 60+ years of legacy and goodwill.

    • bluhare says:

      Personally, I think she uses the no staff excuse to not work. If she had a dresser, that would free up a lot of time she claims she needs to prep for the tour. It also seems there isn’t the pretense of saying Jessie Webb is part time any more either.

      Maybe George really is a handful!

    • Suze says:

      Personally, I believe the public doesn’t want a royal family that’s just like them, because why even have one if that’s the case? But you can’t relish the perks of the job without giving back something.

      The royal family’s goodwill with the public doesn’t lie in them being “just like us”. They are supposed to actually serve the public to earn their keep. The Queen Mother understood that – she always dressed for events, not looking remotely like “one of us” – but she would also work her butt off, standing for hours greeting people. It’s a fine line, but one that they have to tread.

      So Kate and William have to provide value. To do that, they have to work supporting business organizations and charities, and to do that, they need help running their large households and with raising their children. So, nannies and household staff will be employed so that Kate and William can get on with what they have to do.

    • FLORC says:

      Wrong spot.
      And what Suze said.

  12. Seagulls says:

    You’ve summed it up nicely. I know there’s not agreement that the Royals should exist, but they do and to exist as they do as a nice tourist attraction they need staff. So why the pretense that these two have no staff, that they’re just folks? It’s asinine.

    I’m still fascinated by William’s allergy to work.

  13. cass says:

    I am having trouble buying the phrase “left on her own”. Seriously, I doubt Kate is all by her lonesome, single handedly looking after her baby. Even if she doesn’t have a nanny per se, she has access to other staff 24/7 and I am quite sure she takes full advantage of it.

    • StaCat1 says:

      I agree. My husband travels for work quite a bit and I work full time. We don’t have a nanny or one dedicated childcare/housekeeping person- I use daycare for the little one and school for the older while working. I HIGHLY doubt kate is “left on her own”.

      If I had all that staff for pick ups/drop offs, sick days- or merely to get out and get my hair done once in a blue moon etc…I would use it. Can’t fault her for that- I CAN fault them for trying to appear “just like us”. THAT they are not.

  14. HH says:

    Speaking of travel, my biggest annoyance with Kate is that she’s not well-traveled for supposedly being so well off. Her trip to Canada and the US was her first time ever visiting either country. I mean, she’d never been NYC, LA, Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, etc… This will also be her first time to Australia as well. I mean, really?! This rant is all out of pure jealousy. I love to travel and limited money and limited vacation time at work are the only things that stop me. She’s never had to worry about either. Ugh! C’mon girl.

    Edited to add: She has been to Italy and Chile, but from what I understand (and would be willing to bet money on) she was chasing William. So, she only gets partial credit.

    • FLORC says:

      HH
      Didn’t Kate travel to New York for almost 2 weeks to apprentice with a photographer? She left that to return to William though, no?
      And maybe it’s because I have traveled, live in the states now, and do hate planes, but I can’t hate her for this. As long as she’s willing to travel and get her hands dirty by properly representing her country.

      And you nailed it. She had 1 pursuit it seems. If William didn’t go there what purpose could Kate find to go there?

      • HH says:

        Florc,
        I do recall hearing about that, but I don’t think there was any follow through because (1) there was nothing further printed (i.e. while Kate is currently in NYC, etc.) and (2) I specifically recall the journalists mentioning their North American tour was her first in either the U.S. or Canada. And that just struck me as odd. **Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Perhaps they were just referencing Canada.**

        In regards to planes, I doubt she she has an aversion to them. Work, yes. Planes, not so much. I think it’s just the same old, tired excuse. She planned her life around William and wasn’t going anywhere that he wasn’t.

      • FLORC says:

        HH
        No luck finding the link as it’s buried under a lot of recent Kate articles that are all the same… But I want to say she was in NY and there was a picture of her with the photographer in a field or something.
        She went and didn’t complete her short visit is what I took away. I could be remembering it incorrectly, though.

        And Kate takes that long plane ride to Mustique yearly as well as several other trips so I doubt she hates planes that much.
        My husband has to bribe me heavily and give me a damn good reason to get on one. Turbulence and claustophobia are a perfect storm for a living nightmare.

      • Juliette says:

        My memory recalled what HH has said and I was able to find a link. Kate had never been to continental North America before marrying William.

        “It will be Kate Middleton’s first-ever trip to the U.S., and Prince William’s first visit in an official capacity.”

        Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/prince-william-kate-middleton-headed-california-u-s-trip-kate-trip-journey-america-article-1.140625#ixzz2qP16ZSxn

      • FLORC says:

        Juliette
        There was no dispute that article existed. I was searching for the article that covered Kate’s apprenticing a photographer. Maybe she didn’t, but I could have sworn she did go, but left almost immediately to be with William.
        If she did just that I have no doubt it would never be mentioned again since it isn’t showing Kate in a flattering light. Can anyone confirm or deny this with the link?

    • Suze says:

      Actually, I think she’s been on many trips to Africa. They were with William, but still, I do think she has a genuine interest in the continent.

      • HH says:

        Oh, I have no doubt her interest is genuine when Will is there. ;)

      • LAK says:

        I think she’s genuinely interested in what William is interested in. *snort*

      • Angelic 21 says:

        Suze,

        I’m curious to know what makes you think she have a genuine interest in Africa as a continent? She only traveled to Africa on holidays with William at 5 star resorts and such. She herself said it she was just beginning to learn about conservation at a gala even though William has been involved with this for years. I have never seen any evidence of such a interest.

      • Suze says:

        @Angelic – I think she has made Africa one of her interests because it is one of William’s interests – one of both William and Harry’s passions.

        No, I don’t think she developed this interest on her own – in fact, whatever her personal interests are has never been stated.

        As for Africa, they became engaged there and seem to travel there frequently.

      • Green Girl says:

        Yeah, Kate always struck me as being the girl who likes what her boyfriend likes. It’s fine to start liking some things your SO is into, because after some time together you start doing that (I don’t know if I would have gotten into certain sports if it weren’t for my husband, and he definitely wouldn’t have gotten into certain authors if it weren’t for me). Just retain your own interests, too.

        But I always get/got the impression from her that if it was something he liked, then she liked it, too. What do they do together that’s of interest to her?

      • HH says:

        @Suze – I think they travel there frequently because of connections. I mean, I have no doubt that William and Harry absolutely adore Africa, as evidenced by their charities. However, doesn’t Jecca Craig’s father own land there? As well as Richard Branson?

      • MinnFinn says:

        Green Girl – Topless sunbathing?

      • LAK says:

        …..but Suze, when they were at that UNICEF engagement, she had no clue where the famine was despite visiting the country several times including for her engagement AND having Honeymooned a couple of months prior in the Seychelles which is off the coast.

        As Angelic21 said, She visits Africa for the 5star resorts and nothing else.

        I found it strange that she said she is only recently beginning to learn about conservation considering the 5star resort she stays at in Kenya is a conservation park!!!!

    • Angelic 21 says:

      Florc,

      I’m afraid you are wrong. No such trip was made IIRC, just like everything else with this couple there are always plans, intentions to do stuff but in reality nothing is actually done. There were rumors she will go to NY and have a internship with Testino but he denied any involvement with her and just like her all others intentions of doing remotely anything resembling to work faded and she kept on waiting and partying and vacationing……….

    • Juliette says:

      HH makes a phenomenal point here. Kate really only traveled when it was a trip with William or a family vacation. This lines up with her overall personality, she is a follower.

  15. ann says:

    wasty is sooooooooo useless and an embarrassment, any woman could have been more than willing to marry willy, and produce children, she likes to use people, she been using her mother, then willian now george, talk of playing victim, she is not stupid if she is she would not have stalked william, she is a hartdcore stalker, needy sociopath and a fraud she is a smooth operato

  16. Angelic 21 says:

    Wow so much for being a stay at home mom and can’t work because someone plus an army of nanny have to stay at home with the baby. She is so useless, this is our future queen only valued for a prince going inside her and 1 coming out of her,nothing more.

  17. Lexi says:

    Is it so bad what Carole is doing? Whenever and if I ever have kids, I know with my mom I’ll be like ‘omg don’t leave me, i have no idea what i’m doing!” lol my grandmother, my mom’s mom, stayed with my family when i was first born for about 3 weeks and it was no big deal. If I have kids I would welcome it AND my mom dropping by I would welcome as well, for a while at least…lol

    • FLORC says:

      Lexi
      1st thing is 1st. Kate is not like you. In the course of your job if you had to travel with your spouse and had every expense covered, but requested you also had to bring your mother along at the companies expense how would that be perceived? You and your mother might argue it would be at your own expense, but any association with you or your child would involve added security and expense. Your mother would only be there as a security blanket while you are on business for a very short time away.

      And no. IT’s not bad to want your mom near when you’re a new mom. Even though Kate has possibly over 100 years of experience with babies surrounding George having your mom is nice. She can take 2 weeks away though and be with her husband and child while doing her duties. To bring Carole only promotes 2 big issues. 1. Kate is emotionally stunted and needs her mom more than her husband. 2. Carole wants to insert herself into the royal family and benefit from it.

    • bluhare says:

      Lexi, it isn’t bad what Carole is doing. First off, I wouldn’t be able to get rid of my mother, and she’d be over every time she could. Plus George is the first grandchild and if he’s as fussy as he’s made out to be I imagine Kate’ll take any help she can get.

      I don’t fault them for getting another nanny for Australia either. Jessie Webb is in her 70′s, and although the queen’s a bit older than that she’s been advised to not do long haul flights any more. So I can see why a younger, more spritely nanny might be required for Australia. That being said, I won’t be surprised to find out they can’t find anyone so Carole has to go. :)

  18. Juliette says:

    “Kate’s only luxury is her personal hairdresser”

    This is a woman who has NEVER held a job in her whole life. Yet she lives in palaces, wears Cartier and diamonds, drives custom-made Range Rovers, employs a spokesperson, a nanny, a personal trainer, a housekeeper, security personal, etc. etc. etc.

    It’s an insult to all of us practical “regular folks” to say her ONLY luxury is a personal hairdresser. Her entire existence is luxury.

  19. Maria says:

    The PR machine has to make it look like they are “one of us” AKA the vast middle class because they are on the people’s dime. No matter how you slice it or dice it or sugar coat it. The Duchy argument doesn’t hold up either because that ultimately belongs to the people. BUT they are not like us and if we middle class find out, it may be off with their heads and THAT is what they are trying to avoid: being cut off from the golden goose.

  20. Snarkweek says:

    This “we are normal” crap is annoying and starting to wear thin. William and Kate would do better to emphasize different not normal. I do love the fact that they are doing things differently but as for normal, nobody wants that. Without The pageantry, pop and circumstance of royalty these people are just reality stars. So the next time we see Kate out shopping she better be wearing a tiara.

    • My2Pence says:

      It is odd to many folks that they keep pushing the “we are normal” (Okay, define “normal”). Also that we’re supposed to believe that what is behind this is William protecting his fragile Kate (BTW, if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you).

      Why do we keep being sold the story that Kate Middleton being middle class and “normal” is a radical and different choice for a royal consort in recent years?

      Daniel (Sweden), Letizia (Spain), Mary (Denmark), Mette-Marit (Norway) all come from low to middle class backgrounds (not aristocracy and not wealthy). Maxima (Netherlands) was, I think, more upper middle-class (some ties to aristocracy, money, her father’s role in government). Mathilde (Belgium) – Polish and Belgian aristocracy but not a wealthy family (no family estate, they lived in a city apartment, etc.).

      Why on earth do Bill and Kate keep pushing the idea that Kate is supposed to be special because she’s “normal” and “middle class”? And that this means doing things new ways – ways that basically involve neither of them pulling their weight? She has no artistocratic background but (mysteriously-sourced and unverifiable) money. She had many more economic advantages than most of the other consorts had in their lives, including access to the finest expensive schools which she clearly frittered away. But she’s coddled and protected because she’s “middle class” and “normal” and therefore she cannot handle the role?

  21. Renee says:

    Doesn’t Michelle Obama have staff? And what exactly is HER job? Doesn’t the VPs wife have staff? I’m just tired of people complaining over every little thing Will and Kate do. They’re royals. They have staff. Everyone needs to get over it.

    • bluhare says:

      You’re missing the point. No one here cares if they have staff. In fact, I think most of us expect that they do. What we don’t like is all this “we’re just like you; we’re doing everything ourselves!” and then we find out that no, they really aren’t. They had over 30 staff at their Christmas party last year (which we only know about as it was a big deal because of Kate’s morning sickness). I don’t think they’re all house staff; I bet some were office staff, but still. 30 plus people is a lot for people who have no help.

    • FLORC says:

      The Obamas don’t deny up and down that they’re doing it on their own with no staff.
      And no one is criticizing Will and Kate for having staff. They are calling bs on how they claim they’re doing it all on their own and photoshopping out their staff.
      They should have staff, but are actively hiding it and using lack of staff as an excuse for many things. Hope that clears up your misunderstanding.

    • MavenTheFirst says:

      They’re lying about what their lives are like. That’s what’s offensive.

      It’s like Maria above said, it’s all about maintaining the status quo and ensuring their future. So they’ll spin it as if they are hands on, and modern, just like thee and me. They LIE. That’s how much they respect and value their subjects.

    • Bucky says:

      Michelle Obama has very defined duties in the White House. Not to mention, she’s used to working very, very hard. She went to Princeton undergrad, Harvard law, and had a successful career in public service prior to becoming First Lady. I can assure you that she is not work-shy in the way Kate and WIlliam have demonstrated.

      And as someone mentioned, it’s not about having staff, it’s about the poorly executed cloak and dagger act.

  22. So Cal says:

    If people didn’t hate Kate’s mother so much they wouldn’t mind her going with them on the tour to look after her grandson; people don’t even like it when she visits KP because they don’t want her at the palaces. Kate’s mother comes free of charge, no salary like you would a nanny, just pay for her an extra bed and food when traveling. I would rather have my mother look after my child than some stranger who would be willing to write a book once they resign from the job.

    I have been asking on several gossip websites and I haven’t gotten an answer: who said that they were to be a “normal” couple? Did PWilliam say that? Or is the press shoving it down our throats?

    • LAK says:

      It’s been drip fed to the public from the Palace, PR linked directly to the Palace or them via royal reporters and media writing puff pieces that toe the palace line.

      If you listen to William’s interviews, it’s a recurring theme. Heck, even Kate used it in her brief words outside the hospital.

      Everything they do is reported in a way that ties it with ‘normal’ and ‘down to earth’ and ‘being one of us’ as if it’s a badge of honour.

      I actually like that Harry straight out said in an interview after his recent stint in Afghanistan that he is not normal nor does he think his normal is the same as that for regular people.

      • FLORC says:

        I tried to find a direct article quoting him saying “normal” in the context of his life with Kate, but couldn’t.
        I did find out some interesting things. He does say he wants “normalcy” and to be “ordinary”, but these are both pre wedding and are more about him wanting the press to not follow him around his University.

        Also, and interesting quote where he says people are wrong claiming he doesn’t want to be king. That it’s his duty in life to be King, but he still sounds reluctent.

        And there are enough straight from the palace and planted articles to beat in to the reader that he wants to be normal. With his cottage and military job, his time reducing work to settle into marriage, etc…

      • MavenTheFirst says:

        @FLORC

        Meh. I think he is glib. Period.

    • Snarkweek says:

      I have only ever heard or read about will longing for more normalcy in his life. As far as his marriage, his take on Royal life and his role as a father The emphasis has been on doing things differently than previous generations of the monarchy. In large part this has been tightly translated by the media as William and Kate want to convince us that they are normal and just like us. That may not be quite fair and I maintain that the bulk of our collective resentment should be directed towards media outlets. As far as Kate’s mom is concerned I have not been able to accurately pin down why this woman is so hated. It is just irrational. The aristocracy and the old money crowd live their lives behind a dense veil of privacy and discretion. But does anyone really believe that there were not members of this group plotting and pushing to get their daughters in front of William and Harry? It is 2014 yet people still believe that money and privilege automatically convey class, intelligence and superior morals and values. Ironically, it is the royal family it’s self that has proven this assumption to be laughable. Kate’s mom is no better and no worse then so many others.

      • LAK says:

        Dame Snarkweek,

        It’s not as simple as William once said he wishes for normalcy and the media then runaway with a theme.

        If we separate out William’s wishes and look solely at media, it all started at the engagement. People repeat the myth of the iron hand of the grey men at the Palace, but the truth is they do not act without consent from their royal charges.

        At the engagement, many articles appeared emphasising the ‘normalcy’ of Kate, how William wished to continue to be ‘normal’. His own world of aristos was pitted against Kate’s ‘normal’ world. All orchestrated by a mixture of PR and the Palace. You can make the direct link using the bylines of the articles. Many such articles came from royal reporters or Middleton friendly reporters, rest of media picked up the theme.

        At every step of the way, Kate and William wishing to be normal was explained to the public via the royal reporters. From the ‘normalcy’ of the wedding ( limousine instead of glass coach, trees in the Abbey etc) through to their life in Wales ( cottage, RAF wives’ club, Jam making, spud growing) through to George (William changing nappies, spending his first few weeks in a ‘normal’ home instead of a royal one)

        There are constant public gestures and signals that reinforce the message, such as William explaining in the CNN interview that it was important for him to strap the baby seat into the car and drive his own family away from the hospital ( important for him yes, but more important for him to be seen doing so). Next time William gives an interview, listen to all the different ways he explains his wish for normalcy without actually saying so. It’s subtle, but it is there.

        Information about their lives is carefully controlled except for a few titbits and always downplayed. As an example, the Welsh home repeatedly described as a ‘cottage’ by Middleton friendly journalists with emphasis on down to earth as opposed to living it up in a Palace. The deliberate misinformation was never cleared up until it became too obvious via people posting on the internet the size of their home. It was then transmuted to ‘farmhouse’.

        The idea of Kate as a normal Suzy home maker started a few days after the wedding. The Palace statement was along the lines of wanting to settle in to her marriage in her cottage in Wales, join the RAF wives club, make William his favourite dinners of roast chicken and draw him a bath after a long shift. And that’s also when the no staff thing first reared it’s head. Again, impression left that they were very down to earth normal people.

        This very article continues with the tradition by informing the public that Kate’s ONLY luxury is an on call personal hairdresser. (LOL)

        Every few weeks, reporters known to be on favourable to Kate and the Middletons write articles reiterating how ‘normal’ and ‘down to earth’ Kate is or the life she’s created for William and George etc. This message is repeated ad nauseum by the rest of the media. It’s relentless.

        The royal reporters are always banging this drum too. The royal reporters, AKA briefing from the Palace directly, wouldn’t repeat something that wasn’t officially sanctioned.

        This is why when William put a different title on the birth certificate for Kate which was different from the one trotted out by the royal reporters, there was a collective hissy fit on their part saying they happily trotted out the Palace line and were deceived.

        Finally, the fabled break away from tradition is always explained in context of their wish to be normal. It’s never about replacing traditions with new ones. The explanation always goes hand in hand with an explanation about William wishing to extend the normal life he finds with the Middletons into the Palace.

        So it’s not as simple as the media is simple taking a throw away remark that William made in an interview where he specifically mentioned the word ‘normal’. It’s many different, subtle and unsubtle ways that the desire has been teleported.

      • FLORC says:

        Dame Snarkweek
        Not to add to Lady LAK’s lovely detailing of how “normal” is drilled into us, but to tackle why Carole isn’t well liked.

        Carole is a boot straps kind of woman. Came from little and worked very hard to have what she has. Even with a sketchy brother, but all that aside Carole just seems hmm…

        When Kate was dating william it’s fairly well accepted he wasn’t terribly faithful and treated her like a doormatt. Yet, Carole encouraged young, lovely Kate to stay with him and not end what others would take as an unhealthy relationship with a jerk.
        Carole’s well documented dating tips to Kate to win William back summed up to lose weight, make his interests your interests, date within his social cirlce to make him jealous, and don’t question him. She came back looking like a shell of what she used to be, but had the ring.
        This all boils down to Carole coming off as a woman who sold her daughter for wealth and connections. Not to mention Sketchy uncle gary and the shady money of PP.

    • So Cal says:

      Thank you all for your replies to my post. I agree with LAK that it was the royal reporters that were explaining to us that Kate and William wanted to be normal, they didn’t say it themselves.

  23. mimi says:

    good god, is it wrong that carol involve so much into her grandson life? my mom and my mother in law, will be so happy if they can be involve as much as what carol do now.

    I don’t know if anyone feel like I do, but i don’t think its intrusive with your mom help to take care your child because they all had been there, and if they success to raise you or your husband than you will learn so much from your own parents, which can help you raising your own kids as good as they had.

  24. Zombie Shortcake says:

    Lol Carole the Gatecrasher. Maybe she can dog sit while they are away.

  25. melmel says:

    what does a royal dresser do? put your underwear on? or get your clothes ready? it seems like Kate is good at that already

    • My2Pence says:

      @Melmel. I’ve never had one, so can only guess. A royal dresser would potentially be the person who is responsible for things like:

      - Making sure you wear the proper gift outfit when visiting a country so you do not insult everyone by wearing the wrong thing

      - Advise you against wearing head-to-toe black while visiting children in a hospice; guide you towards wearing something, you know, cheerful that doesn’t remind everyone of upcoming funerals

      - Getting the weights sewn into your skirts and dresses so you STOP flashing people constantly

      - Guiding the choice of appropriate clothing (don’t wear low-cut clothing in a conservative country, follow the established royal protocol of knee-length skirts for ladies and heels lower than 3 inches, etc.)

      - Guide you in wearing clothing from the country you are paid to represent, rather than wearing French, Italian, and US clothing (all of which Kate Middleton has done). On her personal time she can wear whatever she wants, but “on duty” she is paid to represent Brand UK and that means UK clothing.

      - Advise you against wearing an $88,000 necklace to a daytime event in the middle of an economic collapse

      - Advise you against wearing skin-tight, inappropriate jeggings on official engagements. Guide you towards attractive and flattering trousers instead.

      - Assist you in selecting professional separates for an economical, flexible wardrobe rather than watching you spend $150,000 in the taxpayers money in a year for one-off inappropriate outfits

      etc.