Prince William announces a new job for Kate: the sponsor of a naval battleship

Embed from Getty Images

Last week, the Duchess of Cambridge added a new patronage to her very small list. She didn’t even make the choice to really add something new, it’s just that her patronage Action on Addiction merged with another charity, The Forward Trust, so now she’s patroness of The Forward Trust. So I guess she didn’t really “add” a patronage after all, since her patronage Action on Addiction has been absorbed into The Forward Trust. I would be very curious about why Action on Addiction needed to be merged with another charity. Is it because – and I’m just guessing – they didn’t actually have the money to continue as-is because their patroness is so lazy? Very curious.

Speaking of Kate, laziness and promises to be eventually quite keen, Kate got name-checked on Day 2 of William’s mini-tour of Scotland with the Queen. On Tuesday, William and Liz visited a shipyard in Glasgow where Royal Navy boats are being made. William promised that Kate would be a royal sponsor of one of the battleships being built:

Kate Middleton has a new role! She is a sponsor for a new naval battleship. Her husband Prince William made the announcement during a visit to the shipyard area of Govan in Glasgow, Scotland, early on Tuesday. Speaking at BAE Systems, William said his grandmother Queen Elizabeth had made the appointment for the Duchess of Cambridge to be associated with HMS Glasgow, which is being built at the yard.

It means Kate, 39, will have a longstanding “strong and enduring personal connection to the vessel and her crew, often supporting milestones, events and deployments,” her office at Kensington Palace explained.

In his speech, William said, “My family’s affection for the Royal Navy is well known, and as I saw the work taking place here today, I was thinking of my grandfather, the Duke of Edinburgh. He would have been fascinated and very excited to see such advances in skills and technology being put into practice. Today, I’m very pleased to announce that my family’s connection with Type 26 will endure for many years to come. Her Majesty the Queen has approved the appointment of my wife Catherine as Sponsor of the superb ship we see taking shape outside — HMS Glasgow. I know that Catherine will be delighted to join you here in Glasgow for the naming ceremony in due course.”

[From People]

This made me wonder about two things: one, is there any reason why William couldn’t sponsor a boat? Do boats need their sponsors to be women specifically? It just feels like William – who was actually physically there at the shipyard – could have been like “yay, I’m the new sponsor of this boat, that’s awesome!” Two, if Kate was having another job foisted upon her (that’s the only way to get her to work), why wasn’t she there on this Scotland trip? I keep wondering about why William was the last-minute royal tasked with going on this trip, especially since he and Kate had just been in Scotland in May. It’s all so strange! But I guess Kate will be happy to be a boat sponsor. It means that she’s not being served with divorce papers any time soon.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Getty.

Related stories

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

65 Responses to “Prince William announces a new job for Kate: the sponsor of a naval battleship”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eurydice says:

    Phillip would have wanted it. Plus, she has those sailor pants with all the gold buttons.

  2. Royalwatcher says:

    I’m so petty but I just love that his nasty, vile personality is written all over his ugly, jaw-clenching mug. Has there ever been a bigger glow down?!

    As for the ship sponsorship…shall we take bets that Keen won’t even be around by the time the ship is christened?

  3. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    Maybe he wants to put the Duchess of Buttons out to sea.

  4. Becks1 says:

    This just makes it weirder that she wasn’t there as well. Why didn’t they visit Glasgow when they were in Scotland last month? Why didnt she attend for this announcement?

    • SamB says:

      First The Queen pretends William isn’t on the engagement with her and now Kate is a no show for a new patronage yet shows up at a Soccer match…yeah there’s something seriously going on here. My only thought is maybe The Queen said yes to William but No to Kate. It would be odd for Kate to show up only for the boat assignment and not with William/ The Queen at the other events, so she didn’t attend at all. Also Kate PR would’ve put out that The Queen is showing Kate how to be a Future Queen ( which is just foolish). If William and Kate are living separate lives the last thing the Palace would want the Public to believe is that the Royal Family will not survive without Keen Kate steering it through the storms of time.

      • equality says:

        Maybe the Queen got wind of the “future Queen and her husband Prince William” article and is taking her down some.

    • Nic919 says:

      I think William didn’t want her there. It’s just very weird for him to announce her involvement like that.

      • SamB says:

        I can see that but why did she get the ok for the Soccer match. William showing George how to be a future King would have grabbed more headlines without Kate tagging alone with misery written all over her face would’ve been a better PR move

      • Mac says:

        Given how last minute it was, I think William was replacing another family member who had to cancel for some reason.

    • Sunday says:

      I think this was a last minute decision, maybe as part of an agreement to continue the embiggening, or maybe just to try and squash the divorce rumors. If it wasn’t last minute she would have been there, full stop. It makes no sense whatsoever for him to announce it without her being there.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      She’s as usual being shoehorned into things – this and the football game yesterday are only to placate her in some way. Guess all the PR leaking and stunting from the past few weeks has paid off.

      I watched some of the footage of TQ in Scotland – she looked to be having a good time. Was in good spirits specially when she went to visit the Irn Bur (soft drink) factory with William.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think the Queen does a good job of seeming to enjoy herself, whether she actually does or not. and I bet she missed not going to Scotland last year (I know she went to Balmoral but that’s different.) She has a good game face, maybe that’s what she’s trying to teach William?

  5. Harper says:

    I suspect part of Kate’s separation agreement will be to continue to hold some royal-adjacent duties in her role as mother to the heir. But only the fun ones. Christening a ship is about right. Plus, she can be quietly removed from the sponsorship when no one is looking.

    • Nic919 says:

      I agree. I think separation in currently happening in a more official way behind the scenes.

      • Bettyrose says:

        If this is how the separation looks, why aren’t we all congratulating Kate? If she gets to live in Bucklebury with her children, only show for rare appearances, and never deal with Will, while keeping her title and position, she’s essentially won the golden ring, yes?

      • Seraphina says:

        @Bettyrose, let’s not forget she still gets to theme dress (added to the list).

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        I agree – a divorce will happen when he finds her replacement, someone who can compete with Meghan. It’s been said that William always wanted what Harry had/has and that he’s always been very competitive with Harry and the rest of the family, esp with media coverage.

        Cain see’s the kind life/image etc.. H&M have and he wants a piece of it. If it’s true that the relationship the young lawyer has been long term, I think he could be lining her up to take Kate’s place.

      • bettyrose says:

        A Meghan equivalent? That ship has sailed, if it were ever even a possibility for Wills. For one thing, no one would buy a great love story between him and another woman after Kate. For another, Wills would be horribly jealous of a woman as animated and interesting as Meghan. Kate got the title because she really is the best choice for him. Maybe he should play this the American way and just sleep with discreet call girls, forget about having a true side piece.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I wonder about the royal duties aspect. I feel like a separation or divorce would result in Kate refusing to maintain the little involvement she has with her patronages. She’d probably want to jump head-first into the total life of leisure that her sister enjoys.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think she would make appearances at things that appeal to her. Christening a ship would appeal to her. But for the most part, yeah – sorry patronages, you’re going to be SOL.

  6. Julie says:

    Honestly, it’s a better fit than some of her other patronages. We know Kate is more enthused during more “active” events. This gives her the chance to shine while keep risk for embarrassment low. If she messes it up will anyone really notice?

    Plus her soggy saltine of a husband doesn’t have the same….let’s say athleticism. Overall, the choice itself makes sense

  7. Esme says:

    LOL literally laughed out loud at the title of this post. Great way to start the morning off 😂

  8. Krista says:

    It actually makes a lot of sense for forward trust and actions on addictions to combine. They both focus on the same thing (though actions on addictions did focus on all addictions and I believe that forward trust is focused on drug and alcohol). Combining these I believe will allow them to better help families as the resources aren’t spread out. So I won’t blame Kate or imply it’s her fault they combined, because if anything kudos to her if she was the driving force behind them combining.

    These patronage’s are great for Kate as they tie in with her whole Early years but I really wish she did more to raise funds/awareness of these great programs.

    I don’t mind pointing out the issues with Kate and Will but lately these articles are like DM level speculations and pitting the two sides against each other. It’s getting gross.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yeah, I’m going to say that Kate didnt have a damn thing to do with the organizations combining.

    • Over it says:

      The only thing Kate organizes is her button collection. Let’s not give her credit for other people hard work, it’s insulting to the ones who actually do the real work

  9. Eurydice says:

    The pandemic has been hard for non-profits. Where I live some charities have merged – they can save costs and they aren’t all competing for the same donors.

  10. Nashville Girl says:

    Everyone on here is talking about rumors of a separation; where are those rumors? Is it more than Just rose trimming?

    • Becks1 says:

      We were talking yesterday that apparently there is a lawyer in London who is the “new” Rose.

      And there was a curious story a week or so ago about how the Cambridges were looking at schools for George in Berkshire and looking at houses too.

      And then look at the body language from last night at the soccer game….

    • Joblo says:

      There is no evidence of a divorce. It’s just a wishful idea for the people on this site.

      • SwirlmamaD says:

        @JOBLO, so in looking at photos of these two together, do they look like the epitome of love and happiness that the BM wants to project and keeps shoving down our throats?

      • Becks1 says:

        @Joblo, right, because shopping for a third house is perfectly normal, especially when you’re not paying for it yourself.

        I still don’t know about a divorce, but the separate lives theory seems pretty solid at this point.

  11. Ainsley7 says:

    I thought maybe this fit with one of Kate’s military appointments. Upon googling it, I found an interesting article on They’re usually wrong and ridiculous, but I think this one has some grains of truth. It says that William refused to join the navy because he didn’t want to be separated from Kate and that Philip was trying to separate him from Kate by pushing for the navy. I think it’s more likely that William refused because he didn’t want to stop partying with his friends/ competition with Harry (who was already at Sandhurst), but things might have turned out so different if William had followed Royal tradition. Philip, Charles, and Andrew were all in the navy.

  12. Pippin says:

    Reminds me of when Henry VIII named a ship ‘Mary Boleyn’. Kate getting shunted aside in 3, 2…

    • Feeshalori says:

      No, that was the Mary Rose named for his sister.

    • Maria says:

      I believe Henry bought that ship from Thomas Boleyn and it was already named for Mary.
      But yes, in terms of the narrative of The Other Boleyn Girl (historically accurate or no) I can see what you’re saying. Bit of a parting gift…

    • Feeshalori says:

      Ah, interesting, l was referring to the warship Henry built. In doing a little research, there was also a ship called Anne Boleyn in addition to the Mary Boleyn.

  13. Snuffles says:

    Maybe I’m reading this wrong but it sounds like two charities were merged and Kate just became patron by default. It’s not a new assignment. No signal of faith in her or that things are well.

  14. MerlinsMom1018 says:

    If that top picture is anything to go by I imagine the sailors of HMS Glasgow are just thrilled. THRILLED I tell you…

  15. taris says:

    patron of … a boat?


  16. Amy Bee says:

    It just means that when the ship is going to be launched she will the person christening it.

  17. Chaine says:

    is there anything more worthless than these sponsorships of boats? A royal will show up one day when the building of the boat is all done, having contributed nothing whatsoever to its design or manufacture, and be the center of attention while christening it, and then go on her merry way, and somehow that will give her credit for doing something in the eyes of her admirers.

    • Oona says:

      It won’t give her credit, her presence turns the christening into a more festive and celebratory occasion and those contributing to the ship’s design and manufacture get deserved credit.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Oona, nah, Kate’s christened boats before. Her outfits and the champagne get the coverage. That’s it.

  18. Merricat says:

    I don’t think christening a boat means she’s safe. It is, however, a safe bit of “work” for Kate to claim without really having to put in any time.

    • SwirlmamaD says:

      No, it doesn’t mean she’s safe at all, but the end of the day, she’s the mother of the FFF heir and spares, so William will never be well and truly rid of her no matter what he wants. It may not be as forward-facing (ha) as it is now, but there will be some sort of visibility for her even if they split, and I suspect mainly soft focus stuff just like this here and there. They may try to spin it as their “modern” approach to co-parenting the heir in the 21st century. Then again, we know their track record when it comes to modernizing…

  19. Jay says:

    Maybe this is to make up for the loss of the taxpayer-funded Royal Yacht – Kate’s sailor outfits will NOT go to waste!

  20. Lizzie says:

    A non charity patronage with plenty of dress up opportunities is right up Waity alley. She will be covered in buttons, laughing uproariously and no pesky needy people around.

  21. Natters says:

    Can everyone stop calling this a “job”? It’s an insult to people who really work.

  22. Amelie says:

    I do think it’s weird William announced it on his wife’s behalf. Like Kate couldn’t do a video on social media accepting the sponsorship or something? Or why not announce it when they went to Scotland last month together? So bizarre for him to announce it for her solo.

    • Babz says:

      I sort of feel like this is HM’s way of keeping Kate in place in an official manner, while passing a warning on to Will to stop being so obvious. I have seen articles stating that, at some point, Will approached HM and Charles, requesting a divorce, and was refused. That lets them know he’s checked out, and that it will eventually become common knowledge, so they need to do public damage control to provide a screen to what’s really happening behind the scenes.

      I believe there will eventually be a formal separation, followed by a divorce once HM is gone. With the story of the house hunting in Bucklebury, the open lack of connection between them becoming more obvious, the increasing speculation that they no longer live together, the constant stories in the media embiggening Kate (most likely desperate attempts from mummy), and her apparent absence from the unveiling tomorrow, there’s simply too much smoke from an increasingly big fire.

      • bamaborn says:

        You wouldn’t believe the number of people that look at this couple and see a stable, long term relationship. Kind of reminds you of the ones that took a look at trump and somehow saw “presidential.”

      • Babz says:

        @bamaborn, I hear you! I’ve often wondered in the last five years, what makes people see things so completely opposite to what the real images are showing them. Their alternate reality is something else! I guess they need to see what supports their ideology, otherwise the reality would be unbearable to them.

  23. Sarah says:

    William is there for damage control because that train tour was a mess.

    Also, if he’s there, there is no need for her to be present, no one needs her to cosplay Scottish outfits.

  24. Pocket Litter says:

    A battleship for a battle-axe.

  25. Feeshalori says:

    HMS Buttons

  26. Pam says:

    I’m not sure about this. I can see them unofficially separating, but does Catherine and the Middletons REALLY want to let go of her being Queen??? I can’t imagine that they do.