Lady Louise Windsor will ‘have an important role in the royal family in the future’

Day Three of The Royal Windsor Horse Show

I’m pretty pleased that I spotted the Wessexes’ machinations before they came to a head this summer. As soon as Prince Philip died this spring, Prince Edward and Sophie were doing the absolute most to get attention, for themselves and for their oldest child, Lady Louise Windsor. Lady Louise turns 18 years old in November, and that’s something we really need to keep our eye on. Reportedly, Sophie and Edward are pushing for Louise to “decide” to become a princess, as is her right as granddaughter of the monarch. Meaning, it was always going to be left up to Sophie to decide on her title when she turned 18, but given all of the shenanigans with Charles refusing to make Edward “the Duke of Edinburgh,” the Wessexes will get their revenge on Charles this way, by adding another HRH princess into the mix. Apparently, the Wessexes have the Queen’s blessing too, because Louise is the Queen’s favorite grandchild.

The Queen’s favourite grandchild is Lady Louise Windsor, not Prince William or Prince Harry, claims a royal expert. The 17-year-old daughter of Prince Edward and wife Sophie, Countess of Wessex, is said to be “adored” by the 95-year-old monarch.

Royal author Phil Dampier told Fabulous: “Lady Louise is definitely a favourite of the Queen and I can see her having an important role in the royal family in the future. Her Majesty sees a lot of Edward and Sophie and their children at Windsor Castle as they live nearby at Bagshot Park. The Queen is very close to her mother Sophie and of course there has always been a bond between them because Sophie nearly died giving birth and Louise has had her eye condition to cope with. But she has grown into a lovely and intelligent young woman and the Queen adores her.”

Phil said that Her Majesty may even be closer to Lady Louise than she is to William, Harry, Eugenie and Beatrice. He explained: “In many ways the Queen is closer to Louise and her brother James because they are just family and don’t yet have major roles. Harry and Meghan have left of course and William and Kate live in Norfolk much of the time, and are busy with their duties. So she sees the Wessex family more in relaxed times.”

Phil continued that we could see Lady Louise take on royal duties as she gets older and play a wider role in the royal family. He explained: “Louise is highly intelligent and thoughtful, and you get the impression she would want to find an important role for herself and do something special with her life. I’m sure she will be encouraged by her parents to forge her own way, but if the Queen needs her to step up and take on some duties then I’m sure she would be up for it.”

“Edward and Sophie have said that they want their children to make their own way and not use their titles, but royals are going to be thin on the ground going forward. Harry and Meghan have left, Charles Camilla and Anne are in their seventies, so who is going to perform the duties? The Queen and Prince Philip had 1500 patronages between them, and although Prince Charles is said to want a slimmed down monarchy, you cannot slim it down so much that no-one can find a royal to open their museum or charity. I think it would be great for Sophie to take on more duties – she has more charisma than her husband Edward – and for Louise to be considered in a couple of years. It would give fresh blood and energy to the creaking House of Windsor.”

[From The Sun]

This just serves as a reminder that while Charles is hellbent on a slimmed-down monarchy, reportedly the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have always wanted more people around to do some of the work. William and Kate have always been okay with the York princesses taking on some duties, and clearly, the Wessexes have spent years ingratiating themselves to the Cambridges too. This is a power play and it goes against what Charles wants. That being said, there’s not much he can do about Louise becoming a princess. And y’all know her stage mother is going to throw her into public life too.

Duke of Edinburgh death

Duke of Edinburgh death

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Related stories

return home

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

124 Responses to “Lady Louise Windsor will ‘have an important role in the royal family in the future’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. JT says:

    Is Louise actually an HRH Princess? Because I’ve seen some things that say she actually isn’t and was never going to be.

    • Fen says:

      Technically yes, but she just doesn’t use it.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        No, she is not. When Edward got married, the Queen published a written statement that his children SHALL NOT be given royal titles. Of course, the queen (or Charles eventually, or William, eventually) can change this by issuing a new written statement to over-ride the queen’s statement from 1999. But until that happens, Edward’s children are NOT royal, despite Sophie’s desperate attempts to convince the public they are.

    • Krista says:

      Her parents chose not to style her that way. But when she reaches 18 she can decide for herself if she wants to take on the title – she is entitled to it, being the grandchild of a monarch.

    • Talia says:

      Yes, she is (and her brother is entitled to call himself HRH Prince). All grandchildren of the monarch born to the wife of a son are automatically HRH Prince or Princess whoever. It’s why it’s such a big deal with Archie and Lilibet – it’s not just that they aren’t being offered titles, Charles will have to actively get the rules changed to *deny* them the titles of Prince and Princess when he becomes King.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        There are no “rules” to govern who gets the HRH title, only written statements by the monarch. The last statement Elizabeth put out governing Edward’s children said they shall not be given royal styles. She can change her mind and issue a new written statement, but she hasn’t done it yet. As for Harry’s children, a prior letter from a monarch would automatically give them “HRH” titles when Charles becomes king. Elizabeth has not changed that (which is different from what she did with Edward), so they should get HRH when Charles is king (unless Charles issues a new statement that says they don’t). That’s how HRH titles work, it is at the whim of the current monarch.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Mrs.Krabapple, you’re explanation is the way I’m understanding it between these 2 different links.
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/1999/06/99/royal_wedding/373120.stm

        This one is an interesting read-it came after the O interview. In his Concluding Thoughts he wrote this:
        “In essence, the Monarch decides who becomes a prince or princess, and the rules are manipulated to achieve the desired outcome.”

        https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2021/03/23/craig-prescott-modernising-the-monarchy-moving-beyond-the-1917-letters-patent-and-the-george-v-convention/

      • Nic919 says:

        The queen needed to write a letters patent to reverse the 1917 rules and she never did. A press statement is not the same thing as a legal instrument like the letters patent. Louise and James are HRH but their parents chose not to use it.

    • Becks1 says:

      So this is the debate on here – I think MrsKrabapple is the one who pulled up the receipts with this – but I have always been of the belief that she is entitled to be HRH Princess at age 18.

      MrsK (I think that’s who it is, sorry if I’m wrong lol) has brought up the point that the announcement of the time of their wedding that their children would be styled as the children of an earl was basically a new letter patent, since there was nothing in the specific announcement about being able to use HRH when they turned 18. so that announcement supersedes the letters patent that make all grandchildren in the male line of the monarch HRH.

      My take on it is that we will see what happens in a few months.

      • JT says:

        So there is no guarantee that she will be and HRH? It that is what the Wessexes want for their daughter, they should be a bit more discreet. If Charles is considering taking away those titles from his own grandchildren; taking it from Louis won’t be a problem.

      • Becks1 says:

        @JT I’m not sure. I’m not an expert on these things, I just play one on Celebitchy, LOL.

        My take on it has always been that she IS entitled to it even now (so its not like age 18 is the trigger for it, its just that at 18 she can decide for herself), because of the letters patent from George V or whatever. But I think the point that the announcement at the time of their marriage saying that their children would be styled as the children of an earl and not a royal duke was interesting.

        so who knows. Like I said we’ll see in a few months, if she starts being referred to as HRH Princess Louise then I guess we’ll know, lol.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “was basically a new letter patent”

        I do not think a “new letter patent” was ever issued. Has anyone seen this “new letter patent”? Any “letter patent” should be public record as public record (making the monarch’s wishes known to the public) is the sole reason for a “letter patent”.

        I think QEII just issued a formal statement agreeing to the Wessexes wish (request) to style their children as children of a non-Royal Earl during the minority of said children.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay that’s my opinion as well (what you’re saying) but the argument that has been made is that the Queen does not need to say THIS IS A LETTER PATENT to have a letter patent. It was a statement from the Queen saying how the children would be styled, so that’s the end of the story, that’s how they’re going to be styled.

        I’m hoping MrsK comes in to clarify lol.

      • Courtney B says:

        @BayTampaBay you’re correct. There was no new LP. It was only a press release. There’s also room for interpretation in it as it says any children ‘should not be given’ the style of HRH but instead have the ‘courtesy titles’ of the children of an Earl. But this was not codified in any LP, unlike the titles of the future Cambridge children in 2012. If they were 100% never going to have the HRH she would’ve issued a LP. She would need no permission, or even consultation with the government, just as George V didn’t in 1917. It’s why there was nothing Edward VIII could do nothing about wallis’s rank. There was a LP issued there. The will of the monarch is what matters as that’s the font of all honors. (Peerages are different which is why discussions of stripping Harry’s dukedom were so much nonsense.) There could very well be a family agreement about what will happen when the children turn 18. It’s not much different from Charles issuing a statement saying Camilla will be Princess Consort and not Queen. She’s automatically the Queen whether they call her that or not.

      • BabsORIG says:

        From my understanding (and based on what has been posted on here) the statement released by BP at the time of Edward and Sophie wedding is considered a letter patent. And Edward did NOT choose for his kids to be anything other than prince/princess, it was a choice made for him by her majesty, the prince of Wales and DoE. The only choice Ed made was for him to be a “Wessex”, that’s it. So with that said, BP released a statement from the queen that it had been decided that 1) Ed would not get a Dukedom but rather a lesser Earldom.
        2) Because he would not be a duke, his children would never be HRH but rather children of a Earl and thus styled as such.
        3) It was stated that the queen and prince Phillip wished that, when the time comes, Ed would get the DoE title once his brother ascended to the throne and all his titles reverted back to the crown. This however would be at Chuck’s discretion as the present monarch since the queen couldn’t make any decisions for the future monarch.
        So, it seems that Sophie Wessex is been floating this idea that Louise can just choose to be a HRH whenever she wants but in actuality, its not Louise or the Wessexes’ decision to make.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Courtney B & Becks1 – Correct me if I am wrong: The purpose of issuing a Letter Patent is to make the “Sovereign’s” wishes/decisions officially known to the public and SET A PRECEDENT for future matters regarding the same issues.

        I bring this up as George VI issued a Letters Patent to make Charles & Anne HRHs as they were not in the male line of the Monarch and OEII issued Letters Patent to make the Cambridge kids HRHs as they were great-grandchildren and not grandchildren of the Monarch.

        It seems to me that if QEII was going to “deprive” Louise & James of the HRH style instead of just agreeing to “respect the wishes” of their parents, she would have issued official Letters Patent denying the Wessex children of such.

        IMPO, QEII is many things but she is not sloppy when it comes to procedure & protocol.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay I mean I see what you’re seeing and agree, I’m just pointing out why there may be some confusion here and why it may NOT be automatic that they’re HRH at 18.

      • Nic919 says:

        Letters patent are a legal instrument and more than just an announcement. There is nothing that removes the HRH from James and Louise, and they were HRH Prince James and HRH Princess Louise from birth. Their parents simply decided not to call them that. This is similar to Harry going by Harry instead of his actual name Henry.

      • BabsORIG says:

        @BTB, I get what you are saying however, in the same exact vein, if the queen had no intention of depriving Edward’s future children any titles, there was no need for the statement released at their wedding. They should have just made Edward a duke and that’s that. But they (petty Betty, Chuckie and Phil) all three chose to give Edward a lesser title and stated unequivocally that his children will be styled as children of an earl. So, even though king George issued a letter patent 1917, the statement that the queen released in 1999 has more weight, she made a decision that Ed would be no more than a earl and his children styled as such. The wording in the 1999 statement is very careful to NOT suggest that Edward’s children would choose to be HRH in the future, the only future changes stated were that Edward would become the duke of Edinburgh but even then, nothing would change for his children styles. Like you said, the queen is a lot of things but fool or sloppy she is not.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @BabsORIG – Now we are getting into gossip territory and everything I state below is just that and/or my own arrogant opinion. I am not attacking your opinions, just stating why I hold the opinions that I hold on this matter

        1. Philip personally wanted Edward to have his DoE title. Philip did not want Charles to have it nor did he want anyone in Charles’s line to have it. In the last 20 years of his life, Philip became extremely close with the Wessexes. Edward was titled as an Earl because Lizzy & Phil 100% intended/intend for him to be the DoE.

        2. If you are part of the Royal Worship Industrial Complex or an employee (very high or very low) of the Firm, from the date of birth it is important to know how a child will be styled especially if said said child is raised in the UK. Supposedly, every time an HRH enters a room, whether that HRH is 7 months or 70 years old, everyone in that room who is not an HRH must stand up and remain standing until they are ask to be seated. I personally believe that the Wessexes did not have not want to deal with this and other protocols regarding, schooling, playdates, domestic help, riding instructors, etc….etc.. and their under age non-adult children. If I were an HRH and in the Wessexes’ place, I would make the same request to QEII in regards to my children while they were minors.

        3. I do not believe Sophie, who really knows how to play the game, would state in interviews that the Wessex children had a choice of style at 18 if it were not true and there was a paper receipt (Letter Patent) laying around depriving her children permanently of HRH. Sophie is many thing put she is not stupid.

      • notasugarhere says:

        No one is required to stand or to bow/curtsy to any member of this family, not even the Queen. But if you wanted to, it would be based on line of succession not HRH. Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise are in, Kate, Camilla, Sophie are not. The Order of Precedence QEII writes up to decrease family squabbles isn’t based on HRH status but rather on place in the line of succession.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @nota – Thanks for that update. I was still under the impression that all people who “hang about the British Royal Family” were required to stand when an HRH entered a room and children with a style of HRH could not be addressed by Christian names alone.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay – your last point is why I think that the theory about the statement superseding the LPs is wrong; would sophie be out there talking about Louise being a HRH if she wasn’t entitled to it? The royals take HRH and titles seriously as we have seen, I would think she would have been shut down FAST if she was just talking out of nowhere, you know? It’s not something she would be able to hold over Charles’ head or whatever.

      • Nic919 says:

        Edward being Duke of Edinburgh is different from Louise and James being HRH. The 1917 letters patent made them HRH at birth. Edward would have to be awarded a dukedom as a gift of the Queen. It was not something granted to him at birth. Same with Harry and William. They were given dukedoms as a gift upon their marriage. Edward was only given an earldom because the intention was that he would eventually get the dukedom of Edinburgh once Charles was king. There is no age 18 rule either outside of that being mentioned in the announcement. Which does not supersede the letters patent. Louise and James could be HRH right now.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Oh, hello Becks 1 — yes, it was me who took that position. There are no “rules” governing HRH titles, only the whim of the current monarch. There are also no legal requirements for a “letters patent” other than it be in writing. So any official written statement coming from the monarch is a letters patent with respect to the HRH title. I have never believed Edward’s kids have a “right” to the HRH title. But, I have also said Elizabeth could have *privately* agreed with Edward that the kids may use the titles if they want to, once they turn 18. And if so, I expect Elizabeth to put out a new written statement to override the one from 1999.

      • Nic919 says:

        A letters patent is a legal instrument and it is published in the gazette as all laws from the Queen are, which includes when she awards dukedoms. There is nothing in the gazette around the time of this announcement and as such the letters patent of 1917 were in force when Louise was born. It is a convention to not use the HRH for them as outlined in the press statement. The Queen did not remove the HRH from Louise and James and she would have had to have a letters patent to do so.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      My head is spinning after eating everyone’s comments, issues of LP, Edward DoE and everything else!! Two hours of horrible sleep and no coffee yet, has me confused. All I know is that I hope that MrsK shows up with some explanations, maybe she can help me sort this out.

      In regards to Phil Dampier campaigning strongly for Edward, Sophie and Louise, I wonder if he is speaking solely at the behest of the family, esp Sophie, or behaviour predicted on TQ. Though, how this plays out to me, in my opinion, will rely heavily on what Chaz dictates once TQ passes. I don’t see a lot of love from Chaz to Edward and his family, though I could highly mistaken. I am going solely based on the fact that Chaz didn’t immediately grant Edward DoE, as was promised by his parents.

      Reminds me of children who refuse to share their toys and demand that they own ALL of them. Yes, Chaz and TOBB, that was directed at you both.

      • Becks1 says:

        So with the DoE – that was specifically mentioned in the statement released at their wedding, that the Queen, Philip and Charles had agreed it would eventually go to Edward.

        As it stands though, Charles cannot grant Edward DoE at this time, as he is the current holder of the title (as the eldest son of the last DoE.) So when he becomes king, DoE reverts to the crown, so to speak. William automatically becomes Duke of Cornwall but all other titles I think go into abeyance or whatever it is (including Prince of Wales.) So at that point Charles can name Edward DoE which was apparently the deal.

        The story put out over the last 6 months is that Charles will not do that.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @BothSidesNow – You are NOT highly mistaken. There is not a lot of anything, especially brotherly love, between Chucky & Eddy.

        Charles cannot “immediately grant Edward DoE” title because it does not work like that.

        The title must “merge back to the crown” before the title of Duke of Edinburgh can be regranted to anyone. The Duke of Edinburgh title will only “merge back to the crown” when Chucky becomes king. When Chucky becomes King Chuck III all his titles merge back to the crown. He automatically becomes King Charles III, Duke of Lancaster, Camilla automatically becomes Queen regardless how she is addressed and William automatically becomes Duke of Cornwall. Nothing else is automatic. All other titles are in Charles’s royal prerogative to grant as he wishes and as he sees fit.

        Charles could make you the Duchess of Bothsideshire or Duchess of Edinburgh and me the Duchess of Dermount or Duchess of Inverness in our own right if he sees fit to do so. I wonder what the donation amount to one of charities would be for us to get those titles??? LOL! LOL!

    • Youre_a_towel says:

      She just *lady* louise.

      Her brother is *viscount*

      Thats it

  2. Here4Tea says:

    Modern-day Boleyns.

  3. Snuffles says:

    I’m sure we’ll get a glam makeover a la The Princess Diaries and a big coming out birthday party to parade her around.

    That said, if they want to keep this shit show going, they need some young blood. Because Charles preferred crew all should be retired or are too young to do anything and really should be allowed to grow up out of the spotlight.

    So why not trot out Lady Louise and the York sisters for the next 10 – 15 years and let the Cambridge kids have a childhood.

  4. Eurydice says:

    Well, even if W&K weren’t work-shy, there’s no way an abbreviated RF can manage over 3,000 patronages, plus trips here and there to bolster the royal image.

    • Chrissy (The Original) says:

      I wonder just how often the Queen and Philip visited or raised awareness of those 3000 patronages. Look how many Keen or PWT or the others have and we rarely hear about any activities related to them. Except when they close down because of neglect.

      • Gubbinal says:

        I am not sure how they promoted the patronages, but many of them are “sponsored” by The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, the Duke of Kent, Prince and Princess Michael in spite of their darth qualities, Princess Alexandra. The Duchess of Kent has retired, I believe. So there we have at least 7 warmish bodies who work for their living and are 80 something (or almost so).

        Anne has done an enormous amount and might go on to age 99 for all we know. But as the hardest worker of the group they cannot afford to have her become ill or descend to a Keen work ethic.

        With narcissists like Charles and William, the belief in the blood royal annointed by God is strong. It adds a huge helping to their narcissism. God has ordained them. I think that only the Royals take the “blood” issue seriously. For example, the York girls wanted to stress their royal blood to try to curb Keen issues.

      • Courtney B says:

        God, the 70+ Duke of Gloucester has more patronages than William. Lol And he was never intended, at birth, to be a working Royal. He was an architect but had to step up when his elder brother died in a plane crash. The duchess has stepped up for decades too and she married him when he was just an architect and planning for a quiet life. But William and Kate, who were either born for their roles or actively chased it, are so freaking lazy.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Princess Alice, mother of the current Duke of Gloucester, lived to be 102 and was still undertaking limited engagements at the age of 95.

        Anne Mountbatten-Windsor Laurence and Richard Gloucester could easily work until they are 90 years old and probably will.

    • Nic919 says:

      This is all an issue because of the laziness of the Cambridges. They should be doing 500 engagements per year each like Anne does. There is no reason for them not to.

    • notasugarhere says:

      If Charles, Camilla, William, and Kate all did 500 engagements a year? That’s 2000 engagements a year. Charles does 500 plus outside things, and still gets 7 months of holiday a year. They could all individually being doing much more than 500. There is no need to bring in more ‘working royals’. They need to get the working royals they have to WORK.

      ‘The Windsors are very good at working three days a week, five months of the year and making it look as though they work hard.’ Mark Bolland, former secretary to Charles

      • Becks1 says:

        And the Cambridges really could do the 500 events a year, since they could do very different events than the Queen does. A lot of her events are around state matters (meeting diplomats etc) or attending events that may be a bit above Will and Kate’s paygrade at this point.

        But they could do the county fairs, the hospital wing openings, the opening of a new school, all that stuff – and they could time it so everything happens during the school day, or they go to a specific area for a week in the summer and knock out 30 events each, etc. 500 engagements a year is 10 a week, that’s 2 a day M-Fri. Knock out 4 a day and you only have to work half the year.

        When there’s talk of “picking up the slack” or “someone will need to step up” the unspoken part is always “because the Cambridges won’t work.” If they were pulling in Anne or Charles like numbers, no one would miss Meghan and Harry work-wise, and they would be setting an example for their children.

        But they won’t, so here we are.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Becks1, it’s truly disgusting that W&K refuse to do the bare minimum, while claiming they are preparing for their FFK & FFKQ in 30+ years. The fact that people within the family, and the taxpayers, are not up in arms about their lazy, living off of the backs of the taxpayers, is astonishing to me!! Chaz should limit their allowance to align with their active work performances, not their alignment with patronage’s or their name stamped on some project. My how things would implode if they were required to “work” for their excessive spending and lavish lifestyle! It’s utterly defenseless as to their inactions within the family, and their outright refusal to participate in the slightest bit.

        In regards to Louise, Chaz had better come up with a plan as TOBB and KKKeen Guevara are not going to pull their weight no matter how many helicopters and grand/lavish royal estates they inhabit.

        Anointed by God, my ass!!

      • Nic919 says:

        The worst part is that the Cambridges are trying to act like the succession should skip to them and these lazy 40 year old layabouts can barely scrape 200 in a year and that’s only William.

  5. Teebee says:

    Okay. Just saying it doesn’t make it so.

    That picture of the three of them, standing side by side, pale as ghosts, bland as artificial vanilla extract, makes them look like parishioners in the background of a funeral for a local magistrate. Blending into the background, appropriately attired, quiet living, modestly employed, boring as sheep shit…🙄

    Stepford Royals.

    • Pao says:

      It literally doesn’t make sense as both sophie and edward have said that they expect both of their kids to make their own way in this world. If lady louise does end up being a working royal (which would be strange since Beatrice and eugenie are right there) then it would be certainly short lived. Im pretty sure she’ll be off to uni soon and who knows if the queen is even around if she finishes. Charles sure as hell won’t have her as a working royal.

      • JT says:

        It doesn’t seem like Sophie actually wants her children to “make their own way” if they are actively campaigning for her to be a working royal.

    • LillyfromLillooet says:

      Just saying, that to me, I have always thought of Lady Louise as a classic English Rose, a true beauty. She has a serene quality and I’ve always thought she is unusually special looking. And yeah, I am listening to Celtic music and I can see her as a 13th century queen.

      • Jaded says:

        She looks like she’s been taken from a medieval painting doesn’t she. Just put her in a long, bejeweled velvet dress with a high lace collar and there you have it!

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @LillyfromLillooet & Jaded. I agree. She’s a naturally lovely girl and it’s refreshing to see someone in her age group not hiding behind 5 lbs. of makeup.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She looks a lot like a younger Edward, which means she looks the most like QEII of any grandchild or great grandchild.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        True she does have a resemblance there. Maybe it’s my eyeballs but Louise has seemed to me like a young, make up less Rosie Vela.. The picture with the hood rreminds me of the medieval aspect Jaded mentioned.
        Plus makeup.

        https://1010parkplace.com/rosie-vela/

        Probably biased because I know someone that looks like Louise and have seen them with and without makeup and they’re still a lovely person.

  6. Scorpion says:

    😂🤭🙈

    Hope Lady Louise enjoys her time in the Sun. Uncle Charles and her cousins will ensure she she meets a swift end, should she eclipse them

    • Tessa says:

      She may be disliking every minute of her parents campaigning for her. I do believe she is not comfortable with it.

  7. Mac says:

    Sophie is wasting her time. Charles isn’t going to waver in his decision about a slimmed down royal family.

    • Snuffles says:

      Then he’s an idiot. Any fool can see he’s doing it because he’s a grudge holder. He’d cut out William if he wasn’t the direct heir. Elizabeth lasted this long because she deployed her cousins to help with the burden.

      • notasugarhere says:

        There is no need for more working royals. They need to make the ones they have work harder. QEII’s elderly cousins do between 100-200 engagements per year on average. Just make the few royals you have do more. A slimdown working royal family could easily do more than 500 engagements a year each, and still have far more holidays than the taxpayers.

      • JT says:

        @nota I agree. There wouldn’t be a crisis if the Keens weren’t so damn lazy and it’s not like the work is hard. 45 mins at a shopping center is nothing.

      • Ainsley7 says:

        Her cousins were only deployed because she is a woman and they didn’t think she was up to the job. If she had been a man, they never would have become working royals.

    • Tessa says:

      Louise needs to get her education instead of being pushed by her parents into the limelight.

  8. Becks1 says:

    LOL, the Wessex PR machine is not subtle, I’ll give them that. Charles is not going to add her as a working royal and considering it’s not going to be an issue for a few years (I’m assuming she’s going to college soon), it’s going to be Charles’ call, not the Queen’s (in all likelihood.) The MOST I can see her doing is what B&E do – private charity work, and then an occasional appearance at a garden party once a season, plus Ascot, christmas walk, etc. Although who knows if they will continue the Christmas walk with all the siblings and nieces and nephews after the queen passes?

  9. Calibration says:

    The creepy undertakers pic never gets old.

    Someone is still trying to make Sophie happen and now poor Louise. I can’t see Charles wanting Louise on the payroll as well as her parents. And Sophie has as much charisma as a bowl of potato soup. But she’s absolutely a stage mother.. She needs her bread buttered, gotta pay bills somehow.

    • Chrissy (The Original) says:

      I feel bad for Louise. I hope she’s not being pressured by her mother. She seems like a quiet, unassuming sort and would be smart to choose college and a quiet life outside the fishbowl. I can see PWT attacking this poor girl or using her as a scapegoat for some of his usual BS. Free Louise from the BRF cesspool!

      • Calibration says:

        Chrissy I agree. Potential PWBT punching bag and Cambridge distraction.

      • Angie H. says:

        Agreed. She seems like a nice girl & I’m not at all convinced Louise wants this for herself. Maybe a taste of it; why not for a gap year do a bunch of the duties, then go to uni and live her life. In fact, why not have that set up for most of the nonworking royals, the non-heirs?

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “Someone is still trying to make Sophie happen and now poor Louise.”

      I think it is the higher echelon circles of the Royal Rota; read media editors. They need Royal copy for their publications. Sophie knows how to play the Royal Rota game and is willing to play it.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ BayTampaBay, after the comment that Dampier made in regards to Sophie being much more charismatic, I knew whose side/“advocate” he was playing for. Sophie charismatic compared to whom/what, Edward or an innate object? Someone get the smelling salts for what he is selling, and it’s not reality….

      • Calibration says:

        I was assuming that this was coming from Sophie. I can’t imagine that she sells copy? Maybe the RR trying to make Louise happen to see if she’ll sell? But to be chewed up by that machine, ugh.

  10. teecee says:

    The UK press is going to rip this child apart.

    • Becks1 says:

      Its why it makes me sad that they are so actively pushing her into the spotlight like this. Just let her be, let her finish her education and start her career in relative obscurity, why push her out into the public eye just as she’s going to start finding her own way and becoming more independent?

    • molly says:

      Absolutely. No good will come of it. (Also, James seems to loathe public royal life, so his parents better leave him the hell alone too.)

  11. MJM says:

    The Wessexes are foolish not encouraging their children to get a life outside of royalty. What future is there for Louise being a loser lesser royal like her parents?

  12. Noki says:

    She seems like a child like (almost) 18 year old. I think she has been very coddled and protected,I have never heard her speak but she doesnt seem like she has a ruthless bone in her body.

  13. Sofia says:

    No she won’t. Sorry Sophie. Don’t get me wrong, Louise seems like she has a good head on her shoulders but life as a working royal is not going to happen for her. She might get to go to/do the odd thing like Bea and Eugenie did when they were younger but full on working royal isn’t happening for her. Especially when Charles gets on the throne.

  14. Lori says:

    The other European royal families have a crop of Young, glamorous, modern girls in the same age cohort. And while Louise will never be Queen, she could be of service to the crown even in a PR sense. The only time Charles has really “looked good” in the last couple of years is when he stood beside and encouraged Greta Thunberg.

    • Sofia says:

      Yeah but that’s because they’re going to be Queen/sister to the queen. The closest relation Louise will have to the monarch is niece/cousin. The other European monarchies are much much smaller than the BRF and restrict working royals to monarch, consort, heir and their consort, their heir (if they’re old enough/have one) and maybe all kids of their heir/1st in line. Some don’t even have the siblings of the heir/monarch as working royals let alone granddaughter/niece/cousin/first cousin once removed (all of which Louise is/will be for the current and next 3 monarchs)

    • notasugarhere says:

      As Sofia writes, those are the heirs themselves. Most of them are still in their teens, headed off to private lives for 4-6 years at University. They won’t be spending their time being working royals for years. No need to drag Louise into being a working royal when she is not needed.

  15. TabithaD says:

    Good grief Sophie (and I do think Sophie has to be behind this – the little dig about how she has “more charisma” than Edward was a rather obvious giveaway) – leave the poor girl out of this shitshow.
    Louise is already something like 15th in line, and will only get pushed further down. She’s completely irrelevant to the BRF, whatever personal relationship she may have with TQ. And it doesn’t look like she has any of her mother’s pushiness, so I doubt she’s cut out for a public role.
    This is like an “audition”, but it’s being played out via leaks to the press. Everyone jockeying for position and trying to get access to that lovely BRF income. It’s just all so desperate.

  16. Gubbinal says:

    There’s a really great chance that Louise is shy or introverted. She may want a country life where the only “fashion” is “stable chic”. She may not want to walk on stillettos. She might find buying hats too tedious. I do hope that she gets to reject forced celebrity and keep being herself. She won’t be taught how to seek out the camera’s beam.

  17. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    “Harry and Meghan have left, Charles Camilla and Anne are in their seventies, so who is going to perform the duties? ”

    Errr…The Other Brother and The Other Wife?

    Ah, wait…sorry, forgot they are useless.

    • Betsy says:

      That was the weirdest. Those two lazy fools’ utter laziness is taken as a fait accompli and that’s just bizarre.

    • Greywacke says:

      Is this one of those circumstances where an article is shading W&K, but not overtly?

      • SnoodleDumpling says:

        It does seem to be doing that, doesn’t it? The natural answer would be the Cambridges, to the point that the question is almost moronic, but they get skipped right over.

    • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

      The only real duty is rubberstamping opening of Parliament, and theoretically the monarch could take a day off from their real job of driving trucks or something for that. The way they’ve abused the political role, even that should be ditched.

      Everything else is self-serving bullshit to justify their privilege.

  18. lanne says:

    Louise needs to go to college and get a JOB. Another hanger-on HRH Princess is not what the UK needs right now. The future of the monarchy (in terms of what they actually do) is very uncertain, and Charles’s plan to slim them down is the right one. I don’t think a young UK is going to want to support a bunch of do-nothing royals, and Louise will be severely curtailed if she becomes an HRH. She’ll be another Beatrice/Eugenie–raised to live a life that no longer exists, unable to function as a working adult with a proper job and unable to work full time as a royal. It will be open season on her by the tabloids. The tabloids will be as vicious to her as they were to Eugenie and Beatrice, and she will be another “ugly stepsister” to Kate. That’s a terrible thing to say, but that will be her role: she won’t be allowed to outshine Kate. The Cambridges will brief against her, and the media will gossip about her looks, who she dates, her figure, and her activities. I hope her parents don’t serve that girl up on a platter for money. They will be placing her at the mercy of her cousin William. She deserves better than that.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “the media will gossip about her looks, who she dates, her figure,”

      The Royal Media Industrial Complex, not just the commentariat of The Daily Fail, is already gossiping about Louise’s looks and figure.

  19. Liz version 700 says:

    That poor girl is going to be set loose in a viper’s pit

  20. Sushi says:

    Other countries like Germany and France without royals are functioning very well. What are the values added with the royals?. Puzzling.

  21. Lizzie says:

    How many of the queens grandchildren have the narrative that they are her favorite? I know I’ve read Peter Philips also the favorite.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I feel like every grandchild except for William has been touted as Elizabeth’s favorite at some point. I might have missed it but I’ve only ever heard his relationship with her highlighted in the context of being the heir.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yeah it cracks me up. They’re all the favorite at some point. I do think she may enjoy Louise and James a great deal at this point as they’re still pretty young, but old enough for her to have real conversations with etc (i.e. its not the same as hanging out with George at 8 years old), and they’re probably around the most. So she may enjoy time with them as she ages in a different way than she enjoyed spending time with Peter or whoever. Her relationship with the Wessex children is probably very different from her relationship with the other grandchildren due to the age gap (whether thats a good thing or not IDK, I’m just speculating.)

  22. SueBarbri says:

    This ship sailed a while ago.

    They can put every HRH they want on her, but this isn’t going to happen. Edward and Sophie are both HRH’s after all, and they generate absolutely no interest anywhere. What makes them think it will be different for Louise? I realize they’re using this as a bargaining chip against whatever Charles is going to do to them when he’s in charge, but at this point Edward and Sophie should be embarrassed to continue pushing Louise out front like this. William and Harry were “popular” and “exciting” as young men (as far as the BM and the RR’s told us, anyway), but that was 3/4 because they were Diana’s sons and 1/4 because they were both reasonably attractive and pretending to be hip.

    By comparison, even the most dedicated royal watchers have never been particularly interested in the York girls. And to give the York girls credit, they went out of their way to latch onto trendiness and hang with the jet-set. Do they think…do they think there will be a sudden swell of interest in Lady Louise? Why? And, why would they want all that attention for such a shy, sheltered girl? This seems dangerous to me.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ SueBarbri, I agree that the play that Edward, and esp Sophie, are putting out will be detrimental to Louise as she seems to be an introvert, shy and does not seem to forge a strong personality. Louise will be eaten up, chewed and spit out all at the hands of the royal rats, the public and unfortunately, the Lambridges if she presents ANY form of competition to KKKeen, or for that matter, TOBB. There will be no attempts to shield her emotionally, with maneuvers by Sophie to enforce her as a “working” part of the Monarchy. Sadly, Louise may grow into a former shell of a person that she may never recover.

  23. Likeyoucare says:

    Taht poor poor girl.

  24. DS9 says:

    What role? She’s too young to take on duties the Cambridges won’t do and God knows they wouldn’t want someone young and blandly pretty to risk being even half as popular as they are. And she’s too old to play alternate to George and crew.

    This young woman has access to the best and brightest and could make virtually anything if herself and her parents are choosing instead to rest on noble titles.

    Good lord

    • Tessa says:

      She should be studying to get into a good University. She is being pushed to the media by her parents who should IMO know better.

  25. FluglyBear says:

    I would love to see her go to medical school or something like that.

    • notasugarhere says:

      While that would be inspiring, it might be a legal nightmare. Would patients deliberately target her with lawsuits, because they think they’d get some of the Windsor private money as a settlement.

  26. Lizzie says:

    I believe her important role is to distract while pedo is hiding from process servers.

    • Nic919 says:

      It seems he was served on august 27, according to a court docket in the US.

      By the way. It is sept 10 and where the hell is Kate? It is beyond absurd that she hasn’t been seen yet. All the other royals have shown their face, even William.

    • Jaded says:

      Too late, he’s been served. My guess is he’ll keep hiding out and some sort of secret payment arrangement will eventually be made to Virginia Guiffre or her lawyer will go very public. I also think this will encourage any other trafficked women he raped to go public.

      • Tessa says:

        I am glad she’s out there and I hope it will bring out the others who will sue. But I am astonished that I notice victim shaming going on in some of the comments sections of media.

  27. Tessa says:

    Sophie and Edward are now doing what the Cambridges do, trotting out the children or in this case the eldest child. I don’t think this would be good for Louise’s well being. She needs to get her degree and not be pushed by her parents like stage parents to be recognized as a “senior” royal with a title. Louise is in the media almost every day. I don’t think this will be good in the long run for her.

  28. Athena says:

    So instead of hearing that Louise is attending university to study business, engineering, law, computer science, medicine, anything that will enable her to be financially independent, it’s all about Louise becoming a member of the firm, so much for how intelligent Louise is.

    I do think Sophie and to some degree Edward made a deal with the Cambridges, but the thing is they will only need Louise for a short while, about 20 years, than they’ll push her out as a working royal in favor of Charlotte and Louis. So at 38-40 Louise will be pushed out with no income, no medical coverage, no security, no retirement plan and at the financial mercy of the Monarch, just like Margaret got pushed out to make room for Edward. One would think as parents that that would be the last thing they would want for their child.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It doesn’t matter what deal they’ve made with W&K, as odds are good Charles will be king for 20 years. Other than rosacea and arthritis, his health is good. His father made it almost to 100, his mother is up there too.

    • Vivian says:

      Is there any reason to think that this girl wants a royal life when she could choose any kind of education/profession? Her parents seem to have had a change of heart. I know the eye condition she has and its treatment and she has been through alot, and may still have some effects– all the more reason not to put her under a photographic microscope.

  29. Cj says:

    “… no-one can find a royal to open their museum or charity.”

    Oh, such woe. However will the fate of the United Kingdom survive without a royal to open a museum or charity. Weep for us, commonwealth countries. For such would be the end of days.
    /sarcasm and an epic eye roll. We’ll just get Love Island castoffs to open things and it will cost everyone a whole lot less but be far more entertaining.

    • Gina says:

      “… no-one can find a royal to open their museum or charity.”
      I thought about this phrase too. Why UK needs titled person with no real merits (apart from the place in the line of succession), to open the library/hospital? Maybe local mayor or celebrity or person who donated money or time to the said library, has more rights to do the opening?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Because W&K refuse to work. They have made clear from the start they consider ‘bread and butter’ engagements beneath them. Last year their spokesperson floated the idea they would pick 2-3 charities each per year, that’s it. Help them with a short-term fundraising goal (1-2 years), then dump them. W&K are writing a rule book where ‘working royals’ work less than 100 hours a year.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Oh, please. How many new museums are there going to be in the world? And why, as asked above, would an uneducated royal be necessary to its opening?

      • notasugarhere says:

        This is how the BRF traditional made themselves ‘useful’. Being seen, out in public, as part of community events. If they don’t do these day-to-day community engagement things, celebrating the small achievements of local groups? They lose their base.

    • nicobel says:

      Cj thank you! That jumped out to me as well – won’t someone think of the poor, unopened museum? That is the justification for maintaining the rf at taxpayer expense… smh.

  30. Mina_Esq says:

    I thought Peter Phillips was Betty’s favorite child. Maybe she changes her mind after his adulterous shenanigans last year? Also, Louise does not look like a kid that wants to be in the spotlight. This is totally her stage mom trying to cling to relevance. Finally, I love that this RR inadvertently burned the BRF by essentially pointing out that their only real role is to open museums and such lol

  31. Haylie says:

    Sophie is a delusional stage mom.

    Both Beatrice and Eugenie are higher ranked than Louise, but have both been benched – even though the firm desperately needs working royals who aren’t 70+ years old. See also: Zara and Peter. Sophie and Edward are working royals, but people barely know they exist and Charles plans to slim them right into the streets.

    So what makes them think Louise is going to be vital and important?

    It’s time for wannabe Diana 2.0 to stop trying to make her daughter with zero personality or Charisma into wannabe Diana 3.0. Especially since we know Supreme Wannabe Diana (Kate) isn’t going to allow anyone to get in in her grift.