Scobie: Princess Kate’s Early Years work is ineffectual because of her ‘limitations’

It’s been Keen Early Years Week, where the Princess of Wales has launched yet another awareness-raising campaign centered on Kate going around, telling people that the early years are important. Shaping Us is no different than the Five Big Questions, which was no different from Big Change Starts Small (rip to that initiative). None of these “campaigns” are any different and none of them actually does something substantive. It’s all white noise, gurning, wiglets and gloss. It’s Kate preening for the cameras and telling everyone that she’s a credible expert and a big girl doing important work! As I said, we’re past the point where Kate is a chaotic neutral – the messaging has gotten harmful. Even credible childhood development experts are coming out and saying that Kate’s fluff is dumb and unimportant, that these resources should be focused on actually solving very real problems for kids. All of this and more made it into Omid Scobie’s latest Yahoo UK column – you can read the full piece here. Some highlights:

Kate’s 2012 ‘listening and learning’ charity visits: Chatting with her press secretary at the time, I was told how the duchess’s “keen interest” in childhood development will likely lead to projects focused on supporting the young. A month earlier she had also taken on a patronage with Action on Addiction, a charity working with those suffering from drug and alcohol addiction and the children affected by it. “Right now she is listening and learning… in the future she hopes to find practical ways to contribute,” the palace aide explained.

All of Kate’s sound and keenery, signifying nothing: It’s an extremely important subject. But after 12 years of work, the goods being delivered right now feel light. Some within the early years sector have already voiced frustrations. “We are well accustomed to MPs and royalty visiting early years settings, praising the invaluable work of practitioners… but nothing is done,” a statement from the Practitioners of the Early Years Sector group says. “The time has long passed for ‘awareness’. We need action – long-term investment and funding in the early years.”

Kate’s big-girl problem: And this is where the Princess of Wales will no doubt find herself stuck. Because while elevating the importance of helping children in their first five years of life to thrive is certainly necessary, there are very few options available to Kate when it comes to actually helping solve the main issue at the heart of Britain’s early years crisis – funding. Budgets for preventative services for children in the country have been slashed by more than £400m since 2015 . And 4,000 early childcare providers have shut down in the last year alone due to chronic underfunding.

More slashes to the social safety net: Cuts have also seen the closures of children’s centres nationwide, despite the fact they help prevent more serious social services intervention at later stages in childhood. Britain’s social care system, which is already on its knees, estimates that over 15,000 young people will be taken into care over the next three years. As the country falls deeper into its cost of living crisis, and childcare providers raise prices due to funding pressures, is Kate’s awareness project really able to do much at all?

Ineffective royal work: If anything, Shaping Us exposes the ineffectiveness that the Royal Family’s charity work can have. Because it is almost impossible to make an impact in this field, or even usher in the smallest of change, without considering all the social factors that have an impact on early development. And that cannot be done without stepping into policy or politics — the one thing Kate can’t do as a working member of the Royal Family.

The Art Room disaster: Two years ago The Art Room charity Kate first visited in 2012 shut down its facilities for good after it became no longer financially sustainable. Shrinking school budgets from the government were to blame, and while Kate was able to shine a light on their work through the odd royal engagement, her limitations as a royal patron meant that she would never be able to lobby to keep it going.

The third landmark announcement: This week’s awareness drive launch is the third “landmark” announcement by the Princess of Wales on this topic in as many years. The message is essential, and she makes a serious case, but no matter how many versions of it we hear, Kate’s hope and a wish are unlikely to bring the necessary solutions. Given that Kensington Palace says this is her “life’s work”, I hope she can eventually prove me wrong.

[From Yahoo UK]

While I know what Scobie is doing here – and god knows, he has his own set of limitations as part of the royal press pack – it would be interesting if he actually came out and said it. Like, he’s going too far to half-way excuse Kate here: “while Kate was able to shine a light on their work through the odd royal engagement, her limitations as a royal patron meant that she would never be able to lobby to keep it going.” Kate could easily brush off the shackles of her royal patron “limitations” if she wanted to. She could have hosted fundraisers for the Art Room, she could have used her staff to come up with some kind of scheme to raise money online by selling the students’ art, she could have done a lot more than she did. It wasn’t because of the limitations of the royal role, it was because Kate is lazy, dull and unimaginative.

THAT is the larger problem – while the royal-patronage system is deeply flawed, all of these people could do a lot more without being called “political.” And seriously, if the point of Kate’s dumbf–k Early Years campaign is to raise awareness of just how basic and fundamental it is to give children a head start in life, why is that political? That’s the argument she could make, if she had two brain cells to rub together. “All kids need access to nursery schools and Head Start programs” is only a political hot potato if you think poor children don’t deserve to be nurtured.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, KP.

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

148 Responses to “Scobie: Princess Kate’s Early Years work is ineffectual because of her ‘limitations’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ThatsNotOkay says:

    This lady’s inability to bring meaningful change or do anything meaningful in regards to her (sister’s) “life’s work” is England’s great shame.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      She is a simpering, preening, cosplaying mess. This is the 3rd or 4th relaunch since 2018. From the huge amount of negative comments, the general public is not fooled and are quite fed up with her antics.

      • Elizabeth says:

        It doesn’t help that people online have been circulating the video of Molly Wright’s Ted Talk. She’s seven, and she was more articulate and gave more concrete information than Kate has done in the three or four years she’s been an Early Years Advocate.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        It’s quite shocking that Keen McMumbles started this campaign in 2012 which was 11 YEARS AGO.

        And this is IT???

    • Swaz says:

      Kate’s critics are being very kind to her, she should be grateful; her sister in law was not that privileged.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Swaz, nor was her SIL prided in her successful campaigns, ie SmartWorks and Grenfell Tower, just to name a few.

        Seems the only accolades given to the SIL was by those who were the recipients, otherwise not a peep from her husbands family except QEII.

    • E says:

      THIS is England’s great shame?!?!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes, Keen, WanK and the unjustified and unnecessary attack to try and emotionally destroy Meghan.

        But who is keeping notes….

      • Museum Lady says:

        Yes, let’s forget colonization. That didn’t have any affect on the world, on race relations, on distribution of wealth in our society, on cruel treatment of people of color, etc.

        KKKate’s inadequacies are by far worse.

    • Liz Version 700 says:

      As a former teacher can I just say this is spot on. She is so so empty just vacant. What went wrong in her early years?

    • DouchesOfCambridge says:

      They deliberately decide to patron without actually giving them a real assisting/commitment hand. They keep thinking that their 1 time presence at a one time event is sufficient for a continuous financial benefit for the organization. That’s how arrogant and pretentious they are. Meanwhile, new comer Meghan in such a short time actually did something with a cookbook. Actually did something with the working suits for women looking for jobs, actually raised funds for her animal shelter cause, actually did something when they came in jeans and tshirts to help out some organization about food security during covid. I’m not even going into the Archwell foundation, Archetypes, etc. Meanwhile, Top CEO with confused eyebrows is still looking to create her own path after a decade, playing the piano, hiding photography books in a park, planting flowers for the chelsey flower show (I love gardening, but what was the end game for that project??!!), just nothing ever substantial. It’s so frustrating to see all the potential of such a title being wasted away. Willie should remarry to an exceptionnal women, like Meghan. And maybe we’d get something better out of the prince of Wailes too.

      • Debbie says:

        What is the endgame, you ask? Why, Kate got her picture in the papers. That’s the endgame. That’s always the BRF’s only endgame.

    • Carolind says:

      Not England. The country is UK. Who do you mean by sister? Pippa is her sister. Meghan and James’s wife are her sisters-in-law.

  2. E.A says:

    well, I guess there’s a discussion about the topic in her defence, UK government is completely terrible at the moment corruption from the tory is just unbelievable. But the sad thing is those people who need the support that Kate’s mentioning are going to continue voting for the same party, so no ones wins in this scheme. everything about the U.K, at the moment is pointless.

    • Layla says:

      Exactly. And like I’ve mentioned before, she’s releasing this “campaign” at the same time as teachers walking out on a mass strike to protest inadequate pay and underfunding for schools. The education situation is pretty bad here in the U.K. preschool and nursery kids are also affected by this

    • Andy Dufresne says:

      @EA- this! 👆

    • Gruey says:

      The problem is Kate is complicit in the Tory gutting of social services. Her fake project is a smokescreen of euphemisms and trite platitudes, not just for her own incompetence, but also for the horrors Tory policies have wrought in England.

      If there is a national discussion to be had in England, as Kate is allegedly trying to foster, shouldn’t it include, ya know, the actual state of reality in England? But Kate is putting on this farce wherein you can mumble treacly nonsense about early years and call it “important.” It is NOT important. What is ACTUALLY happening to English children is important and none of that factors into her featherbrained “project.”

      I’m especially aghast after listening to a lengthy discussion about the WTO’s current assessment of England’s economy. I really feel awful for the English, particularly for the kids who had nothing to do with Brexit and are going to see some of the worst times in England in many, many years. No wonder the British press only wants to talk about Meghan.

      • Lurker25 says:

        I wonder if Scobie is slyly insinuating that that RF is in cahoots with the Tory party. Maybe I’m giving him too much credit.

        The fact remains that the RF courtiers (such as the bee the fly and the wasp, in Harry’s memorable terms, and therefore everyone they hire) are part of the revolving door between palaces, 10 Downing Street/politics, and media.

        To say “the royal family can’t appear to be political” is f-cking hilarious when their offices are rampant with staff from one political party. How many labor sympathizers do you see working for any of them, ever?
        It suits the Tory party to have Kate out there, making parents feel it’s a matter of individual responsibility while all social services for children are being cut.

        Much like the GOP in the US, the cruelty is the point. The greed is the point.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        ++++this @Lurker25. “How many labor sympathizers do you see working for them, ever?” Excellent question. Zero is the answer.

        At this point, in Kate’s “raising awareness” thing, I’m just going to assume they have a 4th child named ‘Awareness’ and Kate wants people to know they’re raising him or her.

        So, Scobie (and other rotas) want to say Kate is trying to do good but her hands are tied? It’s ineffectual because she’s limited. (she’s limited alright)

        Hypothetically, Kate could choose to not do these frivolous photo ops, creepy ass claymation videos and other things. As an Art History major and supposed “artist”, she could have developed a coloring book that represented positive things/activities for children. The RR’s could have been promoters. Proceeds going to groups in need. I believe, deep down, they all know that Kate’s projects would be a fail. No interest. It’s why they keep doing the hilarious polls. The majority of the UK public have zero interest in what Kate has to say.

  3. MY3CENTS says:

    Early years are important!
    Homelessness is bad!
    This is all that can be expected from WanK.

    • booboocita says:

      Buttons are good!
      Wiglets are good!
      Roses are yuck!
      We’re not racists!

    • Nadia says:

      @ AGREATRECKONING well said. I feel like when trying to find “projects” for Kate to do they asked, “What do you like?” And she said, “Oh I like babies and kids” and that is where this stemmed from. However, she is so lacking in not only intellect but motivation and drive to do a darn thing. She loves the attention and her pictures taken in new clothes but that’s about it. People aren’t going to want to pay for that.

  4. Digital Unicorn says:

    Ouch – she’s gonna need some heavy duty cream to treat those burns from this. No lies detected here.

    its becoming painfully obvious to people outside this blog that this is nothing more than PR for her – she has NO INTEREST in actually doing anything substantive.

    She IS ineffective and she IS limited – and not by the Royal institution. They WILL throw her and her grasping family to the beast and it will be karmic.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      I agree. A few years ago if you’d told me the British public will be openly negative in their comments I wouldn’t have believed it. We all know that she doesn’t truly care but she needs to have a legacy project to rival what Meghan does effortlessly. Hence the copying of Meghan;s style, branding, fonts, logo, staging and even mannerisms.

    • SarahCS says:

      Can the Royals do something substantive if they want to? The Prince’s Trust would suggest so, as would the Duke of Edinburghs awards scheme. WanK just don’t care.

      Tin foil tiara time – did this area get chosen so that they could use the excuse of ‘too political’ to excuse her doing anything that actually resembled work? Or am I giving KP too much credit here? I think yes but then again the Tories are so involved in the royals that maybe someone there decided this would be a handy deflection from all their atrocious actions – blame society and the parents! The same government who are about to write to mothers not currently in work asking them why they’re not working but not mentioning any of the issues around availability or affordability of childcare. Shaming Us indeed.

      • Becks1 says:

        @SarahCS Harry founded Sentebale and Invictus as a royal (although Sentebale was completely outside the royal foundation I think), Meghan did the cookbook and SmartSet, hell Charles put out a line of sustainable fashion either shortly before or after the SmartSet. And the Prince’s Trust has obviously been a very substantive effort over the years. So like you said, W&K just don’t care.

        Now that said I do think you are giving KP too much credit about the “too political” excuse. I think they thought this would be a project that would allow Kate to mingle with babies and children, say things like “its so important to have a good childhood” and then swan off back into her palace. I think the fact that people are, at this point, expecting SOMETHING more is throwing KP for a loop.

      • Concern Fae says:

        Just finished Spare and the part about Charles limiting how many events William, Kate, and Harry could do by keeping the purse strings tight has really got me wondering about how that works. Charles is such a tiny minded, tightwad fool.

        The Wales have the Duchy money now, so that isn’t a concern. But they are worse than Charles in just about every way, so this should play out hideously.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Gotta disagree with Omid. There is a LOT she can do, namely FUNDRAISE! Art Room didn’t have to close if she would’ve raised funds for it. Simply visiting once to “learn” (HA!) isn’t going to cut it for ANY of the charities. They operate on FUNDRAISING. She couldn’t be bothered. At. All.

      • Rnot says:

        I’ve wondered whether anyone over there is machiavellian enough to have intended this project to discredit both her and the subject itself. If they can simultaneously demonstrate why Kate has to go, and get people rolling their eyes when someone starts talking about the early years, then that’s a win for William and the Tories.

    • Teagirl says:

      There is one thing that she is exceptionally good at : finding the camera. She always seems to know where the camera is. In the first picture, everyone else is looking forward, but she finds the camera …

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Teagirl, and she makes sure we see big blue.

      • Nadia says:

        @Teagirl, I saw a video of her at the event. There was a man talking to her that she really wasn’t listening to. She would pick up a can, pause, pose and smile for the cameras. It was ridiculous.

  5. Seaflower says:

    I still can’t get over how puffy her face and eyes are from that video.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Its the botox and fillers – she’s had a top up and they are still settling.

      • Mary Pester says:

        Digital unicorn, just think, all the money that she spends on fillers, botox, jewellery and clothes, just how much good that vast amount could do to the “, early years” of many many children. But her vanity is the thing that will keep them without funds and her posing for her friendly paps.

    • sparrow says:

      I still can’t get over the photo of her in the audience from the other night. Looking along the rows there are some genuinely beautiful women. Kate is simply an averagely attractive woman, ageing badly. Without the spangly outfit, and manic face pulling, she would dissolve into that background. Someone said press photographers zoom into her in crowds, and that she pulls prepared facial freezes for them to snap. It became obvious to me, looking at the audience picture, that she operates only in isolation from other women, and with spades’ worth of photoshop. This is why she is addicted to filler and botox, and her eyes are currently skew. I’ve always thought she looked basic. Pictures from her youth, where beauty is at its prime, are downright ordinary. Pictures of her with Meghan are revealing. How she has been elevated to world class beauty status is beyond me.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        ITA – she was always attractive enough in that blend in with the crowd sort of way. The whole ‘great English rose beauty’ thing came from her family PR as part of the embiggening. The sad thing is that she clearly believes her own hype and yes as others pointed out yesterday she is currently on an attention high – has been since QE2 passed. The new titles and status (within the media and family) has gone her her and Carol(e)’s head.

        It will all come crashing down – this campaign is the beginning as its tone def in every way. Teachers are on strike, children are going hungry and people are struggling in every way.

      • Lisa says:

        We can say a lot of things about Kate, but come on. She’s hardly average looking. Yes the Botox and fillers are affecting her face but overall she is attractive. And yes, I’m sensitive to this because if she’s just average, what am I? 😂

      • The Old Chick says:

        When you see unphotoshopped pics, she’s downright plain and her skin is bad. Regardless of botox, fillers and Wiglets or the new full wig. Not eating, smoking (and whatever else), over exercising and a nasty attitude shows.

      • sparrow says:

        Don’t put yourself down, Lisa. If you met Kate in real life, without the fake hair, say at school drop off, you’d think she was a knackered, attractive woman, very much of a type here in the UK. You would not be amazed at her beauty. You wouldn’t think she was great looking. Give that photo of her in the audience a close look. She looks very odd and not that nice. There are women to her side and behind who are far better looking. What she has done to her face to comply with this beauty myth of hers has done her no favours.

      • Nic919 says:

        She was cute in her youth, but that has since faded and she would simply be another rich woman using a lot of botox and fillers if not for her famous husband and his family.

      • Sugarhere says:

        @Sparrow: 😂😭🤣😆

    • KFG says:

      She looks like Jim Carey in the Grinch. Her face and facial expressions are creepy.

      Also, she doesn’t care about anything except how she looks and wearing inappropriate accessories to show her “importance “

    • BeanieBean says:

      She looks like she just woke up.

  6. Heather says:

    You only need to look at the women from the Grenfell Fire community and the cookbook Meghan spearheaded as an example of a simple solution to keep that group going. Simple. Easy. Non political. Effective.

    • LaraK says:

      Yeah, sure, but it also takes work, and work is for the poors, not the future Queen!
      Besides, sweat might make the wiglet fall off.

    • Alexandria says:

      And she did despite having incompetent and awful staff and courtiers. What excuse does Mumbles have.

      • Betsy says:

        I sometimes wonder, in an alternate galaxy where Kate is a Meghan-like worker, would her staff and courtiers also shiv Kate or no.

        Just idle thinking. We’ll never have to find out because she’ll never do any work.

    • Jais says:

      Yep. There are projects she can do that can make a difference. She’s just not doing them. She’s spending money on a hollow campaign as her legacy. Like Kaiser, I disagree that it’s purely bc of the limitations of her role. It becomes poor Kate. It’s not her fault. The role just won’t let her do more.

      • First comment says:

        I agree @Jais..and what really irritates me is the fact that almost everyone in their criticism for this project is very kind towards Kate just like scobie..:” she means well “, “it’s not her fault”, it’s too political to really do something”, “she wants to make a difference but there are limits in the way the royals could operate” etc. Everyone treats her with kid gloves ignoring the big elephant in the room: this whole campaign costs several thousand pounds with no real effect towards little children that she’sso passionate about… why not anyone points to the fact that those money could be spend for something more practical and effective? I mean, in this site only, I’ve read several excellent ideas… I’m pretty sure that her team is aware that there are ways to really help children but they don’t want to either because of lack of interest and will or because of Kate’s obvious “limitations”. Compare her preferential treatment to the one Meghan received after the cookbook… she was even accused of helping terrorists, for God sake, if I remember correctly…

      • Sue E Generis says:

        Harry also made this excuse in his book for why William couldn’t do more, but it’s bs. How did Charles do so much more? How did Harry himself, with no support from his family, manage to establish major, impressive, impactful concerns like Sentebale and Invictus? William and Kate don’t do anything because they don’t want to and they just don’t have the bandwidth.

    • Lizzie says:

      Meghan outclassed the courtiers and did something they said couldn’t/shouldn’t be done and they all turned on her. There is no way Waity will risk having the courtiers turn on her too, not to supply a food bank with food or raise funds for early years programs.

  7. sparrow says:

    Thank heavens for some common sense. It’s like I was saying with food banks; the royal family can’t be involved. It’s all very nice, but it’s a political issue simply because it involves money and policy. There’s very little they can touch without stepping over this line. Even mental health; it’s all very well telling people to talk and seek help, but there is little to no help for people with mental health issues within an NHS in ruins.

    This is where the BRF is showing its limitations. In decades gone by, with British social deference to a hierarchy, and with an empire, it was enough for them to just “be”. In centuries gone by, the monarchy, literally and militarily, protected the emerging nation state. Neither of these are relevant any longer. However, and unfortunately, the presidential system won’t work as a UK office because it will forerun the collapse of the four nations (inc northern ireland). Can you imagine Wales being comfortable with an English president, and possibly vice versa in the long run? The fracture of the four nations would leave Northern Ireland separated, which would cause huge political and ideological problems for their historic relationship with England.

    What to do? We are stuck with a useless and costly institution, and the BRF knows it. British people know it. The number of negative DM comments is rising. Wheeling out this woman and her cynical projects is making it worse. “Modern” UK monarchy is at a tipping point.

    • PunkPrincessPhD says:


      You make some really good points here, but I need to challenge the idea that a Presidential system must look like the USA or France. It is absolutely possible to design a system based on a rotating presidency – someone from England, then Wales, then NI, then Scotland etc. There is a successful model with the EU (ahem). NI itself can provide a model on the design of consociational governments using PR, allocated cabinet seats through a d’Hondt formula etc. While I get that the above is not *likely* because of the current prevailing political dynamics in the UK, the scenario you foresee isn’t inevitable, either.

      That said, I suspect the dissolution of the Union is already in motion, and these concerns will be moot long before the hourglass runs out on the monarchy

    • Jaded says:

      Yes, and because the BRF is in thrall with the Tory gov’t, they can’t be seen to be criticizing or detouring around their egregious cost-cutting policies to provide assistance to the organizations that are being gutted. They’re going through these performative (and costly) appearances thinking they’re doing good by showcasing an issue without actually doing anything that could help them survive, but people are now seeing through the theatrics and voicing their complaints. Yesterday’s strike made that abundantly clear.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      If the monarchy does nothing because they can’t be involved in politics, then they are useless and serve no real purpose. Therefore, it should be possible to abolish the monarchy without replacing it with anything. What would be the difference, except saving tons on money?

      • Moondust says:

        Or they could keep the monarchy and cut their funding. Apart from the BRF who would complain?

  8. Zappy says:

    Royals need to focus on charity. Donate money or organize fundraising.
    Pretend to be intelectual or expert on something serious doesnt suit them. All this fuss bring nothing to the real problem.

    • Chloe says:

      Ding ding ding. This is exactly what kate should be doing. Funding charities that focus on early years and give parents a helping hand. Straight to the point and non complicated and non political. Gods knows it won’t fix the problems in the UK, which are systematic, but at least she would be doing something tangible and we could actually take her serious. However i am convinced that both william and kate are utterly greedy so i don’t think the royal foundation will ever create funds for that.

      • Elizabeth says:

        Usually, that’s what foundations do; they give money to charities. Kate could easily create something like Earthshot for early childhood education. Instead, what we’re probably going to see in a year or two is yet another awareness campaign.

      • SophieJara says:

        Yes, exactly this. As much as it enrages me to hear taking care of children, healthcare, and racism labeled as “political” issues, you could still do a lot of useful charitable work embedded in that corrupt framing.

  9. Jillian O Rourke says:

    A very balanced and insightful report from Omid.

  10. Layla says:

    Let’s be real here, The whole thing is ineffectual because it all started as a vanity project to one-up Meghan. This whole nothingburger started in 2019(?). Before that, nothing. One look at the promotion and the nature of this entire, (I wanna say campaign?) is deep rooted with elements of everything a la meghan. Archceotyoes promotion, a series about a little girl (still pissed she used my name. Like I’ve said before: YOU DONT KNOW ME WELL ENOUGH KATE) her fashion copykeening (bodysuit, long double breasted coats, crew neck knitwear, chunky hoop shaped earrings, red monochrome suit for a speech). Everything she does know is in some shape or form a discount copykeen edition of Meghan and more people are beginning to realise this, hence why she’s never taken seriously anymore.
    Also they can’t be “political” because Willileaks the Basher always in bed (suits reference) on a regular basis with the tories

    • Alexandria says:

      I cringe when I see “decade”. What decade? She started mentioning early years in 2018.

      • Chloe says:

        The decade refers to her listening and learning phase.

      • Belli says:

        They’re trying to retroactively cram her engagements into a rewritten history of early childhood being a lifelong passion of hers. She had a few engagements with children, that’s all.

        I think it was Camilla Tominey who claimed in 2018 that late had been working “secretly” on the early years since becoming a royal.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah they’re trying to say that every time she visited a children’s charity in the past almost 12 years it was a part of this big master plan for her Early Years “work.”

    • TheVolvesSeidr says:

      She’s been droning on uselessly about the “ahly” years for over 10 years now. Here’s an article from Omid from 2021 w/ a vid from @kensingtonroyal twitter stating that. She is going on 11 years of this BS and has done NOTHING.

  11. Ginger says:

    We all know she could do more with this without being political. The problem is that she doesn’t really care. This is just busy work for until she becomes Queen Consort.

    • Tessa says:

      I don’t expect her to do much more as Queen consort. She does not like working.

      • Ginger says:

        She will do even less. She probably won’t work at all.

      • Alexandria says:

        Of course she will work. At scheming against her future daughter in laws who will be younger and fresher news to the tabloid rats.

    • Mary Pester says:

      The BIGGEST problem is she doesn’t do “work”, that is a dirty word with lazy katey. The two biggest differences between this lazy sow and Megan are that MEGAN will and DOES work for things she believes in,, Grenfell was a brilliant example of this, and the fact that Megan still keeps in contact with them. Megan Also RAISES funds for those same projects and has done all her working life. Khate believes in KHATE and believes her hands are for rings, not for mucking in on anything

    • DeeSea says:

      💯 She’s copy-keening Melania’s infamous “I really don’t care, do U?” jacket through her abject lack of concrete action and follow-through.

  12. C-Shell says:

    I’m fervently looking forward to the end of this flurry of embiggening — and it’s coming because KKKHate has such a finite store of motivation. She and Bulliam are infuriating and exhausting with all of their hypocritical performative “ME ME ME!” bullshit. I’m having visceral revulsion whenever I see pics of them, now. 😖

  13. Brassy Rebel says:

    It’s “only a political hot potato if you think poor children don’t deserve to be nurtured”. But that’s exactly what the British establishment and their right wing tools do think. To be fair, that’s the ideological basis for the political right wing here in the US as well: the poor, including their children, should be punished, not nurtured. Since the monarchy is the Tory show pony, all of these “early years” events are just performative stunts. The message is, if you want to help poor children, give to charity because the government won’t be doing it.

    • SarahCS says:

      I strongly agree with everything you say. Their ideology is purely based on the individual, if you succeed well done and if you’re poor, ill, disadvantaged that’s on you. The issue is that they’ve had years to quietly implement policies that align to this ideology and strip funding from everyone who needs it with the royals cheerily along for the ride.

      I am already effectively being taxed more because my conscience feels its the right thing to share my income with others, be that the food bank I make a monthly donation to, one off contributions to various charities, or supporting my retired mother who can’t live on what she has/qualifies for from the state despite having worked through her adult life, including a spell in on the state payroll working in Social Services for 13 years. I’m angry but exhausted.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        I feel your frustration. Please don’t give up! That’s exactly what they want because then they will have a clear field to exploit others and take more for themselves. I do hope that in the next election the Tories will be shown the exit. It’s the only hope for Britain now just as getting the Republicans out was the only hope here.

      • Mary Pester says:

        Sarahcs, I’m with you, I have cancer and care for my darling husband who has early onset dementia. Shopping is a real trial due to my physical limitations and needing someone to be with him. But like you I try and give to my local food bank. I get so sick of hearing they “can’t do this or that”, because it would be political, but we all know they often get involved in things political. Good god its like a swap shop between the Palace and government for staff. What REALLY, REALLY gets me mad is that both my husband and I are veterans and this useless tory governments is now taxing our small military pensions to give the Royal family EXTRA millions each year

  14. Belli says:

    Sorry Omid, it’s not her need to be politically neutral that’s preventing her from doing anything effective. There are so so many politically neutral things she could do to actually have a tangible impact on young children’s lives instead of just wafting around in expensive clothes and saying “Early Years are important” whenever someone pulls her string. Copy Dolly’s book scheme! Use the Duchy and its brands! Create a fund for art and music supplies! This could be so simple without much effort at all if she actually cared!

    She’s tried to make this four-year campaign sound very big and important, but she doesn’t actually know what to do with it, so the result is that it’s incredibly vague and doesn’t actually help anyone.

    • Ginger says:

      And….show up to a food bank with food and then give information so others can donate. This is why no one can take her seriously. Who shows up to a food bank empty handed and then right after claim they care so much about a child’s early years?

    • Alexandria says:

      How are the royals politically neutral anyway. They hire Tories.

      • Belli says:

        Oh, they’re not at all politically neutral. There’s the staff swapping between royal and governemnt offices that you mention and the fact that they do lobby for policies and exemptions that benefit them.

        The politically neutral line is only ever trotted out as an excuse for not doing good.

      • Athena says:

        They’re not apolitical, it’s just an excuse not to do anything for the people. This royal family is a massive scam

  15. heygingersnaps says:

    I just cannot with this constant pr of what is essentially just them getting their egos stoke. It’s an illusion, a nothingburger, a mirage, a con. That’s what it is. More money getting wasted instead of being used for essential public services.
    I used to think that the “monarchy” was harmless and that the UK was all that but as a person of colour who has lived here for nearly 10 years, my gosh, I realised what a pox on mankind it just is.
    Going back to slavery and the subjugation of people in their native lands and not giving them a second thought, here we are in the present. Most people are still holding on to the illusion that it’s good to bow and be ruled over by people just because they won the birth lottery or married into or done whatever to gain access into it. The monarchy is useless saved for the privilege few who get to enjoy unimaginable wealth on the backs of the public and for those who want to be comforted by white supremacy.
    There was a mass strike yesterday from teachers, train workers and the like, my son’s school was opened for 3 classes and his class was one of them. I was talking to one of the parents during the morning school run and said, the government needs to pay workers properly, fund public services properly but they won’t, they have all the money to squander for one man’s ghastly ego fest but none for those that truly matters. The priorities of the people in power are all wrong and it’s time for the majority of the public to say enough is enough.

  16. Maxine Branch says:

    Thank you for reading this article of Scobie’s for us. I refused to read it because I knew he would be straddling the fence on this one. Kate is dumb. Royal patronages under the system of the institution are worthless and nothing more than vanity projects. Labeling a project as “life work,” Suggest you have been at this a long time, which this woman has not been. Happy the professional in the field of Early Childhood are calling this woman out. All in all this woman got what her goal was, headlines, a billboard, able to convene a group of professional along with celebrities so her job is done. Nothing has changed with this woman nor her approach to being a contributing member of society, she and her husband are both lightweight airheads without an ounce of integrity or work ethic.

  17. Amy Bee says:

    I agree, Kate could go much further in her advocacy for Early Years. I remember when Harry used to talk about the funding cuts to youth programmes, the press used to say he’s being political but it didn’t stop him from saying it. Kate doesn’t want to be attacked for telling the truth but she forgets that her invisible contract with the press protects her from criticism.

  18. Becks1 says:

    Yeah Scobie is walking a really fine line here. He obviously doesn’t want to tick off KP too much (he’s probably already on their “people we want to ban” list as it is), and he’s trying really really hard to give Kate the benefit of the doubt, but…..overall, he’s pointing out the weaknesses/inadequacies of this campaign – the numerous big “announcements” that are basically meaningless, Kate’s inability to follow through on anything she’s talking about (and its not just because its “political”), etc.

    Someone really messed up with this “announcement” and campaign and “awareness” etc. It’s just so meaningless and empty.

    • JT says:

      I mean, he’s writing a book about the royals called Endgame. Does he really need to straddle the line anymore? He’s probably already on their watchlist. That’s one of the reasons why I can’t take Omid seriously at times. Just come out and say it damn it! This campaign isn’t real. It’s PR. The royals are political. Why care about access anymore when he’s made a sh*t tonne of money off of H&M with FF and he can make a hell of a lot more by telling the truth about the rest of them.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, that’s why I don’t fully get it, he’s already on their watchlist, lol. I wonder if he knows some things about what goes on behind the scenes (with the marriage etc) that makes him feel the need to treat Kate a bit more gently here? He’s been harsher than this with William and Charles recently.

        but if you kind of look at it like someone patting a child on the head and saying “well you tried” in a condescending and patronizing tone….it seems a bit more biting.

      • Jais says:

        So yeah I’m kind of wondering what is going on behind the scenes that she gets treated with such kid gloves. Is it really just that she’s the heir’s wife? Look, I don’t want her roasted in the town square but some real criticism without simultaneously patting her on the head would not be too much by any means. Also, just wonder if the few people criticizing her also don’t want to add to the misogyny of attacking a woman while she’s down. Idk? But you’re right, becks1, in that the “well you tried” tone is patronizing AF and maybe that’s enough.

    • PunkPrincessPhD says:


      Re: “patting a child on the head and saying well, you tried …” All I can think of is that Simpsons meme with Bart holding a cake iced with the words “At Least You Tried” and dumping it in the bin 😆

  19. SussexWatcher says:

    The bit about not engaging in politics is also false. We’ve seen the queen have special laws passed to exempt her from things she didn’t want reported/laws she didn’t want to follow, we’ve seen Chuckles the clown king lobby the government, and Willnot’s staff is filled with ex-government officials.

    The problem is that a) the government that the royals align with doesn’t support these types of needed social programs, so I don’t believe they even want head start and other social programs for children.

    And b) Keen has shown time and time again that she is incredibly lazy and doesn’t even care about the charities she has, let alone adding something new. We were told how much she cares about addiction and how THAT leads to all sorts of social ills, etc (same noise she’s making now about early childhood)…and then she doesn’t visit said charity for 6 years! Or she lets it get shut down, like with the Art Room. There are so many ways she could have helped raise money (and honestly, I’m shocked she didn’t have a children’s art show to raise money because that’s something Meghan did, so it already would have been on Keen’s Meghan moodboard!). And wasn’t the whole new point/structure of their foundation is that it would give money to worthy causes? Why couldn’t her foundation just have made a donation or grant to keep that place open?! Weren’t we told that the Cambridges weren’t going to do any bread and butter engagements because they’ll be focused on big impact? Ahhh right, they just meant big award shows where they can rub shoulders with celebrities.

    She’s lazy and doesn’t care. This is all lip service to make her look busy and ‘keen’ and it’s gross. Im glad she’s getting slammed by childhood experts and wish Scobie would have been more frank in his article.

    • BeanieBean says:

      That’s what I don’t get about their foundation. Doesn’t it exist to provide grants to organizations that need funding? Couldn’t she then direct some of that money to organizations that support ‘the early years’? Get some good PR that way?

  20. Tessa says:

    That picture, Kate gawks at the cameras and William looks aggravated sitting next to her.

    • Julia K says:

      She’s the only one looking at the camera because she’s the only one who knew a photo op was planned. A set up.

  21. Emmi says:

    Well, he’s not wrong. The real problem is that every real societal issue is political. Of course early childhood development is political. That shit needs a budget and apparently, across many Western countries, it’s the first budget to be cut because children have no lobby. No charity in the world can combat teacher shortages and crappy salaries. No charity can solve maternity leave or non-existent daycare that forces mothers to stay out of the workforce longer. That is just a tiny example of how these royal causes will never not be political and if they continue to try and be wishy-washy about it, this is the result.

    And as someone above said, even the idea that children and families should be supported is a political or rather ideological question and always has been. Politics is what shapes our daily lives. That’s why people were outraged/delighted when Diana stood up for HIV/AIDS patients because while it was a human issue, many people simply hate(ed) gay men and that shaped health policies. So again, political.

    They need to get with the times. If Willy wants to continue to advocate for the evironment, that will lead him down the same path as his wife and her early childhood stuff because it’s even more political.

    • Emily_C says:

      Yep. Having a heart is political. The Tories are very political in their stance on children, which is that immigrant children should be kicked off the island and that British children are no one’s responsibility but that of their parents, and if their parents can’t provide absolutely everything for them, too bad. They should die and reduce the surplus population. It’s completely political, all of it.

  22. Inge says:

    ” her limitations as a royal patron meant that she would never be able to lobby to keep it going”

    Meghan would have found a solution. Just like she did for Hubbs Community Kitchen & Smart Works.

  23. Hail says:

    Kate’s inability to do anything effective has nothing to do with the limitations within the patronage system, it has everything to do with her and her staff’s lack of creativity & interest. No one is asking Kate to do anything revolutionary. In the 2 years of being a working royal, Meghan used her publishing connections to create a cookbook to help fund the Hubb Kitchen, she brought food & donated clothes at engagements, she created a clothing capsule for smart works. The patronages and small businesses she included in her british vogue guest-edit were able to receive substantial donations. Hell, maybe Kate just needs better fans who would rather spend their time setting up fundraisers for her patronages than constantly trolling Meghan.

  24. Genevieve says:

    I bet if she earmarked half her annual clothing budget to dole out to one or two of her patronages a year, she could make a substantial difference somewhere.

    And yet all she ever brings is … nothing.

    • Elizabeth Kerri Mahon says:

      She could do what Princess Diana did, auction her old clothes and donate the money to fund various early childhood projects.

  25. Alexandria says:

    That claymation video. If it costs say $5000, imagine if she had donated that instead. Now that’s impact. Now think of all the useless launches and PR to inform people what they ALREADY know. What a waste of public funds.

  26. JCallas says:

    Kate’s charity work is just a vehicle for her to parade around in designer suits. It’s not meant to have any impact. That’s why she felt comfortable showing up to a food bank empty handed.

    • Athena says:

      While the country is in a financial crisis she should not be seeing in any new clothes. Unless she’s selling the stuff after she wears them or she’s wearing borrowed clothes, she must have rooms and rooms of clothes ( where is she keeping all her clothes? It can’t be in the five bedroom Adelaide cottage). Anne and Camilla rewear their clothes all the time. It’s bunkers that William the future king has four pairs of pants and three sweaters which he wears over and over and this child of the middle class has to wear something new every time we see her.

      This woman does not seem to know anyone who lives in the real world and can advise her. Doesn’t her mother, father, sister and brother watch the news and can call to say “Catherine girl you’re looking pretty bad in the news”.

      • Tessa says:

        Carole would never do that. She would send out her brother Gary who will speak to the media about how his niece Kate can do no wrong.

  27. Steph says:

    I read his piece yesterday. He’s being entirely too generous with her. She is in a position the effect actual change. Everytime @Kaiser writes about this CBers come up with at least ten new ideas per post. She can’t do anything about systemic change but she can still do things that help on a smaller level.

  28. Noor says:

    Basically it means that neither Kate nor William or the Royal foundation understand fully their role and limitations vis a vis public service, charity and discipline in using charity funds.
    They are supposed to use their platforms to raise funds and channel it to worthy causes for the benefit of the people. They are not a commercial entity. Therefore producing videos teasing a new project ShapingUs, holding a glitzy launch or a star studded Earthshot award ceremony is a waste of scarce funds.

  29. Jais says:

    Get that scobie is walking a fine line, and at the end of the day, he was direct in calling out the campaign’s shortcomings. However, the reason the campaign is falling flat is not just because of the limitations of the role and not being able to get into policy. As many upthread have said, the cookbook and smartworks are tangible ways to make a difference. It’s amazing to watch Kate be coddled even in criticism against her campaign. She is so v protected in a way that Meghan never was. Even Lainey wrote about Kate as in she means well and her intentions are in the right place. If only it weren’t for the limitations of the role, she could do more. She is afforded a lot of grace.

  30. ariel says:

    You can’t be an effective “tory stooge” AND help the poor. They are at cross purposes. They only want to keep their money, not shine a light on their secret funds and untold billions, and help the other aristos stay rich and powerful and get more rich and powerful.
    Screw the poor.
    So- jazz hands, and listen and learn.
    Maybe she is not dumb.
    Maybe she is a decoy mannequin- and we’re like – well she’s too dumb to do anything/help anyone.
    When i think there are more insidious, purposeful forces at work behind her dumb*ss jazzhands laziness.
    She is doing exactly what the tory govt wants- NOTHING

  31. susan says:

    I imagine that the realization that royal “charity work” was useless also helped H&M to understand that getting out was essential.

    Honestly, these people-spoiled, useless, thinking that putting on a £1000 outfit and going to a food bank actually “helped” anything?? And they go back to their palaces and count their money.

  32. ML says:

    Usually I am more likely to agree with Omid Scobie than not on the RF. Here I vehemently disagree that Kate is severely limited in what she can do. Kate could rip off Meghan’s clothing initiative, but aim it at babies through preschool children to ensure that they are properly clothed. Call on people to donate food on Fridays for instance and lead the way helping out on food initiatives each Friday. Blankets: get sewers and knitters involved. Draw something and turn it into greeting cards and use that money. Highlight people who are makkng a difference and keep in regular contact with them. She’s got a whole media crew breathlessly waiting to write articles and is a member of a well to do and well connected family. She is NOT as constrained as people seem to believe she is!

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes – this. “Early years are important” is such a huge topic that all one can do is stare at it helplessly, but if you cut it up in smaller pieces, then something can be accomplished. I think the real limitation is Kate’s ego. It’s not big enough or important enough to help people, she wants to be praised as the savior of the UK’s children and make a lasting mark for all eternity.

      • Jaded says:

        I also think Kate is as thick as a brick and lazy as a sloth. She has no imagination and surrounds herself with like-minded “yes” people. Anyone with initiative and smarts who speaks truth to power doesn’t last long in her world. She thinks posing in a costly, bespoke business suit clutching Notey McNotebook and a pen makes her look smart, concerned and professional. There is so much more she could accomplish that wouldn’t be seen as circumventing policy but she clearly only cares about how she looks, not how she performs.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Jaded – Lol, but she seems to have the energy to do things she actually wants to do, like shopping, having her photo taken and going on holiday. And she seems canny enough to avoid work she doesn’t want to do and to plot against people behind their backs. It’s just that she’s a parasite, who’s married into a family of parasites who’ve been told for 1,000 years that God says it’s ok for them to be parasites. There’s really no point in expecting her to be better, because that’s not who she is.

      • Becks1 says:

        “Notey McNotebook” 😂😂😂

    • PunkPrincessPhD says:

      @ML: entirely this. Even framing any of these initiatives as part of the Chubby “Big Help” for Charles’s Coronation extravaganza would buffer the “too political” criticism.

  33. NotSoSocialB says:

    The last photo of her, in the deep green clothing, made me reflexively say “ew” at the expression on her face. It’s quite something to behold.

  34. ML says:

    When the queen died, tons of people brought Paddingtons and sandwiches: continue that and merge it with child-friendly initiatives!

  35. TIFFANY says:

    Her and the rich people she know kids will be fine. Why should she care about kids with working or poor families. That is what someone in the press should finally say.

    The Tories don’t care about the working poor and that is why the royals love them.

  36. Lizzie says:

    I think we all agree Waity is not effective ‘due to her limitations’. But defining those limitations is where we probably disagree. Staying non-political vs only interested in photo shoots.

    • TIFFANY says:

      Having children be born with food and a roof over their head and a proper education is political. Children.

      U.K……they are just like us.

      • SadieMae says:

        Here in the US I recently saw yet another news story about a conservative accusing a liberal of “politicizing” an issue by… mentioning LGBTQ+ rights. Um, advocating for the rights of all people to be free from abuse or retribution or firing or being evicted because of who they intrinsically are is not playing some sort of political “card.” This shouldn’t be considered a political issue at all. It’s basic human rights.

        Same here: making sure children are fed, nurtured, and educated is not taking a political stand. There’s no reason the RF couldn’t do a lot more. Including liquidating some of their many valuable assets (which were largely gleaned from exploiting others!) and just donating that money. It would be morally right AND it would be good PR that might help the monarchy stay afloat, which is what they apparently want…and yet they just cannot see “past the nose on their face” (as my granddad would have said).

        It’s as if they feel they really can’t modernize at all because that would open the floodgates of “you know what would be really modern is if our country just gets rid of this stupid, archaic monarchy!” But if they do nothing, the monarchy is on its way out for sure. It’s like they’re swinging on a trapeze that’s coming loose and yet they can’t bring themselves to just swing over to the next trapeze. Instead they’ll cling to the loose one till it breaks. Luckily for them, at least when that happens they’ll fall safely into piles and piles of money…

  37. NIna says:

    You know who remains politically neutral but manages to effect real change for children?

    Dolly Parton.

    Her Imagination Library distributes a free monthly book to children up to the age of five. The charity supports around one million children EVERY MONTH. Dolly Parton is warm and caring and it is clear that she is passionate about helping people.

    So when you stand Kate up against Dolly Parton, it becomes very clear what the former’s limitation actually is — it’s not that she can’t be political, it’s that she just doesn’t CARE. She is not sincere and it is apparent in everything she does.

    • SadieMae says:

      Perfect example! Of course, Dolly grew up in poverty, and I think that makes a big difference – she doesn’t feel she’s better than, or different from, the people she’s helping. I think the RF thinks of the lower economic classes as “those people we have to go and smile at every few weeks so people think we care.” If Kate truly cared, she’d be donating/investing lots of money into these initiatives instead of buying her tenth forest-green coatdress. (Seriously – of course she’s expected to dress nicely, she’s not gonna wear sweatpants to a formal reception – but why keep buying expensive clothes that look *exactly* like multiple sets of expensive clothes you already have? I would feel awful spending thousands upon thousands of dollars like that when others literally cannot heat their homes.)

  38. kelleybelle says:

    I believe she is actually trying to even copy Meghan’s smiles and her skin tone. Heavy make-up on here. I really believe this. She’s trying to look far more enthusiastic a la Meghan. Truly morbid.

    • Interested Gawker says:

      That ‘bright-eyed’ look, seated in the red suit, is so creepily like Meghan and so unlike her own expressions.
      This tit for tat overlay of Meghan on all of Kate’s events is so sinister.

  39. tamsin says:

    The royal family can effectively lobby the government to benefit themselves, but not to benefit
    “the people.” That’s how they continue to rule.

  40. LizzieB says:

    She literally can’t say any of that though. I’m no Kate defender, I think that this is ridiculous, but she can’t say that all young children need access to good food and great childcare/educational programmes because our Tory government stopped all of that. And she can’t be seen to be criticising the government. The issue is is that it just makes it sound like she’s telling parents they need to do more for their young kids when they are literally working as much as they can to pay their heating bills. It’s a terrible message. Child development is hugely political and she shouldn’t have chosen it, she should just stick to shaking hands and opening train stations or whatever.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Oh, piffle. What are they going to do? Dock her pay? Give her a low performance rating? But I agree with ‘she shouldn’t have chosen it, she should just stick to shaking hands and opening train stations or whatever.’

      • Moondust says:

        Problem is she doesn’t want to mix with the peasants so no bread and butter events. She only want to go to movie premieres.

  41. Mary Pester says:

    Why the hell doesn’t someone just say to her, “ffs Kate, just phone Megan and ask her how it’s done!! How many more times will this show pony trot out a vague idea in designer clothes and heels. How many more earrings are going to frame that plastic face, just to see her smile (for smile read grimace) mumble a few words, smile for multitudes of camera’s and dissappear until the next “novel idea hits her” SICK OF IT AND HER

  42. Flying fish says:

    The only limitation is Kate’s laziness.

  43. Saucy&Sassy says:

    This is what happens when you don’t modernize. The appearances began a century ago so that the brf would look like they were doing something positive for the nation. Well–and so that they wouldn’t have a very fast and very nasty end!

    They can’t just show up and do nothing in this modern world. They now have to show their worth. They can start by fundraising. I don’t care if it’s deemed political. I think the brf needs to decide whether Tories or the brf are the most important. If they continue the way they are going, the Tories will long outlast them. I think(?) QE2 had an eye on the future of the Monarchy, but was completely ineffective about how to do that. It’s possible she really believed just carrying on the way they were was the way to go. I just think KFC and Fails are only concerned about themselves. I would be shocked if either of them honestly thought about the Monarchy long term, and how to make sure it continues to exist.

    To those reading this who have access to the brf: Tories are your enemies. Figure it out, people.

  44. Nx2 says:

    Listening and learning are lifetime behaviors – I mean, is there a point at which an intelligent being quits them? It continues to be stated too that this early childhood area isn’t a new interest for her – so, what, she hasn’t paid any attention until now? -??? She has to spend time “listening and learning”? I smell a total crap cover story for laziness and inactivity – past, present and future.

  45. phlyfiremama says:

    Is there anyone who can explain to me (using sound reasoning) what good the BRF is to a modern day not-so-Great Britain?? Anyone??

    • Moondust says:

      The comforting thought of stability? PMs can come and go, sometimes being defeated by a lettuce but some things don’t change. The BRF is still there, I guess it’s reassuring.

  46. Vanessa says:

    Again Kate and her advisors did this because of Meghan cookbook this was throw Together haste overnight Because Kate was jealous that Meghan was about to have the spotlight . Kate thought this campaign was going to be her big moment she going to have her pictures taken with cute babies and toddlers the royal reporters would write glowing stories about how Kate is a just like Diana her stans would praise her and compare her to Diana . Meanwhile Kate would get to copy Meghan clothes and style while pretending she the people princess instead her country is on strike people are calling her out for vanity project. If this was so politically why did kate advisor pick this campaign that is always the Royal family excuses as to why they can’t help . If they can’t help because everything is so political what’s the point of hard working tax players paying for them if all they can do is show up pretend to listen and while wearing expensive clothes.

  47. Big Bertha says:

    What can you expect from someone who coasted through university, barely showing up, not even making a half-arsed attempt to get the class notes from her classmates even when they were kindly offered to her?

  48. Nerd says:

    It’s ineffective because she’s lazy, incompetent and doesn’t care. Politics has nothing to do with this. There are ways of doing the right thing without having to go the political route. Meghan managed to create change that is still impacting the UK years later without having to go the political route.

  49. EllenOlenska says:

    She could take a cue from her deceased mother in law and auction off “Big Blue” and donate the proceeds to fund some real support….because she cares more about children than jewels….

  50. Lily says:

    One of the biggest problems with this campaign is the subject is too safe. Kate is not Diana shaking hands with an AIDS patient in the early eighties. That was groundbreaking.

  51. Lily says:

    Why do women like Kate act like they are interacting with people in photographs when it is obvious that no one is paying any attention to them? I am referring to the top photograph of Kate sitting in the audience with her fingers at the V on her jacket.

  52. Cathy says:

    The only thing I can see that Kate has been committed to is putting an ugly belt, from her ugly belt collection, on what was a reasonably nice dress before the addition.

    Oh, I forgot how committed she was in stalking and catching William.

    Otherwise I see nothing.

  53. j.ferber says:

    Her limitations are in her character, personality, work ethic, and values. In other words, it’s not the “job” that gives her limitations–it’s her small, cold heart.

  54. Gabby says:

    I’m here to make fun of Wills in the top picture. That look on his face. Did he have a shock treatment or something? And his hand, what is that hand doing? Not the one on his knee.