Times: King Charles’s slimmed-down monarchy was a mistake, the royals are fragile

Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace threw hissy fits this past weekend, all about a rumor they started: that Prince Harry had “offered” to come back temporarily to do some royal work while his father is being treated for cancer. Harry possibly made that offer to his father in their brief private meeting two weeks ago, but Harry was not the one who leaked that offer to the Times this weekend. Harry was also not behind any of the ridiculous columns and thinkpieces about how his 25-hour visit could be the start of a real “reconciliation.” The Windsors and their media handlers are flat-out desperate for the Sussexes to return, but only on Windsor/media terms. Which isn’t going to happen, and so Prince William spent three full days screaming, crying and throwing up about how he will never allow Harry to come back. Meanwhile, even the Times of London acknowledges that Charles and William need some reinforcements. From Jenni Russell’s “Fragile royal family requires reinforcements.”

How Russell used to think. A modern Britain didn’t need this extensive clan.Even before his disgrace, Prince Andrew looked like a man without sufficient purpose. There were already rumours of Prince Harry’s discontent. It would be far better to liberate all those outside the line of succession from royal expectations and allow them their own careers and independent lives. The future king and his advisers thought the same. Even before his accession it was understood that Charles intended to cut the number of working royals. Frankly, both the King and I were wrong. The royal family suddenly looks fragile and thinned out. With both the King and the Princess of Wales seriously unwell, it’s abruptly apparent how few working royals there are.

Too old: Most are in their seventies and eighties. Of the 11 currently working members, only four — the prince and princess of Wales and the duke and duchess of Edinburgh — are under 60; two will soon turn 90. Nobody from the next generation is being lined up for the working roster until ten-year-old Prince George comes of age.

William’s appearance at the investiture two weeks ago: A fortnight ago Prince William held an investiture, on duty for the first time since the family illnesses. On arrival he was bleak, distracted, swaying on his feet. He looked a man bearing too much alone. Even Prince Harry, who rejected his royal role, has spotted the gap and offered to fill in while his father is ill, although it is improbable his family would welcome such an unreliable member back.

Not enough royals to cover these events: Buckingham Palace is overwhelmed with requests for royal attention. Already it cannot meet demand. The death of the Queen has left hundreds of organisations without the royal patron they were proud of. Those patronages are not automatically transferred; a request can be made to a new sovereign, as the Royal Society of Portrait Painters has done, but because a patronage entails time and obligation it may well be refused. Rationalists and republicans are bewildered by this. Why, they wonder, should anyone feel uplifted by proximity to the members of a hereditary family, there by accidents of conquest, battle, infertility, religious disqualification and premature death? I once felt the same. I didn’t appreciate the triple appeal of recognition, history and mystique.

The slimmed-down monarchy was a mistake: It’s a mistake for Britain to prune the royal roster to its core when its members can perform this unique unifying function across its nations and classes, generating excitement, validation and pride simply by showing up. The dutiful King is cutting back because he wants to retain public support by being leaner and smaller. The opposite is true: Britons living in hard and divisive times are badly in need of a calm, apolitical, supportive presence. Harry may be beyond redemption but the King should enlist his nieces and nephews: the princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, Lady Louise, Viscount Severn, if they will serve, to strengthen the family team.

[From The Times]

Again, Lady Louise is in college! Leave her alone! Viscount Severn (Sophie and Edward’s son) is only 16 years old! Leave him alone! Princess Eugenie already has one foot out the door and she lives part-time in Portugal, so please leave her alone too. Granted, Princess Beatrice genuinely wants to work for the Firm, and so does her husband. So it’s actually kind of bonkers that Beatrice hasn’t been given more to do, even on a temporary basis. In any case, none of this is new – people always knew that the slimmed-down monarchy was going to be very old and very lazy, and they have no one to blame but themselves. Charles, Camilla, William and Kate wanted all of the attention, all of the spotlight, all of the stolen treasure to themselves. They got it. Enjoy it, dumbasses.


Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

149 Responses to “Times: King Charles’s slimmed-down monarchy was a mistake, the royals are fragile”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Tessa says:

    I doubt harry offered to return to help out. He probably said no and told will Ree v e that his family are his wife and children Charles was warned about the slimmed down monarchy ages ago and did not listen

    • Robert Phillips says:

      A slimmed down monarchy would be fine. The problem is the ones they are left with won’t do anything at all. If William and Kate and Sophie and her husband would only do three things each week. That would be way more than enough. But they won’t even do that. Sophie is. But no one cares about her. The problem they are now having. Is the ones left have always been allowed to believe that they are better than everyone else. When they continually prove they aren’t. The public get fed up with them.

      • Eurydice says:

        It’s not just the laziness. With so few “working” there needs to be central planning and coordination. There are not enough of them for each to go off doing their own thing. If existing work is being neglected, there’s no need to bring on new projects that will also be neglected.

        Of course, this all depends on whether Jenni Russell’s mission for the RF as a cultural force of pride is the same as the RF’s mission of “who knows?”. Charles may just want to ride out his royal years and let the rest of them figure it out themselves.

      • Snaggletooth says:

        Everyone cheering for the slimmed down monarchy was high on their own supply about the Wales’. THAT is the real problem here.

      • Vik says:

        A slimmed monarchy is more than fine, I can never understand arguments against it. All other monarchies are working on a “slimmed down” principle and have done so for decades. The UK isn’t bigger and the Commonwealth doesn’t want UK monarchs anyway, so all these arguments are null and void.

        A slimmed down monarchy is cheaper and easier to manage. You have fewer people, who can mess up and fewer offices.

        On the other hand, that’s the clue. Those who do the “work”, they need to be serious about it and do it properly. Also there shouldn’t be many offices, comms should be streamlined and one company motto heralded by all.

        The approach Harry and Will wanted to do, spearheading one or two charities for a while and the moving on would also work, if you want to focus on one issue for a while, but indeed the problem is simply they don’t want to do the joke of a “work” thing as is. Never mind go the distance and do more. WanK are beyond uninterested and lazy and the Sussexes have been bullied out. The monarchy would be fine with a “monarch and heir only” or “monarch and children only” approach, but you can’t do that if you bully and harrass one set of the family and the other set is lazy and can’t and won’t be moved to pull their weight.

        “Slimmed down” is great, but if the members won’t work it fails of course. The approach isn’t the problem, the people are.

      • Jais says:

        But @vik. The issue is that the slimmed down monarchy in the UK is not cheaper. In fact, the SG is actually going up. It will cost more.

      • SussexWatcher says:

        Vik – the problem is also that the Leftover Royals may say slimmed down and mean fewer people and less work, but they are taking a pay raise at the same time. So, as you mentioned, when other royal families slim down, they seem to also reduce their overall financial burden on the citizens/country but not the grifting Windsors.

      • Vik says:

        @Jais & @SussexWatcher, unfortunately, you are right and I know that. I wanted to keep my comment short (not that I did!) and worked on a hypothetical. Indeed, the grant is going up and the monarch is going to pocket as much money as never before, unprecedented sums, whilst the number of recipients has gone down drastically.

        It should be cheaper and more importantly, could be cheaper. But greed is greed, just like laziness is laziness.

        Same with my point of not messing up (“be serious and do it properly”) – not possible with the sh*t show that is William, see: most recent example, the BAFTAs. But then his statesmenshipdom kicked in and he told the middle east to behave and now we have peace, so obviously when he wants work to get done, he gets it done! Hold on, wait… oh. :’D

      • LRB says:

        Replying to @Vik… one problem is that the slimmed down monarchy is NOT cheaper… they are using just as much money for their lazy lives as the full on fatter monarchy. Remember Harry said he had essentially no money and was shopping at TKMaxx…

    • StillDouchesOfCambridge says:

      I say, let Lady Louise in! Even being full
      time in college, I bet she could manage to do more than Kkkhate and eggplant willie combined, in a year. She’d be the next pancake under the bus.

      • lanne says:

        people were cruel to that girl when she was a child and had issues with her eyes. She shouldn’t be subject to clean up the messes of adults twice her age. Let her be a college kid and live her own life.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Agree @lanne. They need to leave Louise and James alone for the time being. William was given plenty of time to fart around (still does).

        Oh lordy, ‘Harry is beyond redemption’. LOLZ Bob Marley’s family/Jamaica think otherwise (and plenty of other people).

    • Dilettante says:

      Where’s the slimmed-down budget to go with the slimmed-down monarchy??

      • Lulu says:

        Here is an idea, slim down the royal offices. Eliminate KP as royal office. Let CH and BP manage all comm’s and diaries for ‘working’ royals. Giving KP platform to immature William was a huge mistake.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Dilettane. In the circular file.

    • westcoastgal says:

      I think they should keep pruning. It is 2024 and a monarchy is silly and quite simply ridiculous. They look old and musty because it is an outdated, out of touch institution. Abolish the monarchy so the teapot polishers can stop their fretting and the UK can focus on it’s future and not it’s ancient past.

    • Liz says:

      On another note the Middletons really did William no favours. Any stardust from Diana or his title has been lost through them.

      His recent statement on the Middle East sounded less global statesman and more Bill Middleton.

  2. olivia says:

    The only miscalculation here is that people want them to go away, give back what is due to the people of UK and citizens of other countries (land rights, sea rights, properties, gifts, diamonds) and vanish into obscurity appearing only at Christmas and Easter. No more weekly updates from the PM, no more raking in the money with ten fistufuls, no more stipends and annual payments.. Just. Go. Away.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      This article is really just whining about the fact that with so few royals under the age of 60 people see how pointless the monarchy is. If enough Brits see the institution as pointless, public support for it will vanish. The fact that even when well William and Kate refuse to do anything is not helping to keep the public engaged.

      • SarahLee says:

        @BrassyRebel, you are spot on. My though reading this was “Oh dear…..the Royal Society of Portrait Painters doesn’t have a patron. However will England survive!” Please. Seriously. The more the royals are out of site and not doing anything, the quicker the British public will realize that they didn’t even really miss them. That’s the real danger for Charles’ “slimmed-down” vision.

  3. Jais says:

    Lord Severn is 16. They need to back off and enjoy the slim pickings that they have.

    • Snaggletooth says:

      Right. What about this wasn’t totally foreseeable? Oh wait did they actually think Kate never put a foot wrong and that TOB was stoically going about his duties? Lmao sorry suckers!

    • Dee(2) says:

      It just highlights how proprietary they feel over the lives of these people. Harry is unreliable for daring to put his own wants and needs and those of his family over the needs of his extended family and the BM. They thought nothing at all at just completely deciding that the life trajectory of five people needed to change. No question at all if he, or Louise, or even Beatrice or Eugenie even want to do this, just expectation that your life is ours to direct and own.

    • Ula1010 says:

      He’s not Lord Severn anymore. He’s now an Earl, but he’s still 16, and wasn’t raised for public duties. It’s a ridiculous idea that a 16 has to pick up the slack of two 40-somethings.

  4. Tessa says:

    William is unreliable not harry. And imo an embarrassment. William drove out harry and meghan and Charles let him.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Tessa, oh, I think Wont had help driving out the Sussexes. KHate was right there with him as were KFC and the Escort. It’s easy to blame on person, but it was much more than that.

  5. Lili says:

    Yikes! Small mindedness drove away Harry and Meghan, but even if they came back thats just 2 people. they lost 4 qe2 , her husband , Harry and Meghan. but we cant really count meghan as she was there for only a short time. Cut the work, to the amount of people you have. normal companies downsize all the time. re structure!

    • SURE says:

      Don’t forget Andrew!

    • ML says:

      Exactly. To a certain extent they will have to downsize. However, William needs to get his butt into gear: time to start doubling or tripling his pathetically light workload. Camz needs to work more as well. This is the job description folks: in exchange for a luxurious lifestyle based on birth you need to show up for events and charities daily.

  6. This really is a case of be careful what you wish for situation. Chuckles was never going to listen to people about don’t t do this because he is as arrogant as his number one son.

    • Snaggletooth says:

      Exactly. What did they think would happen if one of the four remaining working royals got sick? Do these people lack the brain cells devoted to long term planning?

      • B says:

        Despite their lies this family was never a business. Its an institution and way of life that is devoted to its own survival and the monarch is the the mascot and leader. This “slimmed down monarchy” was never going to cost less it would just feature less people. A real business would understand to widen your customer base and would have valued what Diana, Harry, and Meghan brought to the table.

        This isn’t a business and the mascot doesn’t like to share focus so this is what you get.

    • LRB says:

      They need to give up some of the wealth… the slimmed down monarchy doesn’t need so many palaces… a good London base and a holiday/country home… that is ok. But not Balmoral and Sandringham and Amner and the Welsh ‘cottages’, and all the huge homes on Balmoral… and all the KP apartments and Adelaide and Windsor… I mean the list just goes on and on and on. Let’s not get into Anne’s huge estate where both her kids have free homes, and Edward’s mansion.

  7. M says:

    So many articles and talking points to serve as a smoke screen to cover up the real issue – where is Kate?? It’s legit been two months and no one has seen her. No articles about her recovery, no cute stories about the kids helping her, nada. It’s beyond strange at this point. And William’s weird hand-wavey gesture at the Baftas when referring to her doesn’t help either. Even he doesn’t know how to play it off. I think that’s the real reason he’s staying out of the public eye – too many questions.

    • Harper says:

      According to the above article in The Times, Kate is seriously unwell.

      • Snaggletooth says:

        That could just mean unwell enough to need such a long recovery (including colostomy bag and other reasonable theories here). But it is interesting language and a bit different from the tone KP is trying to set.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        That jumped out to me as well.

      • Water Lilly says:

        I came here to say the same thing:
        “With both the King and the Princess of Wales seriously unwell, it’s abruptly apparent how few working royals there are.”
        First time I’ve seen it in print.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Charles is going through treatments. We’ve seen him walk out of the hospital and church walks. Kate hasn’t been seen for 58? days. She’s been in the wind. Saying ‘serious unwell’ is a choice or slip considering certain RR’s were claiming Kate would be working from bed and others claiming William didn’t watch the BAFTA movies because he only watches stuff with Kate. paraphrasing.

        One of these things is not like the other.

    • Caribbean says:

      I am thinking that she had a breakdown, but since the institution cannot ‘support’ such things, it is been reported as surgery.

  8. Just Jade says:

    They made their beds now it’s time to sleep. H&M tried to tell them four years ago they chased out of the country. I remembered back 2019 when Meghan was pregnant with Archie, I saw one of the rats on CNN saying the Royals don’t want Meghan to modernize anything for them.

  9. Celine says:

    I don’t think the slimmed-down monarchy is a mistake or the royals are fragile. Sophie, Edward and Anne work very hard every day by royal standards even though they are lacking star power. Even Camilla did a good job on her husband’s behalf. Only the heir and his wife are lazy. The press is bored because the current working royals are boring and uninteresting that’s why they are always mentioning Harry’s return. But in reality there is no need for Harry to return.

    • equality says:

      Every day? Uh, no. There were articles very recently about Ed taking off a week or two. If you add up the work any of them do by the hours, it is far less than someone with a full time job who actually works instead of cutting ribbons and attending banquets.

      • Snaggletooth says:

        Exactly @equality that is the elephant in the room. What happens in 5-10 years time when all those hard working royals are gone and it’s just down to the Keens. That is what everyone is really panicking about. And the rightfully so because what ARE they going to do about the William and Kate disaster?

      • Celine says:

        Edward has been already back to work. They don’t work like normal people, but Sophie, Anne and Edward are doing a fantastic job by royal standards. Sophie travels overseas a lot and she does actually a good work. She has no charisma or star power, but no one denies her hard working.

      • Eurydice says:

        Full-time or not, this is their job. Sophie and Edward each have about 70-80 patronages. Some of them, like perhaps the military patronages, only need one visit a year for the Annual Blahdy-Blah Parade of Whatever. Others will get more attention depending on how personally involved they are. And then Charles may ask them to go here or there and do this or that. The question isn’t how many hours a day do they work, it’s are they fulfilling expectations or are they neglecting their obligations.

        It seems that Sophie and Edward are fulfilling expectations – at least, there’s not a lot of public complaining about them. The glaring problem is W&K, who not only neglect their existing patronages, but create new initiatives which they also neglect.

      • equality says:

        @Eurydice I guess, that depends on whose expectations you think they should fill. If I were paying such big money and perks for them to do what they do with extended time off, it wouldn’t fulfill mine. Are the citizens of the UK happy with that? Or does the media just tell them to be happy with that?

      • Eurydice says:

        @equality – yes, that’s a very good question. From my outsider’s perspective, it seems that people in the UK look at the RF as a kind of fancy wallpaper – it should be decorative and make you feel good that your house is pretty. It should be mildly entertaining, but not obtrusive. One should be able to live one’s life with an occasional “Look, there’s Kate” and then move on. And in a painful time, there should be a metaphorical hug to make people feel better. If that costs money, it’s not the first time and the government has probably spent more money on far stupider things. Again, this is the impression I get about the general expectations – but I’m happy to be instructed about this..

        Then there are the patronages. There seem to be thousands of organizations that want to be associated with the RF. When those patronages are accepted, there is an expectation that the assigned royal will pay attention to them in some consistent way.

        And finally, there are the expectations of the King, himself. All the other royals are at his beck and call.

      • Bean says:

        There is going to be some very spare years once the elder royals kick off this mortal coil.
        W and K will just be kicking time till their kids are old enough to start royal duties, I wouldn’t be surprised if we start seeing them earlier than 18.

    • Lawrenceville says:

      LOL, how many events does Sophie and Edward average a given year? C’mon, even when the queen was still alive, she over worked every one of them and sometimes all of them put together. And none of the above mentioned has made any increase to the numbers they were doing when queenie was still alive, its still same ole same ole, change in not in either of those people’s DNA, they all are lazy AF. And what do you mean Harry is not needed? How many tours have ALL of them morons done that didn’t even measure up to 10% to what Prince Harry used to do solo before he got married? And how many tours were the Sussexes sent on when Meg was “heavily” pregnant, and after Archie was born? And the Sussexes aced them all, what are you talking about? LOL “Harry is not needed”? Even the RR wouldn’t believe you.

      • Nic919 says:

        Pre pandemic both Sophie and Edward did over 300 engagements. Edward was up there exceeding Andrew who also put in a few hundred.

        Sophie also managed to pull off several hundred for years, even though her kids were young. James is still in school and Louise only just started university.

        The issue has only ever been William and Kate being two lazy slugs who never pulled their weight but always pulled rank.

        Charles and Diana busted out significant numbers despite their personal lives being a mess. And the reality is that any issues with them had everything to do with a broken marriage and not attend engagements.

      • Celine says:

        Sophie, Edward and Anne aren’t the heirs but they are always working hard, that’s a fact whether you like it or not. And yes, Harry is not needed. If the monarchy depends on Harry’s presence, Charles would bring him back into the fold. Remember Harry is still open to the idea of ​​working for the Commonwealth. The RRs want Harry back because, as I said, the current working royals are boring , not because the monarchy depends on Harry. The monarchy will continue without Harry.

    • SussexWatcher says:

      Celine – Harry was always meant to be included in Chuckles’s slimmed down monarchy plan so it’s clear that (originally) he was needed. The fact that the family is too racist and jealous to stop abusing Harry and Meghan and too stupid stop the press driving her almost to suicide is their own fault. Harry isn’t coming back by his own choice – I don’t think there’s anything Chuckles could do to bring him back into the fold. He’s said multiple times he isn’t coming back and his home is in America now. FAFO royal style.

      Just because now the press want to talk about how unwanted or unneeded Harry is, doesn’t change the fact that he – and his family once he married – was always meant to be a part of the slimmed down plan.

      As for the monarchy continuing…we’ll have to wait and see. Chuckles’s first year was filled with protests and eggs thrown. So I wonder what things will look like in 5-10 years – especially if we have Pegs continuing to day drink, make offensive “jokes,” and stick his flared nostrils into political landmines. Not to mention the disappearance of Kkkeen and the potential divorce of the Wailses.

      • SussexWatcher says:

        I ran out of time to edit my comment but meant to add that you talk also about star power not being needed, but that’s exactly what is needed! It’s the reason these articles are starting to be written. The point of the royal visits is to bring attention to causes and events. To bring the glamour and excitement. If no one is paying attention to the bland and boring Sofeista, who cares how many engagements she does? It’s the ‘if a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, does it make a sound’ kind of thing. Even with the Wailses, no one cares much about them as we’ve seen recently when they fail to draw crowds (was it Pegs in Wales where there were literally less than a dozen people on the ropeline?). And they are supposed to be the youngest and most exciting of the bunch!

      • Eurydice says:

        Exactly! Jenni Russell talks about “this unique unifying function across its nations and classes, generating excitement, validation and pride.” Anne can spend 300 days a year visiting lighthouses and nobody would care. Sophie has a lot of worthy causes, but doesn’t generate much interest. But when Kate visits some nonagenarians, that brings out the press. Maybe they need some kind of central PR, instead of letting each royal deal with it separately.

        As for “work,” there’s a lot they could do without going anywhere and lifting more than one finger. I don’t know that anyone believes the RF can actually cure the problems of the country, but they could at least show empathy and interest and pride in the people. It would have taken no energy at all to support the British team at the Invictus Games, far less energy than it took to leak stories to the press and trash Harry. Nobody would have had to fly to Germany, nobody would have had to miss a school run – just to issue a simple statement of pride and encouragement. That statement would have let the press know they care, and then the media would have taken over and done the work.

      • Celine says:

        Harry said he doesn’t want to back as a full-time working royal BUT he also said the idea of ​​working for the Commonwealth is still on the table if he were asked by his father to do so. Harry has said the US is his home “for the time being”، BUT he has said countless times that the UK is his home and his children home and their heritage, he is still fighting over the issue of security in the UK. Charles is the king and also Harry’s father, if having Harry represent the crown is soo important for the monarchy then Charles would bring him back into the fold. But Charles (who is the king) has a different opinion than you and doesn’t think that the monarchy needs Harry. Like I said, the monarchy will continue without Harry.

    • Kit says:

      Harry doesn’t want to return. The monarchy is very fragile.

      The reason why Sophie, Eddie, Anne, etc. are working is because they need their bills paid. They don’t have a wealthy duchy and can’t access tax dollars easily. They like their extravagant lifestyle way too much, the pomp and circumstances, and evidently the fast motorcade that can run roughshod over hapless old ladies. As for Camilla, hard working she’s not. She’s too cunning for that. She doesn’t need to match the work number of QE2 or the Queen’s cousins as evident by Celine’s comment here that she’s working hard. lol.

      The monarchy is fragile. It’s a gossip. It’s a joke. It’s unserious. The royals make great fodder. They make great soap opera. They are cartoon characters and the lazy a** royal rats portray them as such with all the repetitive BS that fill their columns and air wave daily.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Kit, if the King and heir would get over themselves, there would be more media for Anne, Sophie, Edward and others when they went on their engagements. They could the showcase the charity and member of the brf. It would do some good for the charities and for the brf. The problem, I think, is that the bm only wants to talk about and photographs KFC, the Escort, Wont and KHate. That’s because they’re the only “important” members of the brf. They need to change that. It will make the others more visible.

      • Kit says:

        The invisible contract with the Rota doesn’t stipulate that British press pay attention to good works or good eggs.

        The contract is to sell positive PR of the head and future head. That’s it. Everything and everyone else are fair game for made up salacious stories to sell and keep the British media and their billionaire owners flushed. What the Rota want is a naughty, drunk, nude Lady Louisa or Count Severn. They don’t want pious nuns and monks. (If Sophie and Eddie are smart, they keep their kids far away and teach them to be more like Harry— and be financially independent.)

        This is where modern monarchy did itself in. It made itself into a soap opera, the best low brow, reality show ever. It’s printed and aired daily, everywhere. At grocery check-out and on the Telly at 7AM. That’s how you reduced a thousand year heritage into a cartoon or late night joke.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Agree @Kit, Harry doesn’t want to return to that sh*tshow. As hard as leaving may have been, it was also easy to leave in order to protect his wife, Meghan, and also Archie. The Royal Family Industrial Complex lost a lot when they chose to run/smear H&M out.

        @Celine, when did Harry say working for the Commonwealth was still on the table if his father asked? Jamaica was pretty cool with him being at the One Love premiere without being a “working royal”. Still enjoy Andrew Holness’s comments afterwards. I have no doubt Harry could dip into any Commonwealth country and they would be like, AWESOME. Please ignore the BM/Murdoch owned press.

        I may have missed something-again. Not familiar with Harry saying England was his children’s home either. Archie lived there for 6 months. Lili never did. I believe he has said they should know his birth country which is part of their heritage. Could be wrong?

        Harry is fighting for the issue of paying for his own security because he was born into a position that required security. That security was pulled. The threat level didn’t. He’s not fighting so he can visit the BaRF. He’s fighting because he should have the right to visit his birth country with his wife & children and the needed protection/security.

        Agree that the monarchy will continue on without Harry-in a charisma vacuum. Which is why they need him (and Meghan). Le Sigh. I’m happy with where H&M are at. They are too.

        It seems some gaslighting is going on here.

    • Celine says:

      @AGREATRECKONING – I think many of you didn’t bother to watch Harry’s interviews for promoting Spare, and that’s why you don’t know anything about Harry’s opinions. Harry himself said in his interview with Michael Strahan that if his father asked him to work for the Commonwealth, then this idea is of course on the table.

      As for the fact that the UK is his and his children home, here is a quote from Harry:

      “It was with great sadness for both of us that my wife and I felt forced to step back from this role and leave the country in 2020. The UK is my home. The UK is central to the heritage of my children and a place I want them to feel at home as much as where they live at the moment in the US.“ (December 2023)

      Harry always says he misses the UK, including in the the Netflix documentary in December 2022:

      “I miss the weird family gatherings, when we are all sort of brought together under one roof for certain times of the year. being part of the institution meant I was in the UK. So I miss the UK, I miss my friends.”

      So now, will you believe what Harry says about himself and his life, or will you believe the idea that you created about him in your head?

  10. Izzy says:

    I wish someone on the Sussex side would leak a simple denial: “Plans for Harry to return to royal duties, temporarily or part time, were not discussed when he met with his father and as far as Harry is concerned, that is not on the table.”

    • Bean says:

      I wish they’d just come out and say it – no leaking.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Izzy, I found it interesting that this didn’t even allude to a ‘source’. It’s an outright statement that this is what Harry did/said. Harry may just ignore it, because he knows what he said and didn’t say. Why give them more fodder for the mill?

    • Unblinkered says:

      Know why you say that, Izzy, but for me that would be H&M being played.

      It’s vital, now more than ever, that they’re both truly circumspect with any and all statements. Probably the less the better.

  11. Blithe says:

    Beatrice, Eugenie, and Edward’s kids were raised with the caveat that they would likely have to make their own way as Charles slimmed down the monarchy— but not it’s costs. Now, terrified by what they’ve helped to create, people like Russell are reaping what they worked quite hard to sow. Why would anyone be a working Royal without some guarantees of long-term support for themselves and for their frequently photographed minor children? Why would anyone in their right mind disrupt a carefully crafted life — to leave the financial and emotional security of their family up to the whims and vagaries of someone like William? If only Charles had had the foresight to do the math. If only the Royal Rota had had the foresight to realize that people who are abused and exploited may eventually revolt— or collapse under the strains of constant stress. Oopsie.

    • Jais says:

      That’s really it. Who would want “to leave the emotional and financial security of their family up to the vagaries and whims of someone like William?” I know we say Beatrice wants it but honestly I’m not sure even she does. I think she’s happy to use her royal adjacency to promote things but to actually be in the fold and one day dependent on William? Who would want that? It’s terrifying.

      • JanetDR says:

        Yes, I could see it only with a contract for housing and some sort of salary.
        Seeing Charles grab away QEII’s “gift” to Harry had to be a wake-up call for any royals.

      • Christine says:

        Agreed. I can even see Anne retiring when Wiinot is king, and that would have been unimaginable a decade ago.

      • Deering24 says:

        Heh–it’s not just the RR’s bargain with the RF that’s starting to crack. One suspects the Men In Grey never considered that a current ruler would be too cheap to continue supporting the rest of the family. And they certainly didn’t bargain that the next heir would be a raging destructive nut head whom you couldn’t trust to say grass is green. In short, the center is not holding with Charles, and no one with sense should want to be at his or William’s mercy.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Blithe, Beatrice doesn’t put photos of her daughter out AT ALL. Can you imagine if she was a working royal–even part time? Does she ever want her children used in that manner?

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      That’s pretty much it @Blithe. When Harry as, an individual, was pretty much financially limited..d*mn, Chuckles would only pay for outfits for royal engagements, if even. Meghan paid for things. For their staff, for Nott Cott and herself. They didn’t have money for the beautiful, diplomatic, intelligent and biracial woman that Harry loved. She should consider to keep acting….MFers. These People are the worst! (that includes the RR’s)

  12. MaryContrary says:

    The bottom line issue, that they won’t call out, is that Kate and William are lazy and don’t want to do the bread and butter that the institution does require. No one needs yet another lightweight “Aarrly Yaars” or William “solving homelessness.” Get your butts out there and support the patronages that you have: cut the ribbons, make small talk with the crowds, give these organizations some visibility.

    • Snaggletooth says:

      This is it. Bullseye. I’m really having an “no really…what is the plan” moment this week. Especially what is the plan for William?? Cuz at the rate we’re going…

    • Nic919 says:

      This has always been the issue. William is just running out of excuses to not do the work and who knows what is going on with Kate.

    • May says:

      William and Kate NEVER intended to do the bread and butter engagements. That was made very clear after their marriage. They specifically stated that they wanted to shift the focus of their energy from small, numerous, engagements to fewer high profile, glamorous, engagements, like the BAFTAs, charity galas, earthshot, etc. Charles knew this. The Rota knew this.

      • Vik says:

        But even to those events they either don’t show up or wait last minute to decide how they feel and say “alright, I think I can make it”. Will (as president no less) and Kate with the BAFTAs, Kate with Earthshot, when have they ever attended a charity gala?

        Those few engagements and patronages they do just don’t mean anything. There’s a study that shows that royals don’t help these charities at all. They are completely useless and ineffective.

        Maybe WanK are aware and on top of their laziness they just go “oh well whatever, what’s the point, esp when I can be in Mustique for the 10th time this year!”

        Every project just peters out (mental health, addiction) or has been done, but better (early years) or is unsolvable for these ineffective just-exist-to-wave m*rons (homelessness, poverty).

        The fact that monarchies continue to exist is really befuddling.

      • May says:

        @Vik, my point was that the then Cambridges telegraphed very clearly early on that they had no intention of doing the small engagements. So, neither the Rota nor Charles have the right to complain about their lack of routine work. Charles does not seem to have countered their expectations of the type and amount of work they would do.

        What they did was bring some organizations under the umbrella of their Foundation and they assumed that they would be able to fundraise for the Foundation and then have those funds trickle down to those organizations. This clearly did not work out as some of those charities were forced to close.

        Will and Kate have attended a few charity galas and events. Case in point, the fundraiser held at Houghton Hall where Kate is pictured ogling Rocksavage. But you are absolutely right, they have not even been able to fulfill their very meager expected workload.

  13. EasternViolet says:

    Not shocking that the press are spinning “poor William can’t cope with the pressure” with his showing up drunk to work stunt. And the whole Harry wanting to return to work? That was Camilla pulling William’s chain to get him off his arse. It worked.

    • Snaggletooth says:

      Mentioning the swaying here makes me think there are many in the press who know for a fact that he was drunk and are dying to say it.

  14. Angie says:

    Harry and Meghan please say away from that hot mess called the royal family in the UK. Your brand is fresh and modern theirs is old, pale and stale. Your sweet little family is what the Commonwealth really looks like those people not so much. They don’t want to represent modernity. They want the all white royal family. No wonder the countries in the Commonwealth want to leave. All the global eyes are on you don’t let those people anywhere near your star power.

  15. Morning says:

    I believe the term “working royal” means those royals who are represented/managed by the palace bureaucracy and the royal rota. It is unlikely Harry would ever work with them. However, I do wonder where the British government and the Foreign Office come into play, when it is clear H & M can do the diplomatic work W & K cannot.

    Also…..where is Kate?

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Morning, frankly, I’ve thought that KHate could be out for months and no one would miss her. Yes, she gets seen periodically, but she’s never had a work schedule and she’s the laziest of the bunch with her phone calls counting as ‘engagements’. I keep thinking that in a few more months no one will be asking where she is.

  16. jj says:

    putting aside the york sisters, it is hilarious to me that he’d name lady Louise and her minor brother rather than Zara/mike and peter. those are “royals” with literally nothing else to do. they could tap them anytime they want.

    • equality says:

      Zara and Peter have all kinds of endorsements that they have gotten by royal connections. They aren’t going to give up that for whatever pittance KC will give them.

  17. Kate says:

    Took a quick look at the first group photo and I thought omg is it Betty’s ghost that Sophie and Edward are holding up?! Only after zooming in did I realize it’s actually Princess Alexandra, bless her. The older cousins and their work ethic should really be applauded. What will happen when they’re gone, who’s going to be there to pick up the slack?

  18. The Hench says:

    Yeah, when you look at the actual numbers, they have a problem. In 2019 (which was noted as having lower numbers than 2018) the engagements were as follows:
    Total engagements: 3,567 broken down as:
    Charles 521
    Anne 506
    Ed 308
    Queen Elizabeth 295
    Andrew 274
    William 220
    Harry 201
    Kate 116
    Meghan 83
    Other (Camilla, ancient cousins) 1,043
    Now? Andrew’s out, H & M are gone, the ancient cousins are ancient, Charles is ill, Kate’s MIA, QE is deceased. Even if Charles gets better and goes back to his previous rate and Kate reappears, we’re rapidly looking at the ‘working’ royals covering barely 2,000 between them and I wasn’t even going far enough back to include Philip’s engagements.

    Another few years and there could be no Charles and no Camilla. Kate and Will did 350 between them last year. If it’s just them and Sophie, Ed and Anne then they will barely clear 1,500, leaving nearly 2,000 uncovered.
    For an organisation that needs to be seen to be believed (and therefore remain relevant) not good.

    • Blithe says:

      With William at the helm, Anne might retire. Edward might retire too, especially if he has health issues. That leaves wonky Will, absent Kate, and maybe Sophie — only one of them a blood royal. And now that we’re getting a clearer idea of what William can look like when he’s “seen” it’s possible that seeing even more of William might not be a great thing for the future of the monarchy.

    • windyriver says:

      It’s not just the total number of engagements, it’s also maintaining connections with organizations, even if each one isn’t visited every year. According to royal.uk, “Over the course of his life, [Prince Philip] was associated with 992 organizations, either as President, Patron, honorary Member or in another capacity.” In 2016 when QEII turned 90 and began stepping back from some organizations, she’d been royal patron of about 600. In terms of visibility, that’s a big hole to leave.

    • Becks1 says:

      Part of the issue is that the spending isn’t being downsized as we know, butalso just the lack of visits like you point out. The people who support the monarchy want to see the working royals out and about on a regular basis. It was easy for W&K to somewhat hide their laziness when QEII, Andrew, and Harry were picking up almost 800 engagements between the three of them (when the queen was in her 90s!) there was almost always a royal out and about in any given week.

      Now, with H&M gone, the Queen dead, Andrew out – even without Kate or charles being sick it would be severely reduced numbers. the only real solution to this “crisis” for the royal family is for William to step up significantly, and Kate if she ever returns to royal duties. We’ll have to see how that plays out.

      • Nic919 says:

        The sovereign grant is also supposed to bump up significantly in 2025 and so people are going to question this lower workload even more.

      • Jais says:

        I know it’s happening but I still cannot believe the SG is going up. For what? So the wales can continue to do the bare minimum? Nothing about their past work ethic says they should be getting a raise.

    • Debbie says:

      Are these numbers accurate? In a year that Meghan was still pregnant, had a baby and went on maternity leave, Kate only did 33 more events than she did? In that whole year? Did she leave town or something?

  19. SarahCS says:

    And yet they never mention that the leaner/lighter line up doesn’t reduce the millions in funding they receive from the taxpayers. Can we please talk about that more loudly?

  20. Sunday says:

    All this talk of a “slimmed down monarchy” and yet once again the Times conveniently omits that these ghouls are getting more taxpayer money than ever, despite being so “slim.” Apparently all this talk about slimming down didn’t extend to the budget, how odd!

    Also, it’s disgusting that they’re portraying Will’s blatantly inappropriate hungover/under the influence behavior at the investiture as a man in the throws of grief and pressure. Give me a BREAK, funny how all that pressure only displays itself at a boring bread-and-butter event like an investiture and then immediately evaporates around hollywood celebrities.

  21. Lau says:

    Clearly they’re trying to pressure Louise into doing royal work because they must have asked her and she said no. As for Beatrice, I think the royal family don’t want to have one sister without the other. Look at the corronation and the jubilee : they did most of their events together. The family see them as a package deal and even if Beatrice wants to join in, they won’t accept it until they can get Eugenie to work too.

    • lanne says:

      They also have the taint of their horrible parents–perhaps them doing engagements would keep discussion of their father in the media

      • Lau says:

        This family and their respective teams are so dumb that I actually think they believe that if both Beatrice and Eugenie get royal work they’ll be able to redeem their father’s image.

    • Lulu says:

      Louise, Bea and Eugenie would make a start for adding a younger generation of working royals. Anne’s kids are not royals, it is their rule not mine. We do not know if any of them actually want to do it at this point. But Chuck, and Chuck alone, decides who is a ‘working’ royal and his number one rule is he is number one.

  22. Amy Bee says:

    This is what they wanted. They can’t change their minds now. Plus, I don’t believe Harry offered to help, that would mean subjecting himself to the control of the Palace. I can’t see him agreeing to that. I do believe that Charles asked Harry to come back and hence the meeting only lasted 30 minutes.

  23. Mary Pester says:

    I’m sorry, but what the actual fk?? BEYOND REDEMPTION,
    Is Harry the sexual predator and trafficker?, NO
    Is Harry the adulterer or the tampon wannabe? NO
    Did Harry take bags of dodgy cash?NO
    Did harry take months off at a time!? NO
    Did Harry ignore the late Queen’s wishes? NO
    So PLEEEEASE stop this absolute bullsht.
    All Harry did was step back as a senior working Royal to protect his wife and her sanity along with his sons safety, and all because the clowns listed above in order of offence, didn’t do a fking thing to help or protect them, in fact they actually encouraged the hatred and threats and still do.
    They, along with the rags who print this sht, should hang their heads in shame, but of course they won’t, because they haven’t got any

    • lanne says:

      that’s why I say the british media has the royal family they deserve. I’m so sorry that those ghouls and their flying monkeys are being inflicted on the British people.

      If monarchy is so important to the British political system, does monarchy have to be the Windsors? The British people have had Plantagenets, Rudors, Stuarts, Hanovers, and Saxe Coberg and Gothas. Could they recruit a replacement royal family from another European country? The Greek and Norwegian monarchies in their current (or former) forms came from other countries. I jest, but could they throw the whole Windsor gang out and start over with some Danes, Swedes, or even more Germans?

    • Izzy says:

      And that phrase is what finally clued me in to the real purpose of this word vomit. They want a bunch of other, younger royals to start working more so they can start screaming about how Harry was never needed and he never needs to come back. They want the expanded royals so they can use it to bludgeon Harry. Again.

  24. Louise says:

    Yeah, you can gtfo with that ‘across its nations’ bs. Commonwealth nations are no longer ‘yours’ ffs. (says a Canadian) There is no longer a British Empire, and at this rate, there won’t a ‘United’ Kingdom for long.

  25. Scout says:

    I disagree that a slimmed down monarchy is the problem.

    It’s the ALL IN or ALL OUT policy that is the problem.

    You can have a small handful of full time royals and then let the outer circle handle a few patronages covering areas they are familiar with. They could ‘work’ on a few weekends. Nothing too rough that would disturb their already not so tough lifestyle.

    Zara and Mike – sporting events

    Eugenie – scoliosis and young person medical issues

    Peter – hunting stuff. Single/divorced father stuff.

    Beatrice and Edo – Italian and young mother stuff

    • Jais says:

      Well, they’d have to be paid for their services. And how much would they really get? Would it be enough to allow the tabloids to then start writing more articles about their kids and their marriage?

      • Snaggletooth says:

        Nope. Until the job description doesn’t come with “be abused and slandered for the sake of keeping the eyes of the vulture press off the useless, rage monster, buffoonish heir,” then I don’t think they’ll have many takers…

    • Michelle says:

      CBers am I taking crazy pills? Is The Times not sucking up to William? Two articles this week that don’t sound like a briefing! What is the world coming to?

  26. Murphy says:

    Give Bea a title in her own right, don’t need to extend it to Edo. Then let her pick up this slack, she can do it without Genie.

  27. tamsin says:

    Harry was the reliable one, the well-liked one, the charismatic one, the competent one, who seriously represented his grandmother well. None of this could be said for the current versions of William and Kate. They don’t need a monarchy like Elizabeth’s. They should have a slimmed down one. Unfortunately, the heir and consort are duds. A lot of pressure on the Wales kids about to hit them.

  28. Blujfly says:

    While I personally am a republcian, so long as “Royal” is appended to organizations where “National” should be – as wags often point out, somehow it is the National debt and not the royal debt or her/hus majesty’s debt – then these institutions have every right to asking for acknowledgment from the Royal(s). Charles’ slimmed down monarchy was always just a way for him to stick it to his siblings and “remove” the possibility of public criticism due to behavior and actions of people outside his immediate family. And it never ever consisted of less money. But it did envision a working Harry with a glamorous working wife. The Queen financially supported her extended family and non-heir children as part of a silent or not so silent pact that at least some of them, most of the time, wouldn’t do things to embarrass the monarchy and would give up or turn down positions that their rich friends would otherwise bestow upon them. Without remuneration why should any of them constrain themselves and invite the media onslaught of “Royal service”?

  29. Mary Pester says:

    Pssst, someone is a lot sicker than the public are being told! Watch the weight loss on walks or travels.
    When prince Phillip died it was operation fourth bridge, when the Queen died it was operation London bridge, with Charles it will Menai bridge, so with William will it be dental bridge!!

    • lanne says:

      Edward has looked poorly for a while. Could he be facing a serious illness as well? Kate hasn’t been doing any walking or travelling. William doesn’t look that great either.

    • Blithe says:

      It’s wild to me that this nugget could be about any of a number of people in a pretty small group. “Sicker” could easily be Charles, Camilla, or Kate — if it’s been openly acknowledged, or Edward or William if it hasn’t. “…weight loss on walks or travels” narrows it down a bit. If this is about Charles, whatever ensues will be a major mess. (I’m saving “royal mess” for future catastrophes.)

    • Patricia says:

      Me thinks, Mary Pester, it’s either Edward or Kate. Both are rail thin and people have been commenting on their weight loss.. Time will tell.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Mary Pester, well, the brf is going to become even more of a sh!tstorm, isn’t it?

      I had to LOL at “dental bridge”.

    • Jazz Hands says:

      Oooh Mary Pester, I cannot get enough of your delicious, piping hot tea! I even re-read all the comments at the end of the day on each royal post to make sure I haven’t missed any of your tidbits!

      As for this bit in particular, we’ve been told two are sick – Charles and Kate – but only one of them is out and about. So Charles must be the one who is worse off than they’re letting on?

  30. Beverley says:

    Well, what do you know! Fewer people doing “the work” (such as it is), yet being paid even more.

    Nice grift!

  31. Lady Digby says:

    Okay nobody could have forseen serious ops for KC and Kate but the Firm does know that heir and wife have limited capabilities and neither the desire or ability to work consistently doing bread and butter engagements which they consider beneath them. Everybody was expecting KC to enjoy the longevity of his parents but if he doesn’t and Cam goes into retirement and then say Edward is also too unwell to work. Well that leaves Anne and Sophie as the work horses and KW and QK aren’t going to be doing any more than rattle their new jewellery at the peasants. T

  32. Jay says:

    I think a lot of this is a classic problem that many organizations encounter when succession planning: the current monarch (Charles) has one vision of what the monarchy will be while the heir has a very different one.

    The so-called “slimmed down” monarchy that Charles envisioned is in line with other modern monarchies, but it sort of assumed that A. Harry (and his spouse) would be happy to do most of the travel and carry more than his share, B. That Andrew would continue to be involved in a public role and most importantly C. That WanK would suddenly decide to do their jobs. Obviously all three of those things are no longer true, and Charles isn’t willing to alter the plan.

    As for WanK, I think the concept of wanting to do less ribbon cutting and more “substantial” work isn’t a bad thing in itself. But I think it’s a huge misreading of their audience – those that still care about the monarchy want them to do these kinds of bread and butter engagements in order to remain relevant. They aren’t interested in seeing the prince pose or preen on the world stage. And anyway neither of the Wails have gotten tangible results from their big projects, they’ve just been drifting from one taskforce to another without anything to show for it. I’d also add here that Charles as POW was able to do substantial work furthering causes he cared about in addition to the bread and butter stuff.

    So the two philosophies don’t HAVE to be mutually exclusive – it’s just that William won’t follow the blueprint his father set out and Charles won’t change his blueprint, even though circumstances have changed. It would be a recipe for disaster in any organization, particularly now that William has his own money and palace comms.

    • Kit says:

      Many organizations don’t have the whole 1st born out of the golden vagina criteria and then get to live off hundreds of millions of taxpayer monies and own hefty real estates that really belong to the people.

      Yeah, this isn’t a problem of succession planning. That’s already a given— by birth order.

      No the problem lies with the head’s and future head’s lack of character, lack of ethics, lack of grit (or the classic stiff upper lip), lack of decency, lack of loyalty, lack of humility, lack of intellectual heft and curiosity. These people are spoiled and groomed to be spoiled. They are dilettante in the making. They are all big teeth and blood diamond crown.

      The problem here is you can have a bad person be king. Or queen. This isn’t a democracy or even a room full of voting stakeholders. It’s all in the invisible contract with the right wing press. As a result, this is why an economically troubled nation must pay for an inept person be King. And William as the next king. It’s why tax dollars are going to these royals instead of the NHS or pre schools. And why common people must wait months to be diagnosed and treated for cancer, yet the nation must go into a sad decline because of a king’s quick CA diagnosis and the best treatment.

      People are expendable. It’s a world of serfdom and royalty. Shakespeare would feel right at home in 21st century England.

  33. QuiteContrary says:

    None of them is needed. Spare me the prose about the “triple appeal of recognition, history and mystique” and the “unique unifying function” of the royals. Gen Zers don’t want any of it, either.

    The monarchy is doomed, and I’m here for its slow fade into oblivion.

    • Lady Digby says:

      Louis 16th said, After me the flood! And KC could say the same because things are unraveling at a rate of knots here. How unwell is Kate and what about Willy? Unwell, alcohol abusing, unsteady on feet and loose of tongue? He is lurching towards disaster. Is anyone going to stage an intervention?

    • Angie says:

      When they ask Gen Zers who they like it’s always Harry and Meghan. Part of their appeal is being self sufficient as well as being charismatic. No grifting off of the UK taxpayer. The other royals are the definition of grifters. No wonder they are in trouble. Personally I think it’s to late for them and Harry and Meghan saw the writing on the wall. They are all living on borrowed time. Those old monarchist won’t be around for ever. Everything WanK do is just dull, dull dull, Look at Kate gone for nearly 2 months and who misses her? No one truly cares. She might as well be Sophie and Edward. Look at William going from Earthshot to homelessness and now peace in the Middle East. Does anyone know what the hell he stands for? I believe if he went away for two months no one would miss him either. Someone said the monarchy died after the Queen they just refuse to realize it.

  34. acha says:

    I don’t see anyone calling out the condescending language of that article, yet — that the author sincerely thinks the royals perform a useful function “across all nations and classes”.

    Classes? Does England really need some royalty to lean down from their throne and tell things to the lower classes? I guess being american, I sincerely don’t understand “lower class” or what it means. Do people introduce themselves that way? “Hi, I’m Karen from the Lower Class.” Like. What?

    If someone from a “class above me” tried to tell me that their morals or virtues were in any way better than mine, I’d politely invite them and their tea to jump in a handy harbor.

    IMO a threadbare monarchy is better than a bloated one.

    • Kit says:

      You don’t have to leap across the pond to understand classism. It’s everywhere. England just refined it better. Just like here, people don’t introduce themselves by class. In fact you can spot the rich Karens and Kens because they play coy and think they are clever with a lot of humble brag.

      Class in England is very much about where you go to school, your poshness and shotgun, your scuffed up wellies, your school tie, bloodline, and of course, always money. Boris Johnson, Cameron, Jeremy Hunt, etc. You can buy social class with a lot of money. Think of all the wealthy American heiresses that married over there. It’s not all Wallis Simpson. It’s way more Jenny Churchills. These days, it’s the Saudis and the Russians. The Brits are born amnesiac when convenient.

  35. HuffnPuff says:

    Charles’ slim down was done in poor taste and with little foresight. Slimming down should have been divided into institutional needs and family needs.

    On the institutional side, it would mean no fancy houses or full time security for cousins or children of princes/princesses. I think Harry and Meghan should have been allowed to keep Frogmore since he’s the son of the king. Taking that away was petty. The organization and messaging should have been centralized under Charles to avoid upstaging one another and to keep messaging in synch.

    On the family side, all of them should be welcome to stand on the balcony during special occasions (except the pedophile of course). All of them should be welcome to represent the family in patronages and special events (same exception as before). Have they not heard of strength in numbers?

    Anyway, if they had done that, Harry’s visits wouldn’t be headline grabbing events. And no one would be writing about who will fill in because they could all fill in.

  36. bisynaptic says:

    “Mystique“ is doing a lot of work, here. 🙃

  37. Angie says:

    She didn’t appreciate the triple appeal of recognition, history and mystique that’s a laugh. Well hold my beer while I explain their appeal. The King I’ll give him sort of a pass but I swear he looked like he was wearing makeup and blush the kind that Grandpa Munster wears. Camilla reminds me of the woman who opens the door wearing a housecoat and dragging on a cigarette while holding a cup of mystery liquid screaming at the kids to get off her no grass lawn. Sophie and Edward are the two people who never get invited to the offices parties at someone house. Their invitation always get lost in the mailroom. No one wants two Debbie Downers at their parties. Lastly WanK the wannabe cool kids but the title has already be bestowed on Harry and Meghan. Wank will never measure up. There is nothing mysterious about the left behinds in the royal family.

  38. westcoastgal says:

    I think they should keep pruning. It is 2024 and a monarchy is silly and quite simply ridiculous. They look old and musty because it is an outdated, out of touch institution. Abolish the monarchy so the teapot polishers can stop their fretting and the UK can focus on it’s future and not it’s ancient past.

  39. BeanieBean says:

    So the Queen is dead & her 600-900 patronages (can’t remember the exact number, but it was a lot) don’t have a royal name attached? And they absolutely need a royal or can’t function? I don’t believe TQ personally attended to each & every one of those patronages; it’s not a matter of not having enough extra people to take this on, nor is it a matter of so much work! TQ was only one person, for heaven’s sake. One person’s gone & the remaining five main players (Charles, W&K, Sophie & Eddie) can’t pick up the slack? Five can’t do the ‘work’ of one? Something’s wrong with this picture.

  40. Deering24 says:

    “Britons living in hard and divisive times are badly in need of a calm, apolitical, supportive presence.”

    *snort* Really? I guess things like inflation, polluted water, hapless/feed-the-rich politicians, and a tottering health system are way down the list, eh? Britons just need pats on the head…🙄 Criminy, what an idiot.

  41. phlyfiremama says:

    I am HOWLING at this article. The media really is getting ready to knock down the entire house of cards, aren’t they?! SHOTS FIRED!! 😂😂😂

  42. Liz says:

    I remember in their engagement interview Kate said in response to being asked about never having a job that she didn’t really care what people thought. Didn’t bode well for someone about to enter a life of duty.

    Then after a few years they said they didn’t want to do the boring visits to towns, just the ones that appealed to them. Wimbledon, red carpet etc, more like celebrities.

    They don’t have the star glamour of Diana (who was wonderful at both – the big events and engaging with ‘ordinary’ people)

    And they don’t have the sustained interest and commitment in charity work.

    If they hadn’t announced Kate’s illness – another blunder – no one would have noticed they weren’t around. They don’t do much at all.

    And their constant refrain about the school run is an insult to parents who do it every day and also work.

  43. ChattyCath says:

    This is rubbish. There are plenty of people with ‘Royal Blood ‘ out there. What about King William IV’s family illegitimate but that concept is void now we have DNA. Or Princess Mary’s sons the Lascelles? She was the sister of George V. These stupid articles are just that. Stupid.