Graham Smith: The Waleses’ Forest Lodge move is an ‘abuse of power’

Last week, we learned some interesting news about the Wales family’s new home, Forest Lodge. Forest Lodge is located on the Windsor estate, and it’s part of the Crown Estates. We learned that Prince William and Kate actually are paying “market rate” for their 20-year lease, although it sounds like the independent valuers were assessing the property as-is, well before William and Kate decided they needed to evict local tenants, grab 150 acres of public parkland and sow chaos for Christmas tree shoppers across Windsor Great Park. All said, this Forest Lodge move has not gone smoothly from a PR perspective, despite some pitiful PR about how they *deserve* a luxury manor house because their previous home was cursed! Well, now Republic’s Graham Smith is chiming in about William and Kate’s “abuse of power.”

Prince William and Princess Kate’s new home has pushed Windsor residents into a one-mile detour to buy their Christmas trees in the latest example of tensions caused by the couple relocating. The Prince and Princess of Wales only moved into their former home Adelaide Cottage in 2022 and already they have moved on to Forest Lodge, a bigger house, also in Windsor. However, the shift appears to have caused some disruption to local residents due to the security buffer zone around the home, which most recently has forced Christmas tree shoppers onto an awkward one mile detour, the Daily Mail reported.

Any suggestion ordinary people’s lives are being turned upside down so William and Kate can move to a bigger house in the same area, in Windsor, risks framing the couple as part an out of touch elite.

Graham Smith, chief executive of anti-Monarchy campaign group Republic, told Newsweek: “The Christmas trees issue might seem silly, but the point is this is all public property and William should not have been able to close those roads and close access to that land. It’s not his to do what he wants with.”

The British Government passed legislation via an amendment to the Serious Organized Crime and Police Act to make trespassing in a buffer zone around Forest Lodge a criminal offense under U.K. law. Trespass is usually a civil offense only. The act said this was needed “in anticipation of the relocation of a protected principal.” This is understood to mean William, as well as Kate and their three children Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis.

This exclusion zone covers around 150 acres around the mansion, in Windsor Great Park, and the legislation states that it sits on Crown Estate land. The Crown Estate is not run directly by the Monarchy and is widely regarded as a public asset. It’s profits go to the British Government which then gives 25 percent to the palace as its public funding.

Smith pointed to other examples of the security zone causing problems, including over the summer when The Mail on Sunday reported two families had been forced to move out of their homes because they were considered too close to Forest Lodge. They were reportedly found alternative accommodation.

Graham Smith, chief executive of Republic, told Newsweek: “He’s also forced two people, two families to move out of their homes. They were relocated to other places on the park but this is just another example of William just basically sticking two fingers up to local people and then just grabbing land that isn’t his just so that he can move from one house to another. So it’s just an abuse of power and privilege for me.”

[From Newsweek]

Graham Smith is right – it’s abuse of power, it’s privileged and, even more than that, it’s high-handed and soooo unnecessary. There was absolutely no reason for Will and Kate to suddenly decide that Forest Lodge will be their latest forever home and, oh yeah, we need to tack on another 150 acres and evict a bunch of people and ruin locals’ tree-buying experiences to boot. William and Kate are acting like all of Windsor is their playground to do whatever they want. There were already plenty of open and available properties with built-in security zones. So why Forest Lodge? I really wonder.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

36 Responses to “Graham Smith: The Waleses’ Forest Lodge move is an ‘abuse of power’”

  1. Bella says:

    I am so loving this for them. It’s about time the Brit press is calling them out. But just look how far they were able to push it before it happened!

    • BeanieBean says:

      Well, it was Newsweek, which is an American magazine. Don’t know if the British press are too exercised over this.

  2. Yes an abuse of power. Need more of these articles!!

  3. jais says:

    Welp, no one is stopping them. They’ve been given the all-clear. It’s beyond gross and looks terrible though. And yeah, why FL?

  4. wolfmamma says:

    Me thinks William did it purposely to “ prove” he can do anything he wants… Kate as well.
    They are vacant folk., arrogant and without reflection.. they want what they want and take it. Very much like many of the elite destroying the world right now for their own gain. Not a kind or reflective bone in their bodies.

  5. Beverley says:

    The Wales have made it patently clear that they will do whatever the hell they want, because who’s gonna check them?

    It’s already been revealed that Slumlord Willy’s rental properties are drafty, moldy, and badly in need of repair. Some properties are unlivable, yet absolutely nothing has happened. No one – it seems – can hold Scooter accountable for any damn thing.

    The Wales KNOW that absolutely nobody can hold them accountable for any reason at all.

    • khaveman says:

      Hm. If you’re separating from your husband, would you want to live in something with “Cottage” in the name (sounds like a downgrade/small) or in a bigger place like Forest Lodge? Just a guess. Kate may have worked that into the agreement.

  6. QuiteContrary says:

    Given the bad PR around Forest Lodge, it’s going to be even harder for the Waleses to grab Royal Lodge once Pedrew finally evacuates the premises. I love this for them.

    • L84Tea says:

      I can’t understand why anyone in their right mind would want to live in Andrew’, of all people’s, old digs. Gross…

      • Lurker says:

        Before they will move to Royal Lodge (for reasons) they will of course have everything renovated and remodeled. Walls, floors, windows…. nothing will remain the same except the exterior walls. It will be as good as new and you can bet they will find a way to make the taxpayer pay for it.

  7. Alex Can says:

    I think, like many do, that they’re separated and they don’t want anyone too close by. They want to hide how they manage their pretend marriage, and minimize the risk of leaks which is also why they don’t want live-in staff. I also believe that William probably wants to isolate Kate.

    • Chrissy says:

      I totally believe this scenario but the fact remains that the land grab and not up keeping Crown properties leased to the public needs to be addressed. Weak Willie can’t have it both ways. I hope that the tenants affected and Republic keep the pressure on. Willie needs a major reality check!

    • Christine says:

      Except they have never once been photographed at Adelaide, unless you count Kate’s highly photoshopped disaster.

  8. Lady Esther says:

    My favorite articles were the ones from The Mirror which extensively quoted a local resident saying all the things we’ve been discussing here: that it was a power grab, that William and Kate and the RF are treating Windsor Park like their personal property when it is actually owned by the taxpayers, how disappointed and sad people are at the land grab when they’ve walked their dogs and rode their horses on the grounds for years, etc. The Republic’s take is welcome and expected but the Mirror pieces were brutal.

    And this story is just not going away, especially around Christmas time…I love this for the Waleses, they so rarely receive even slightly negative coverage so it’s refreshing!

    • Sunniside up says:

      The mirror is supposed to be left wing.

    • Becks1 says:

      I really love this for them. They got some pushback from the press when they moved to Adelaide, since the press had been insisting for years that the $$$ renovations to 1A were necessary bc it was their permanent home. So they looked a little dumb when they moved to Windsor but overall I think the cover story worked with the public – they wanted more privacy, more outdoor space, the kids were switching schools, etc.

      I think they thought the public would be just as understanding with the move to Forest Lodge and instead there is a lot of criticism and you know it bothers W&K. They’re going to do what they want anyway, but it still bothers them. The press is trying to cover for them this time but even the press is struggling and some of the outlets are outright printing a lot of those criticisms.

      The issue is, the only valid reason for them wanting Forest Lodge and the 150 acre “buffer zone” is for Kate’s separation house. Maybe Adelaide was always meant to be temporary, maybe Kate got a better deal after the cancer announcement, who knows. but none of the other reasons make sense – wanting more room (Adelaide is only 4 bedrooms but I’m sure its still relatively big on its own), or more land (AC is on the Windsor estate already) or more privacy (I’m not sure how you can get more private than Adelaide, they were never papped there.)

      Maybe this is also so William can have a room there and stops going to KP every night, but overall the only thing that makes sense is that this is about a separation.

      And the press can’t say that.

      • Magdalena says:

        William and Kate are certainly not paying “market rate” for anything. And the reporters are all focussing on the house only, as though the house is standing on a small plot all by itself.

        Are they also paying “market rate” for the 150 *acres* of land that they grabbed (stole)? That’s a LOT of land. Why does the exclusion zone need to be THAT huge? Is there someone living in the house who occasionally goes berserk, axe-murderer style, and needs to be kept away from the public? Had they tacked on a mile, at most, round the property, I think people might have been more forgiving, but 150 acres??? I agree with those who said that William is doing it to show that he can, with zero consequences.

        Who are they competing with regarding property size that they needed to steal a whole 150 acres of public land, when they already own so much? They could have hidden Kate’s separation house perfectly well with just a few acres.

      • Nic919 says:

        There are farms smaller than 150 acres. It is insane to close off that much land.
        Graham smith should raise money to start a challenge against this decision. It will force them to expose why this needs to be done. And it can’t be simply security when buckingham palace has less of a security zone in the middle of London.

  9. Tessa says:

    So much for being “normal” and supposedly raising their kids to live “relatively normal lives.” And I doubt this is the last time Scooter will grab for property. About time they are called out. Could not Charles control Scooter and Keen and put a stop to it? And the Keens do little in return for all the property grabbing.

  10. Millie328 says:

    I still don’t get the financial part. William is supposedly paying market rate for the manor. But isn’t the money he’s paying with from taxpayers anyway? It just seems like public money just gets shifted around.

    • Sunniside up says:

      The rent will come out of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall and the extra security will come from the tax payer. Meanwhile some of those paying to rent houses in the Duchy will be living in conditions that are unsuitable for renting by normal landlords.

    • Me at home says:

      And Norman Baker makes an excellent case, in his new book, that the Duchy of Cornwall actually belongs to the public. So duchy income belongs to the public, who give some of it back to WanK (who btw refuse to say whether they pay taxes on their “duchy income”).

  11. Brassy Rebel says:

    This doesn’t just “risk framing the couple as part of an out of touch elite.” They have been part of the out of touch elite for decades. And the entire family has been an out of touch elite for centuries. The Forest Lodge melodrama is just the latest chapter in a long, inglorious history.

  12. Maja says:

    25% of the profits from this land, where the Wales live, go back to the palace, i.e. to the RF. So if they pay rent at all, the palace gets a quarter of it back. And the taxpayer pays 100%. They don’t get a quarter back. Or am I wrong?

  13. Me at home says:

    Love that this is in Newsweek with Jack Royston’s name on it. The Mirror is also doing a good job of exposing the Waleses’ land grab. Would be good to see this exposed in more British media.

  14. Bloemheks says:

    What I can’t wrap my head around is that they just did it. No focus groups. No surveys of the residents. Nothing tangible to make the pill less bitter to swallow. Has there even been an acknowledgement by the RF the residents are losing anything?

    I try to think of what Disney would do if they needed an exclusion zone around an area the public and residents had been using for a very long time. Would they just put up a sign for people to encounter when they went there as part of their normal routine? I don’t believe they would. Residents would be contacted, information disseminated, and likely something to soften the blow, like a new playground in another area, alternate routes created, or more likely both.

    It’s just bizarre that in 2025 a “Firm” would make a move like this without factoring in the likely and totally normal reaction by residents and how that reaction would affect public opinion.

  15. Lady Digby says:

    Republic website need to clock watch Will and report each day on his work engagement eg Monday nada Tuesday 1 x 20 minute visit, empty handed to foodbank Wednesday nada Thursday 1×20 minute visit to patronise school kids by waving finger in their faces Friday begins long weekend Then tot up all the expense, upheaval and inconvenience to community around Forest Lodge. To convince you need to present the evidence of laxity and excess and privilege that Will embraces.

    • Christine says:

      Agreed. Nothing is going to change unless Will and Kate start getting called out for their inability to do anything that resembles work. Showing up to three events a week is a complete joke, and that’s a giant stretch for Kate.

  16. Nic919 says:

    There is no reason to make trespass a criminal offence just for them. The security zone is so big there are bound to be people accidentally crossing into it and turning that into a criminal offence is grotesque.

    British people need to start looking at what the French did because this is egregious and unnecessary.

    Also not actually putting a number to market value is sketchy. Originally we were told that Edward and Sophie paid a market value rent at Bagshot. And that was a lie.

    • Becks1 says:

      That part is mind boggling to me. so you can trespass near Sandringham, or Windsor Castle itself, and that’s a civil offense, but trespassing near W&K is a criminal offense?!?!

      • Nic919 says:

        It is an abuse of power and someone needs to challenge this law. Have them justify in court why this needs to be a criminal offence. These people have RPOs there 24/7. They have more security than most of the country.

  17. jferber says:

    He is absolutely correct–an unbridled abuse of power.

  18. A different hecate says:

    Absolutely ridiculous. And as an American who has visited Windsor: It sucks. The castle sucks, the village/town sucks, the family sucks. They can all sod off.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment