William and Kate’s rail trip

Yes, I know that Anniebach

As I said in my post that was removed.My friend is spitting feathers about the jaunt by THE royal couple.....his mother is in hospital with cancer an dementia an dhe cant get in to see her...imagine his anger when Willie and Kate could wander in with an entourage .I posted HIS views and was reported I agree that he has every right to be fuming ,Apart form the disrespect shown to teh FM and the people of Scotland the patients who have been longing to see loved ones didn't want these two instead.

The Head of the Commonwealth is not hereditary as some seem to think. The commonwealth leaders agreed that Prince Charles would take over the role from the Queen. Had they wanted they could have had anyone else.

Was anyone else up for the job of Head of the Commonwealth? It would be a poor show if Charles had been rejected.

25Avalon

The Head of the Commonwealth is not hereditary as some seem to think. The commonwealth leaders agreed that Prince Charles would take over the role from the Queen. Had they wanted they could have had anyone else.

This'll be the "soft power" we hear about all the time.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/commonwealth-queen-prince-charles-chogm-succession-buckingham-palace-a8313376.html

In the video up thread is interesting information about The commonwealth. You can see in it the Queen suggesting that Charles should be the next Head of the Commonwealth, nepotism ha.

Well one thing is for sure, they will & are criticised for what they do & get involved with & they will & are criticised if they don’t .
The charities they support & the charities they are patrons of
all state that their patronage is invaluable.
One thing is for sure our own lives would not be enhanced in any way shape or form without them. But they certainly bring a ray of sunshine to very many people ,some folks seem to find this hard or strange to believe. A shame in my opinion to knock them for it.

What charities

Today The Duke of Cambridge has become Patron of two wildlife conservation charities, @FaunaFloraInt and @_BTO
Hey members @_BTO do you REALLY want a toff who blasts wee birds for fun as patron?

Yeah, both these charities have had #Royal patrons for years.
BTO has had just two Royal engagements in the last *ten years*; FFI not even that - it's had just one.
Methinks most Royal #charity patronages are not really a thing:

the UK powers that be, including the Royals have a mind-set towards biodiversity that is Victorian. If this grouse shooting land were re-wilded, Scotland could have National Parks as famous as Yellowstone Park with iconic birds of prey such as Golden Eagles, Fish Eagles, Hen Harriers and perhaps even wolves...... but probably not in my lifetime.

Well feed folks donate to charities for those who don’t have enough to eat. Nothing is as straightforward as it seems.

Of course, had they not gone on this rail tour they'd be accused of living in their ivory tower, not knowing what goes on in the country.

I think the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have a good handle on the problems faced by many in this country.
Their interests highlights many problems and can shine a light on areas where help is needed.

Callistemon it's not a light that's needed it's investment and cash.
So instead of just sitting in their ivory tower they took it for a trip round the country, avoiding anywhere where the plague was seriously bad of course.

I disagree.
Publicity is good

Are not the areas with high numbers of the virus tier 3 ?

They didn’t avoid , there has been complaints here they were in tier 2 areas .

They visited a few low number sites in Tier 3 areas. They could have stopped where the virus is much more virulent. Seen the schools where children have been sent home 2 or 3 times and large numbers of teachers have been ill. The places really devastated by Covid.

trisher you would criticise them if they helped to scrub wards , you are are a republican you will find fault no matter
what they do or don’t do.

Perhaps that's because they are such over privileged, indulged, anachronisms. But actually if they were scrubbing wards I might be impressed.

I heard on the news this evening that 67% of people in the United Kingdom are happy with the Royal family.

No win situation for the Royals, but no obligation to turn out to see them either.
I have no idea whether they contribute to the charities where they are patrons, but if they announced their contributions you can guarantee the cry would go up, “Not enough!”

Compared to poor countries where people still suffer from starvation , WE here are all Over Privileged ‘
Would we be willing to give up who we are & all of what we have for others. ?Doing what we can who ever we maybe is better than doing nothing .
We don’t choose what we are born into, so anyone who endeavours to do something for other deserves to have acknowledgement for that no matter who they are or what they do or do not have in my opinion.

Trisher, they would have been criticised for visiting a higher tier area, & to suggest that they should have /could have seems to me to be a bit irrational.

We are not all over privileged in this country. Plenty of poor and homeless. However it looks like our over privileged will get a wealth tax to help pay for COVID.

Don't look like RF over privileged will get wealth tax

Ministers asked that Charles pay Corporation and capital gains tax on Duchy of Cornwall, he gets over 20 million given to him, he hasn't . Gives him an unfair advantage.

You may be right Grany. Not all tenants like the Duchy which can be very money grabbing, wanting to build houses to swell the coffers. Argue and fear your rent goes up.

However it looks like our over privileged will get a wealth tax to help pay for COVID.

I think this is a great idea.

It doesn't really matter whether a name is spelt in a different way from the norm, in my opinion.

An Irish acquaintance of mine was very critical of a relative's name being spelt Kieran. She insisted that the correct spelling is either Kieron or Ciaran. Frankly, I don't care what the more usual spelling is. There are different ways to spell a name and, in my view it is rather petty and discourteous to be unwilling to accept the name that a person has been given.

Despite living here, the person who took issue with it was, perhaps understandably from a historical point of view, not a great fan of England and may have felt that an English person taking an Irish name and then spelling it differently was some sort of snub.

Is it acceptable, though, for a person to question, or indeed change, the spelling or pronunciation of another person's name, on the grounds that the spelling/pronunciation is not the norm or is seen as "incorrect"?