Prince William to leave the armed forces

But Lilygran does the country feel we need to maintain the royals in such an opulent lifestyle . I have 'a thing ' about the number of homes we have to pay for security cover . It quite angers me that we have to pay for so many homes.

We have to have a Head of State and in my opinion, having a sovereign is by far the most attractive option. As for how much the Royal family costs us, any Head of State has to be maintained in the manner the country feels is appropriate and the royals contribute a great deal in cash terms, let alone what is offered in terms of tradition, buildings, art, jewellery, frocks and uniforms. Prince Philip, Andrew, Charles, William and Harry have all served this country in the military and they and Princess Anne do inestimable work in sponsoring many charities and projects. They bring pleasure to thousands when they arrive to open, unveil or launch and although a number of people who post on GN appear to be anti-royalist, they surely cannot deny any of this. [where's the crown emoticon?]

If the royals were to leave the country tomorrow I don't think it would make the slightest difference to tourism. I just can't accept the tourists who come here do so to see the Windsors. I am basing this on a number of Americans, Australians etc who I have and do exchange emails with. People want to find where their British ancestors with. They say they are coming here for a holiday and can we help with look ups for them, In the years I have exchanged mails and so had chats not one has ever said 'we want to see the queen. They want to see London - The Tower, Hampton Court, Buck House etc, Stratford , Bronte country, Dorset, Castles are popular, they want to see where their ancestors came from, get very excited if a home still exists, or we can locate a grave. so in my opinion it's our history and their roots which brings them here plus the areas where they can see the likes of Hardy/Bronte country . Quite a few if going to Scotland say a visit to Loch Ness would be fun.

So it's where were Henry 8th wives behead not will the queen be in London

We should care - we're paying for it all!

"Who cares" seems a fairly mild response to me, given that so much broadcasting time is devoted to the royal family.

I agree with Greatnan on the tourism thing.

IMO it's a bad move on William's part.

In the Armed Forces he was immune from much criticism or harping from the press but if the couple are just to be seen as attending dinners for elephants, visiting hospitals, etc., and talk of a 'transitional' year, people might begin to wonder what we are paying for.

Charles has been in a non-role preparing to be king for so long - I can't imagine why William wants to do the same.

I don't think the UK tourist industry depends on the Royal Family. France is the most visited country in the world and has not had a monarch since 1789. I think tourist go to Britain for the scenery, history and architecture - especially people who come from countries where the oldest house is no more than a few hundred years old.
(Absent lives in New Zealand, so she won't be bothered about the tourist industry in the UK!)

I agree with that Ceesnan and in fact we should care. The Royal family and all that goes with it is a great institution, our tourism industry alone depends on it, the pomp, splendour and tradition is not everyone's cup of tea, but it is ours and we should be proud that we have a royal family, some of whom are respected wold-wide. Apart from that, and being a little flippant, - what would the media have to report upon if we did not have a royal family.

Well said ceesnan.

Absent I'm sure you're really not expecting a reply to that pithy comment, so why bother posting it? Hasn't there been enough unpleasantness on this forum lately without trying to stir up some more? Actually,that is probably why you posted it. No doubt someone will now tell me in strident terms that anyone can post what they like etc etc.... Well yes, of course they can, but other people don't have to like it, and have the right to say so.

Very sweet the way William got a bit emotional about the lions he is going to protect.

Charles is much maligned, in my opinion. He had a very different sort of upbringing from the freedoms enjoyed by William and Harry.
The Prince's Trust is a marvellous organisation and Charles is not just a figurehead but very involved. He's not perfect human being, but none of us are! I think he cares about things.
As for William leaving the services, well it was always on the cards that he would. I believe he will do his best to find something worthwhile to do, and with the Queen getting older he will obviously be needed to help fill the gap.
It can't be easy being Royal in this day and age, and no-one can choose the circumstances into which they are born. Everything they do is going to picked over and criticised, no matter how hard they try.
I would hate to be royal!

Who cares?

Not just "alternative" medicines but homeopathy, that well known fraud. And he does not seem to understand that sticking his oar in re the NHS on this subject is inappropriate.
Yes Wills is redundant - it was announced months ago. Presumably did not fancy being TUPEd

Yes it is correct wisewoman,

I heard on the news today that the RAF Search and Rescue service is to be privatised (what a surprise!) and that is why William needs to get out now. It was on the BBC so hopefully correct!

Oooooh, I have used alternative medicines for years , well the queen and I actually

HRH Prince Charles does talk a lot of piffle about things he really knows nothing about - his support for so-called alternative medicine being a case in point. And as has been said by at least one person who works with him, you can't argue with him.

I think Prince Charles has a lot to look forward to. He is obviously happy in his marriage and will probably be taking over more official functions from the Queen which will put him in the front line for a change. He will also be able to leave the arduous overseas tours to William and Kate who have the popularity, youth and energy.

Charles had a horrible time at school - he is not naturally a team player and was bullied at both his prep school and Gordonstoun. His father despised him, preferring the more macho Andrew (and the even more macho Anne.) Ironic, given the rumours that later surfaced about their respective sexuality. I have always felt rather sorry for him - such a lonely life. Is anybody ever really relaxed in the company of the Royal Family?
He shouldn't have married Diana knowing he was in love with Camilla but there was a lot of pressure on him, not least from his uncle, Lord Mountbatten. He is now married to the love of his life and seems much more relaxed and appears to be a loving father.

To be fair to Charles, much of what he has done has been wiped from memory because of his failed marriage. The Princes Trust has helped so many young people, he always turns up at any area which has met with some force of nature and there must have been times he wanted to stay hidden under the stairs but has always turned up no matter how much hammering he was getting in the press

That he isn't as relaxed in public as his sons , in my opinion , being from a different generation he was 'trained ' in a much different way to his sons

I seem to remember something many years ago, when Charles was in the navy, I think, when he swam under one of the poles, can`t remember if it was north or south. No, he wasn`t exactly idle as a young man.

Lets face it the older royals and minor royals are not particularly popular (apart from the queen I suppose) whereas Will Kate and Harry are. Camilla obviously not keen on public life as she only recently did an engagment on her own. Best advice to the "brand" is to slowly retire all the over 60s and let the new generation front the show.

Thanks feetle for bringing me up to date on HRH PC,pretty impressive I have to admit but I still have to sway to Prince William I'm affraid he just seems that more approachable in his manner.

"At least Prince William has achieved much more than his father has in his working life"

Not so sure about that -

"Following royal tradition, Charles served in the navy and air force. After requesting and receiving Royal Air Force training during his second year at Cambridge, on 8 March 1971, he flew himself to the Royal Air Force College Cranwell to train as a jet pilot. Following the passing-out parade that September, he embarked on a naval career, enrolling in a six-week course at the Royal Naval College Dartmouth and then serving on the guided missile destroyer HMS Norfolk (1971–1972) and the frigates HMS Minerva (1972–1973) and HMS Jupiter (1974). He also qualified as a helicopter pilot at RNAS Yeovilton in 1974, just prior to joining 845 Naval Air Squadron, operating from HMS Hermes. On 9 February 1976, he took command of the coastal minehunter HMS Bronington for his last ten months serving actively in the navy. He learned to fly on a Chipmunk basic pilot trainer, a BAC Jet Provost jet trainer, and a Beagle Basset multi-engine trainer; he then regularly flew the Hawker Siddeley Andover, Westland Wessex and BAe 146 aircraft of The Queen's Flight."

About even-steven wouldn't you say?