How the Royal Family might change with Charles (then William) as Monarch?

Anniebach

*Calandergirl*. ? the present Duke of Gloucester inherited the title from his father, he is also a Prince because he is the grandson of a king, if he has sons they will not be a Prince because they are great grandchildren of a king , same for the
Kent’s

They'll keep the dukedoms though won't they?

Just how much would Prince Charles and, increasingly perhaps, Prince William have to 'give up' in an attempt to modernise the Monarchy?
How 'like us' would we like them to become?

Calandergirl. ? the present Duke of Gloucester inherited the title from his father, he is also a Prince because he is the grandson of a king, if he has sons they will not be a Prince because they are great grandchildren of a king , same for the
Kent’s

I have been wondering if they will keep their usual names when they become King. Would PC be Charles the III or IV ?
What about William? King Billy might cause some ructions or consternation in NI.

Calendargirl

I digress here, but when the Kents and the Gloucesters die, do their elder children inherit the titles, or do they revert to the Crown? I seem to remember seeing somewhere they carry on, but the ‘HRH’ doesn’t.

Come on Annie and Merlotgran, I bet you know. Will save me looking it up!

I think they do, Calendargirl but the HRH is no longer appropriate as they are too far down the line of succession.

The malicious rumours about William and Rose (?) turned out to be just that. She wasn’t even in this country when the illicit romance was supposed to have taken place. Interesting how people like to believe the worst when it suits their agenda.

I read that 70% of Brits were in favour of retaining the Monarchy but I tend to avoid the Guardian and the so called Independent.

I prefer to stick with the monarchy especially given the actions of various presidents recently.

Mollygo

Ixion that is worth considering.
Should any of us gift our wealth or property to our family members or should we give it up for the public good?

Some Gransnetters think all private property should go to the Government upon death, there was a thread about it a while ago.

ixion

What about the Big Houses/Castles/Palaces, their long term futures?
Should the Monarch stop gifting houses to family? (Gatcombe, Anmer, Frogmore, KP, St.James' P, Royal Lodge.......?)

That's from their private money, though.

Buckingham Palace and Windsor are the only ones which are Offices of State and official Royal Residences owned by the Crown.

If I could afford to buy my children houses I would too. Why not?

I digress here, but when the Kents and the Gloucesters die, do their elder children inherit the titles, or do they revert to the Crown? I seem to remember seeing somewhere they carry on, but the ‘HRH’ doesn’t.

Come on Annie and Merlotgran, I bet you know. Will save me looking it up!

ixion

What about the Big Houses/Castles/Palaces, their long term futures?
Should the Monarch stop gifting houses to family? (Gatcombe, Anmer, Frogmore, KP, St.James' P, Royal Lodge.......?)

I wonder what will happen to Kensington Palace when older members of the RF die, like the Kents and Gloucesters?

William and Kate will probably move to Clarence House when Charles becomes King.

Ixion that is worth considering.
Should any of us gift our wealth or property to our family members or should we give it up for the public good?

What about the Big Houses/Castles/Palaces, their long term futures?
Should the Monarch stop gifting houses to family? (Gatcombe, Anmer, Frogmore, KP, St.James' P, Royal Lodge.......?)

I hope to live to see Prince Charles become King. (not that I wish the Queen any harm, far from it). He has years of experience and has already said that he will slim down the monarchy. He is better man than many give him credit for in my opinion and will make a good King.
Most people with common sense should know that silly tales about toothpaste etc should be ignored. And even if it was true, first and foremost our royals are human beings and not without flaws, just like the rest of us.
And then, hopefully, Prince William and Kate. I think they will be fantastic. And hopefully have enough sense to see that no-one except the monarch and immediate heirs should be considered royal and should earn their own living. It has to be modernised and slimmed down if it is to survive.

None of us have really know but one thing I would like to change is the National Anthem.

However the monarchy changes in the next few years, it would be nice to think that some people in the UK could stop thinking about it as a shining example of how to organise a country, and stop being so superior about other country's Heads of State. British exceptionalism all over.

Oh we have a monarch, so much better than those nasty common presidents!

I read that he takes his own toilet seat on trips, has his clothes laid out in a certain order and is a stickler for protocol his way or no way. Who knows whether any of this is true. Indeed who cares.

JenniferEccles

One thing I feel pretty certain of is that neither Charles nor William will have the same level of commitment and dedication to duty as the Queen.

Agree Jennifer. But I do like Charles as we ‘grew up together’, so to speak. As for somebody squeezing the toothpaste on his toothbrush, really? Perhaps somebody wipes his bottom too?!

The monarchy has changed over my lifetime, and will continue to do so if it is going to survive.
Charles has grown in confidence, maybe due to his being with Camilla, and seems to be a thoughtful person; he has taken on many of the duties of the Queen over the past few years. I think the greater change will come when William is king. He has more experience of life outside the royal household and has a younger outlook in general. A trimmed down monarchy is the only way it will be acceptable in future and will have to be seen to be in touch with the rest of society.

The role of President will be proscribed by law. Like a judge.

His/her job will be well defined and be above politics.

Charles and William want to be involved in politics that's not their job description as a Head of State .

The institution of monarchy is corrupt Using public office for private gain. And The embarrassing wealth Some of it is hidden in off shore tax havens.

Above the law Andrew speaking in interview with BBC about his father DoE
The RF should not try to launder PA in front of cameras he has not been interviewed by the FBI involvement with Epstein.

Unaccountable Exempted from freedom of information act.

Charles not allowing tennents to buy the land that their house sits on As you can imagine this causes tennents lots of problems. Even though all other landlords are required to do so. My MP Mr Pennycook will look into this, he agrees with me this is very unfair, he will write to housing minister Robert Jerrick Charles gets out of paying tax on the Duchy

So if all you royalists think monarchy is fair and run properly think again.

Alegrias1

There's only one person who keeps bringing up President Higgins and it ain't Grany.

Not him in particular but yes, any President of Ireland is apparently a shining example to us all
☘

One thing I feel pretty certain of is that neither Charles nor William will have the same level of commitment and dedication to duty as the Queen.

? ? ? ?

There's only one person who keeps bringing up President Higgins and it ain't Grany.

Merlotgran (love that name) I’d never heard the toothpaste rumour before, but his flunky would have been paid.
Many of us are happy to pay someone else to do things we could do ourselves if we can afford it. I’m just about to book someone to clean my oven after reading a thread on GN. One more job off my list!

^Grany if you mean a president as head of state and should be
above politics why do you always put forward the president of
Ireland?^

That puzzles me too, Anniebach

Presidents no-one has heard of, apart from Éamon de Valera, and not all above reproach nor are they all apolitical.