Kate & Will's Caribbean Trip

Oopsadaisy1

I don’t think Charles will refuse, it would seem that he can’t wait and I don’t think William would either, maybe the youngsters might.
But it’s a life of extreme privilege why would they willingly give it up? and I can’t see any British PM wanting to go down in History for abolishing the Monarchy.

They wouldn’t be giving up a life of wealth if they weren’t the RF. The Royals are extremely wealthy and could live their lives in luxurious anonymity if we didn’t have a monarchy. As it is, these riches come with a huge encumbrance of never ending public duty and scrutiny. I know which I’d prefer.

The media didn’t bother to report other parts of William’s
speech.

I wonder, an ageing monarch always seems to bring out the worst in everybody, when Elizabeth 1 was dying everyone who was anyone was rushing off to toady up to James1, then when Queen Victoria was on the way out it was all going to be a disaster but Edward V11 salvaged/ worked wonders with anglo french relations in the nicest possible way! Times are very strange and I am not sure its all over yet.
I guess this tour has been long in the devising and unfortunately times have changed drastically in the meantime.

And we should remember, the "host" country didn't invite them. They invited themselves. Like Elizabeth I making a progress.

Is that an established fact, volver? Have you a reference?

The 'host' country could have said no'. It didn't have to put on displays or lavish entertainments. We don't have any particular hold on them after all, we couldn't threaten to withdraw funding or throw the government in prison...

I do like to think that these places have some agency of their own, that they're not just imposed upon.. I think it's a bit disrespectful of them to think otherwise.

Yes they can be voted out, may not beat Thatchers record
11 years and we will have the ‘he/she lied’ as we do after every
general election

Annieback the point is we don’t get a choice. It’s Charles like it or not, unlike voting for a president that can be voted out.

Irrespective of one's views on monarchy versus republic, it cannot be denied that this Royal Tour is a bit of a disaster. We are no longer in the 1950s and perhaps some of the old guard at the palace need to wake up to this. All this traditional dancing in front of people is belittling and patronising as is streets lined with flag waving school children. Tedious in the extreme for all parties

Whitewavemark2

I think that history will show that Elizabeth 11 was the last accepted monarch.

This anachronistic system will begin to fade away on her death.

Hopefully.

I have always thought that a monarch was preferable to an elected head of state but this latest royal tour has caused me to have a rethink.

Seeing Kate in a dress that must have cost a fortune then hearing a young mum saying she only put the lights on when absolutely necessary made me feel a bit nauseous.

Grandma70 we will wait and see shall we?

I know what I know ?

I think W & C haven't put a foot wrong, is there anything C can't do well (scuba diving etc). But it is all so predictable, even PW's speeches. I am bored with it.

Johnny Dymond (sp?) on the BBC talked about the how the trip will have been planned and approved by the Cambridge's PR team. They haven't had to organise one for two years and seem to have lost the knack.

For me, it doesn't matter who planned the tour or what they were trying to achieve with it. It has been a disaster.

Regarding the scuba driving; usually the Royals turn up at whatever charity or cause is being focused on and nod and ask relevant (scripted) questions. But all they managed this time was to look like privileged tourists.

And we should remember, the "host" country didn't invite them. They invited themselves. Like Elizabeth I making a progress.

To those criticising the William and Kate's itinerary, you do know that they won't have devised it themselves; they weren't going on holiday and able to chose what they wanted to visit or do. Scuba diving in Belize could very well have been chosen by the Belize government as an opportunity to showcase the country's visitor attractions (tourism being a major part of their economy). A royal visit is a good publicity vehicle.

And until we know just who was responsible for the open top Landrover idea, the UK govt or the Jamaican govt, it's really not possible to say whether it was a diplomatic boo boo or just a reference back to William's grandparents' visit.

Planning a royal tour, this from 2019:

Royal tours can take up to a year to plan, and are either instigated by the U.K. government, or by an invitation from the host country. The itinerary is put together based on whatever matters of national importance the host government would like to draw attention to, while also incorporating some of the visiting royal's personal interests.

www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a10309303/royal-tour-planning-process/

I haven't followed this tour particularly, not being very interested, but it seems to me that the scuba diving has really upset many people on here. I fail to understand why.

Oopsadaisy1

I didn’t say he wants her to die, if she retired he’d be on that throne before it got cold.

How do you know?

There were two photos in the Guardian today.

The first of the Queen and DoE in the 1950’s Jamaica standing in a vehicle inspecting something.

The second was on PW with K in an identical vehicle, standing making an inspection of something in Jamaica.

Apart from the women’s fashion there is no difference.

No movement or change since the 1950s

I think that history will show that Elizabeth 11 was the last accepted monarch.

This anachronistic system will begin to fade away on her death.

I didn’t say he wants her to die, if she retired he’d be on that throne before it got cold.

I don’t think Charles is longing for his mother to die,

I don’t think Charles will refuse, it would seem that he can’t wait and I don’t think William would either, maybe the youngsters might.
But it’s a life of extreme privilege why would they willingly give it up? and I can’t see any British PM wanting to go down in History for abolishing the Monarchy.

Grany

Disaster tour

Monarchy gives all power to Government she can only do what PM asks that's why queen did not prevent the UK's politicians illegally proroguing parliament. She has no role pointless and powerless.

That's why we need to elect our own HoS

We could still have pageantry as other countries do with a president.

I read a rather interesting article about the pageantry, I'll try to dig out a link.

Basically it was showing that, at the height of its colonial power, Britain was actually very poor at pageantry (there was a quote from one of Victoria's ministers saying - in 19th century language - someone always cocks it up).

The rise in the 'quality' of our pageantry mirrors the decline in our power.

The other side of the coin is that under the present system a person is forced to become the monarch due to an accident of birth. The Queen's father didn't want to be king but had no choice. How can it be fair to force generations of a family to live their lives under the intense scrutiny of the great British public? Instead of getting rid of them give the monarch a say in whether or not they are willing to take it on. Set them free to choose I say.

Disaster tour

Monarchy gives all power to Government she can only do what PM asks that's why queen did not prevent the UK's politicians illegally proroguing parliament. She has no role pointless and powerless.

That's why we need to elect our own HoS

We could still have pageantry as other countries do with a president.

America has a different governmental system.

Do people really not get that?

What would London be without all the pageantry though?

Bit like Paris. They seem to manage fine.

I look at America and their Presidents, and shudder to think of it here.
All the same, our monarchy does need to change, starting with embarrassing Royal tours.
What would London be without all the pageantry though? Just another big city. A president wouldn't have the appeal.

Re Jamaica...

not least as a bulwark against overmighty politicians.

Could someone explain how that works please? Seeing as how she can't even prevent the UK's politicians illegally proroguing parliament?