King Charles III

He has lost his mother at the end of the day and no matter how he was prepared for all this, until it happens you don't know how you cope. I'm sure he could see some of this pomp and ceremony far enough, but it's got to done. He has big boots to fill and I'm sure he'll do his very best ?

Pantglas2, of course he didn't 'steal' a pen. It was a lighthearted comment and I am not a royalty hater. Charles did what many people do when they borrow a pen, they inadvertently forget to hand it back. I don't dislike Charles per se, I dislike what he put his children through. He has many good qualities I am sure and if he was just an ordinary CEO, I'd have no problem with him at all. My problem is that he is head of the Church. No more, no less.

Surely it's when his predecessor is dead, not his successor? I think Charles will make a splendid king, followed by an equally successful William.

I've never been a fanatical royalist, just more pro than anti, but I've been enormously impressed by the grace, courage and dignity with which HM King Charles has taken on his new role. I happen to believe he will be an outstanding king, he has done a great deal of good as PoW, and was ahead of the curve on environmental issues for which he was mocked until the world caught up. I've been glued to the news since Thursday, and the more I've seen, the more I've liked. I have to confess, I'm more than a little in love with our new monarch! ?

God Save the King ?

BlueBelle

I often like and agree with things Charles says He’s definitely into greener ways and if he slims the royals down to a much smaller amount eg himself camilla, Anne, Edward, and William open up all their castles which would then go a long way to pay for themselves
I don’t see why the rich royals can’t look after their own spouses I think if they weren’t so money eating Id have more admiration for them
He’s been waiting I think probably reluctantly for this job for a very very long time I think he ll be good he’s had enough practice and I like Camilla I think she sound, grounded and extremely good for him

The Sovreign Grant £86.3 million is exchanged for for income surrendered to the Treasury from Crown lands in 2017/18 the profit was c£330 million. In addition the Royal Familt brings in tourism worth c£5 million. The Royal Family pay tax at the higher rate on private incomes.
Windsor Castle, Buckinham Palace, belong to the nation.
The Sovreign Grant is to fund expenses arising from the duties of the Royal Family.

Plainly the country as a whole derives a lot more income than it pays out for the Royals. They are not lazy hangers on. Who, I wonder among their detractors here will be working on the day before they die at the age of 96?

Mandrake

It feels very strange to have a king. I've only ever known a queen. I'm quite neutral on the monarchy on the whole, but King Charles seems to be a bit environmentally aware, so hopefully that will bring some positive things.

A bit environmentally aware? He was one of the first to try to bring it into the public domain and was called a nutter for his pains.
I think he’ll be a good king, I hope so anyway.

But he pocketed his own ? not one from the pen tray! I checked the video half a dozen times and he’s the only signatory who used his own pen!

He’s a great letter writer and it surprises me not that he carries one with him at all times - I’m never without one myself - of course his will be posher than mine...

Plainly the country as a whole derives a lot more income than it pays out for the Royals.

No it doesn't. And if all they bring in from tourism is £5million we'd better get them a business manager, because that's peanuts.

...sigh...

Who, I wonder among their detractors here will be working on the day before they die at the age of 96?

Is that any way to treat an old person? To expect them to be working until the day before they die? Perhaps the monarchists should search their consciences about what they have expected of this family in the past and what they expect of them now.

Yes, well, a constitutional monarch must not express political opinions that favour any particular political party.

But King Charles can lead by example.

The greener both his private home or homes and the royal estates become, the greater the chances of it boosting green energy amongst those who uphold the monarchy, at least.

And I imagine that many republicans will be glad if royal estates contribute to solving our environmental problems, rather than increasing them.

I also assume that those who would like to see the monarchy abolished are big enough not to deride green energy just because the King uses it!

I also assume that those who would like to see the monarchy abolished are big enough not to deride green energy just because the King uses it!

What? Is that what you think of republicans? Small minded individuals who will cut off their noses despite their faces? What a country... ??‍♀️

I believe that in Charles we have a very good king. I like Camilla very much too. She’s intelligent, well-read, amusing, and I have no doubt she’ll support her husband in every way.

Well I would have been annoyed if they had laid out pens like that. Good for him for not meekly accepting it. Shows he has a bit of spirit about him. I am glad he is not a meek little twerp.

Like a lot of of elderly men, Charles is tetchy.
This is where Camilla comes in. She can calm him down by saying the right thing - she can soothe and praise him.
Personally, I can't stand pandering to blokes, but there you are.

icanhandthemback

*Pantglas2*, of course he didn't 'steal' a pen. It was a lighthearted comment and I am not a royalty hater. Charles did what many people do when they borrow a pen, they inadvertently forget to hand it back. I don't dislike Charles per se, I dislike what he put his children through. He has many good qualities I am sure and if he was just an ordinary CEO, I'd have no problem with him at all. My problem is that he is head of the Church. No more, no less.

This carries the same misconception as the King having any power because he is Head of State. He is the titular head of the Church of England. A titular head possesses few, if any, actual powers. This is the case with the King and the Church of England. I cannot guess what your problem is with that. Have you discussed it with your Vicar or others in authority in your church?

In most parliamentary democracies today, the head of state has either evolved into, or was created as, a position of titular leadership. Again, I cannot see any reasoned argument that makes our, very historical but also democratic arrangement, wrong.

Boz

Like a lot of of elderly men, Charles is tetchy.
This is where Camilla comes in. She can calm him down by saying the right thing - she can soothe and praise him.
Personally, I can't stand pandering to blokes, but there you are.

You were obviously not being serious - I hope. I wonder how you, presumably not an elderly man, would have stood up to what he has over the last few days.

DaisyAnne

icanhandthemback

Pantglas2, of course he didn't 'steal' a pen. It was a lighthearted comment and I am not a royalty hater. Charles did what many people do when they borrow a pen, they inadvertently forget to hand it back. I don't dislike Charles per se, I dislike what he put his children through. He has many good qualities I am sure and if he was just an ordinary CEO, I'd have no problem with him at all. My problem is that he is head of the Church. No more, no less.

This carries the same misconception as the King having any power because he is Head of State. He is the titular head of the Church of England. A titular head possesses few, if any, actual powers. This is the case with the King and the Church of England. I cannot guess what your problem is with that. Have you discussed it with your Vicar or others in authority in your church?

In most parliamentary democracies today, the head of state has either evolved into, or was created as, a position of titular leadership. Again, I cannot see any reasoned argument that makes our, very historical but also democratic arrangement, wrong.

Wrong on so many counts.

If he has no power, what is the point of him?

Somebody to wave at?

Can’t bear the sychophancy

Some information about Charles interest in Green issues and how he used influence for profit.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/prince-charles-millions-shore-tax-11484478

Coco51

BlueBelle

I often like and agree with things Charles says He’s definitely into greener ways and if he slims the royals down to a much smaller amount eg himself camilla, Anne, Edward, and William open up all their castles which would then go a long way to pay for themselves
I don’t see why the rich royals can’t look after their own spouses I think if they weren’t so money eating Id have more admiration for them
He’s been waiting I think probably reluctantly for this job for a very very long time I think he ll be good he’s had enough practice and I like Camilla I think she sound, grounded and extremely good for him

The Sovreign Grant £86.3 million is exchanged for for income surrendered to the Treasury from Crown lands in 2017/18 the profit was c£330 million. In addition the Royal Familt brings in tourism worth c£5 million. The Royal Family pay tax at the higher rate on private incomes.
Windsor Castle, Buckinham Palace, belong to the nation.
The Sovreign Grant is to fund expenses arising from the duties of the Royal Family.

Plainly the country as a whole derives a lot more income than it pays out for the Royals. They are not lazy hangers on. Who, I wonder among their detractors here will be working on the day before they die at the age of 96?

The Crown estates are not part of the monarch's private estates, do not belong to the monarch or the government. They are held in corporate sole. They were given up in exchange for not having to pay for the upkeep of government which was the burden of the monarch before this agreement. I'd say they got a pretty good deal tbh.
I am also never sure what people mean when they say that the monarchy brings in money from tourism ? I am not aware of any tourist coming to the UK to "see" the monarch. The most visited tourist attraction in the UK is Stonehenge followed by Stratford upon Avon, the Lake district, the Cotswolds and the Eden Project.
So your claim that the monarchy brings in more than it costs is erroneous.
I don't have an issue with the cost as I'm sure that an elected H of S would be a similar cost to the taxpayer but I would prefer that our H of S should be accountable to the people whose taxes fund them.

Grany I am neither asleep nor brainwashed. This country has a Head of State; I prefer this to a president, as do most it seems or the Monarchy would not have survived. Given Charles 1's fate, it didn't take long for the country to decide it preferred a Monarch to a dictator. Who wants a Trump, or a Putin?
This country has possibly the most stable society on earth, and not even a properly written constitution, because we are not subjected to coups, takeovers, invasions, civil war, or violent political changes that requires a constant re writing of the fundamental management of the nation. We hand it on, with tradition and practice, through the decades, in a peaceful and practised way. Suits me - 'seems to suit most of us.

Good Lord.

When people make daft comments it just shows how much they know about this stuff.

A president is Head of State of their own country. Heads of state can be Kings, Queen, Princes, Presidents or Lord High Everything Else if that's what we decide to call them

I do wish people would take some time to understand all this before they make pronouncements on things.

God save the King.

Volver
The Queen could have chosen to abdicate if the job became too much in old age, but she chose not to.
I don’t agree with all the wealth associated with the Royal Family, but if we had a President and a Constitution we could end up with a Trump or a Putin! We could even have a ‘right to bear arms’. ?? No doubt a President would also be wealthy.
For me, the only time that the Queen ever put a foot wrong was in her treatment of Diana. However, Diana didn’t have to marry Charles. It’s a pity that Charles couldn’t marry Camilla in the first place. They’re obviously very happy together.

Yes The Queen/King is our Head of State and that’s how we like it. Heavens above what would you prefer? Nicola Sturgeon?? Doesn’t have the same gravitas does it?

We’ll stay as we are.

Please, please, no more Trump and Putin stuff. Please, it's not big and it's not clever. Its certainly not original.

Heaven forfend that we should want a Constitution. I mean, who do we think we are?

??‍♀️

For anybody who wants to defend a monarchy in the face of an elected Head of State, can you please make sure you know what you are talking about before spouting nonsense?