Do you think Charles becoming King is very imminent?

[crochetmonkey74]

The Mail are going mad on stories about exactly what will happen, and how it will happen. Now I know it's The Mail but we also know they do seed stuff out to the public

@Comedycook really? Nobody would admit to voting labour that I know! Too embarrassed.

They've been sprucing Caernarfon up ready for an investiture for about 10 years now.

My (limited) experience of death and dying in the very old is that there is often a strong psychological component to the timing. The Queen has lost her husband and has made it as far as the Platinum Jubilee, which may have been an important milestone for her. I wouldn't be surprised if she slipped away quite soon

She really wants to own a Derby winner, as it's the big race that has eluded her. The Derby is in the June Jubilee celebration plans, so she's definitely got stuff to look forward to and hang on for.

I agree that there is a public interest in kniwingsomething of the health of the head of state. But that's not the same as being curious about the details. Her hospital stay last year was never fully explained, and I take that to mean that even if there is something up, it is not a cause for concern in the short or medium term as there is nothing that needs an announcement for now. Her health has been good so far throughout her life, and she may well have a few more years in her (especially given her monthers longevity)

She won't abdicate, but if she becomes very frail, then Prince Charles could be installed as Prince Regent. If she carries on as she is, then the State Counsellors will continue to carry out some roles on the monarch's behalf, so she has something like a half retirement.

As for Charles he wouldn't refuse to be king, not only would it be disrespectful to his Mother it would also mean William couldn't be King

It doesn't mean that.

Edward VIII had no children at the time if his abdication. He did not (and could not) have removed any legitimate DC who had already been born (eg if he had issue from a previous marriage). It simply disqualified any who could be born after the abdication - either from his marriage to Mrs Simpson or from any subsequent marriage if she predeceased him.

@astrocroc

Yes. The Daily Mail somehow has some inside clairvoyant knowledge of the queen's imminent death. And what have they chosen to do with that special psychic information? Well, use it to ease the public into the idea of the upheaval by printing tangent articles about what might happen when Charles becomes king, of course! The DM is truly dedicated to public service and niceties like this. Makes total sense.

The Sun ran a mysterious little story back in December simply saying that the Queen had been seen in London.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4431580-Queen-seen-in-London

My take on that was that it's a shot over the bows of the Palace, letting them know that the Queen was seen, and that they have a good idea about what she was doing and therefore why.

Which means there's a possibility ithat something is up, health-wise, but no immediate grounds for concern. Lots of older people die 'with' rather than 'of' various conditions.

Not sure anyone is really clamouring for William anymore are they? Some posh balding middle age bloke or some posh balding old bloke.

HMQ commands great respect even from those who intensely dislike the idea of the monarchy.

I often wonder will the same respect/interest be afforded to Charles? He is getting on, is a bit of a dull individual, from my perspective of course, so I wonder will anyone care anymore when he becomes King.

I hope that the Queen lives on for a while yet, if not to 100, I'd like her to still be alive in mid 2024, when her reign will become longer than Louis XIV of France's was.

[quote Gilead]@Isntisironic1 BasicyIm against a monarchy in principle. It costs a fortune and has no place in modern society. The age old tourism argument isn’t valid, France, Spain, other European countries haven’t suffered from a lack of tourists and neither will we.[/quote]
Spain has a monarchy, as do Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg and Monaco.

I’m not sure that monarchies cost more than an equivalent head of state such as a President and it would cost huge amounts to rewrite all our legislation and customs - so I can’t support a cost argument for abolishing the monarchy. I think all the places listed above are all progressive, modern places to live so I think the stability provided by a monarchy is great.

Charles will not abdicate. I also don’t think he will be a bad king - don’t judge his behaviour from his 20s and 30s on how he will be now or in future. There is always the unfortunate possibility that Charles pre-deceases the Queen, which means it will pass to William, but I think a lot of people would prefer that his kids are a little older before William becomes king.

The queen is very, very old.

Even with the best healthcare, she is still a fantastic age.

Who knows what health issues she may be facing.

It does seem that the public is being prepped for Charles and Camilla. Which is fine - crack on and do it and let the queen have a bit of peace.

Charles would have been scandalous a few decades ago - he was ridiculed in the paper for talking to plants, messy divorce, affair lasting ages, Diana died, he married his mistress...but now Camilla is established and Charles is no longer a figure for pisstaking.

@Comedycook

and the last thing you guys need another 50:50 disruption

If there was a referendum in the UK on the monarchy, it would not be a 50/50 split. The UK public would vote overwhelmingly to keep the royal family

Were the referendum held after the time of the current incumbent, I would like us to be in a position to test this theory.

@MarieIVanArkleStinks I think that the proportion in favour of a republic will increase after the Queen dies, and can see a number of countries where the British monarch is head of state going the way of Barbados and choosing a person living in their country instead.

As opposed to what? Living forever?

@BarrowInFurnessRailwayStation

Charles is so wet. He's not really King material. We'll be entering an era of hopeless politicians and a hopeless head of state.

Well he won't be head of state as long as his mum, you can be sure of that. Let the man do his work, he's waited long enough for it.

Edward VIII had no children at the time if his abdication. He did not (and could not) have removed any legitimate DC who had already been born (eg if he had issue from a previous marriage). It simply disqualified any who could be born after the abdication - either from his marriage to Mrs Simpson or from any subsequent marriage if she predeceased him.

This is true. Also an Act of Parliament is necessary to remove someone who is already in the line of succession from the succession, except for one circumstance: becoming a Roman Catholic. Several people in the Kent line have become ineligible by becoming RC.

At one time, a person in the line of succession could become ineligible by marrying a Roman Catholic. That happened to Prince Michael of Kent. But then the law was changed to eliminate that barrier and he got put back in the line.

I did think the other day that postponing the official jubilee celebration and bank holiday to the summer could be risky. What if she dies before that? Will they do the bank holiday as a national at of mourning or something?

Charles is so wet. He's not really King material. We'll be entering an era of hopeless politicians and a hopeless head of state.

I disagree (regarding Charles). He has done an excellent job as Prince of Wales, with many worthwhile endeavors, and I think he will be a good king.

@balalake

I hope that the Queen lives on for a while yet, if not to 100, I'd like her to still be alive in mid 2024, when her reign will become longer than Louis XIV of France's was.

And Louis XIV became king aged 4 years 8 months - this year wouid have seen the Queens's 90th Jubilee had they had the same staring point!!

I don't mind Charles...he went up in my estimation when he walked Meghan down the aisle. I thought it was such a kind gesture.

What does it mean to "be a good King?" asking those who say this of Charles.

@mixum

What does it mean to "be a good King?" asking those who say this of Charles.

It's because people see him as the bad guy, because of Diana. Whilst he did some terrible things, he has also done some excellent things, and his affairs have no real bearing in his ability to be a king.

I'm surprised this thread is still up. MNHQ usually delete them on the grounds that speculating on an individual's life expectancy isn't on.

[quote RussianSpy101]@Comedycook really? Nobody would admit to voting labour that I know! Too embarrassed.[/quote]
Oh for goodness sake.

I'm not a royalist but imagine being "trained" and waiting for a job for over 70 years. You finally get it in your old age and nobody wants you to have the job anyway!

It's been talked about behind the scenes for years.

Her funeral is obviously fully planned.

Newspapers have the stories ready to report on her death. They have also had the physical paper ready for years so they can print more copies!