To think prince Charles isn't that bad

[Julia2016]

The princes trust does good work. Yes he didn't treat Diana well but she also manipulated the media and they were an odd match from the start.

Take the other night, why did Charles not meet Obama? Or was this William picking a job he liked doing?? It looks to me like Charles is being sidelined, perhaps there are plans to bypass him in the line of succession. Or maybe the media are not bothered about him.

I kinda like him.. 😌

[chilipepper20]

The Canadian head of state is the Queen of England, opinions appear to vary rather less.

the HoS is the queen, but the de facto head is the GG. There would be no tolerance for the queen butting in if I had to guess (Quebec, in particular, has no particular fondness for the queen). in fact, the entire office is rendered essentially useless because of the whole queen/GG system.

In canada, the GG is appointed by the PM, and is more a position of honour then anything else. The GG steps in rarely (2008 was the last time I think), but mainly followed the advice of constitutional experts.

In any case, both provide models of powerless HoS very similar to ours, but without a hereditary head of state. No need to look to france or the US.

[Ricardian]

what about canada or australia? HoS is not elected but appointed

In the case of Australia, their head of state is either the Governor-General (appointed by the British monarch) or the British monarch, opinions vary. How would we do this?

The Canadian head of state is the Queen of England, opinions appear to vary rather less. I don't know why the two situations aren't the same (given both have Governors-General), but Australia has had a referendum on becoming a republic in living memory (which was lost, interestingly) and Canada hasn't.

Who would you suggest appoints our head of state? Jean-Claude Junkers might be a fun suggestion.

[chilipepper20]

I'm not at all sure that's true. Heads of State with very limited executive power are rare; Germany and Italy have that, but they have a particular constitutional history

what about canada or australia? HoS is not elected but appointed. has essentially no power and otherwise the same bicameral system as ours.

minimal change to our system. less overhead then a queen.

[HarlotBronte]

Where's the evidence that people think they're out of touch because/when they shut up? If that were the case, Charles would be seen as more in touch than his mother. Which section of the public thinks this?

[eaglesreach]

No they arent told they're out of touch if they dont speak out. They have no right to speak out. If they really want to, let them step down from their royal positions and take up politics. People think they are out of touch because of many many things. Using their royal status as a platform to spout off doesnt make them in touch in any way.They dont have to be royal, they do it for the massive rewards, i'm sure if wasnt a good life they wouldnt do it. Princess Margaret once had the opportunity to step down so she could marry the man she supposedly loved....she chose not to, that says it all.

Prince Charles does do a lot of good for young people, but really, he has to do something to stay relevant, he's hardly going to want to sit in the palace all day twiddling his thumbs. He, like the rest of them need to be seen doing some good, they have to justify their massive cost to the taxpayer,but its like a hobby to him, and he takes far more than he gives.

[Ricardian]

Ricardian, you're confusing 'ruler' with 'leader' again.

I'm not the only one, it would appear.

While the presidential post is mainly a ceremonial role, Hofer has threatened to make use of a right to dissolve parliament before the 2018 elections, warning other candidates in a TV debate that “you will be surprised by what can be done [by a president]”.

[corythatwas]

Falling270 Mon 25-Apr-16 18:21:50


"Cory

It seems he can't do right for doing wrong though. He's using his position to attempt to influence and do some good for causes he believes in. If he was "shutting the f**k up" he'd no doubt be criticised for doing nothing as well. Do you think he should just be a silent ambassador for the UK?"

What do you think the role of a titular monarch is? It is to be a silent ambassador: those are the conditions under which this country has agreed to keep the monarchy.

"StillDrSethHazlittMD Tue 26-Apr-16 09:03:25


"It's no win because if they speak out they are told by one section of the public that they should say nothing, while another section of the public think they are out of touch and know nothing because they're told to shut up."

Speaking for myself, it is more when Charles opens his mouth that he makes me think he is out of touch.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what one section of the public thinks: as the heir to the throne he has to stick to the rules that govern that position.

Slightly similar situation: in my native land a few years ago they elected a bishop who does not believe in the incarnation of Christ and says so openly. Some people admire her honesty and feel terribly sorry for the poor woman if she's not even to be allowed to say what she thinks. Me, I could think of a simpler solution- don't be a bishop.

[motherinferior]

Ricardian, you're confusing 'ruler' with 'leader' again.

The simple way for the poor little things to get out of their gilded cage would be to abolish them. Kinder, really. Then they could get on with having proper jobs (if they had the capacity to hold them down, obviously) and, should they please, standing for parliament.

[StillDrSethHazlittMD]

It's no win because if they speak out they are told by one section of the public that they should say nothing, while another section of the public think they are out of touch and know nothing because they're told to shut up.

We pay our politicians and we expect them to have opinions and to speak out on subjects yet most of us think they do a shit job, apparently. We pay our royals and they're allowed to have opinions but we expect them to shut up and most of us think they do a shit job, apparently. I'd still not want their job regardless of their wealth and palaces and servants.

These days, I tend to think the royals actually make a better fist of it than the elected mob. Having seen at first hand what The Prince's Trust does, I'm inclined to the belief that it has done far more for disadvantaged kids than pretty much any government-led initiative over the last 30 years. Duke of Edinburgh's awards are pretty good too.

[eaglesreach]

The whole titular monarchy is, in some ways, a no win situation for them
No its a win win situation, obscene wealth, huge palaces and servants to pander to every need.... with the added bonus in Charlies case of being able to spout off whenever he wants knowing his position is secure. What on earth is a no win situation about that, apart from some justified critisism from people who see the injustice of it all.

[Ricardian]

The "well, any democratically elected leader is better than the royal family" argument is getting a good workout in Austria this week, anyway. A anti-Semitic, gun-carrying right-wing extremist just won the first round of their presidential election, on the back of anti-immigration fervour, and looks more than likely to win the final run-off.

What could possibly go wrong?

[Lightbulbon]

I'm a republican but idratherhave PC who set up the princes trust than the freeloading Cambridgeshire who do f a for charity.

[Falling270]

Very good point Bill.

[BillSykesDog]

Well most people hadn't met Henry VIII or Bloody Mary. But I think they could have made a pretty good summation that they had nob tendencies which have proved to be historically accurate.

[KondoLisaNice]

I don't care, but I don't understand why I have to keep paying for them and I just want my money back.

[YelloRoses]

Well i haven't met him to judge if he is bad or not but I dont really care for him.
Went to a tea party in Buckingham palace before and whilst the queen sat way away from the peasants charlies actually came nearer to engage.

PS Buckingham palace garden is really boring, just grass and trees.

[HarlotBronte]

You're allowed to warm to him failing to stfu if you want to. It's not what a titular monarch is actually supposed to do, though.

[Falling270]

I personally warm to him over the fact he speaks up about issues that he's passionate about. IMO it's better than being inert, but of course I don't expect everyone to agree, I personally think he has good intentions and does a lot of good for the country.

[LarryStylison]

I'm sorry, but there's a lot of naivety on this thread.

[motherinferior]

He appears to have confused being king with being ruler.

That's not how it works. Smile and wave, trouser the large sums of cash, and keep yer gob shut. Your views on architecture, homeopathy and farming are completely irrelevant.

[HarlotBronte]

Why do you think he'd be criticised for doing nothing if he shut the fuck up, when that's pretty much what his mother does and she's widely seen as competent?

[Falling270]

Cory

It seems he can't do right for doing wrong though. He's using his position to attempt to influence and do some good for causes he believes in. If he was "shutting the f**k up" he'd no doubt be criticised for doing nothing as well. Do you think he should just be a silent ambassador for the UK?

[corythatwas]

Falling270 Mon 25-Apr-16 11:01:24


"Cory do you mean the fact he is divorced and has remarried?

Yes the monarchy is constitutional but there are arguments that it also needs to reflect the 21st century and "move with the times". I don't think divorcing and remarrying is reason enough to pressure him to abdicate, when considered on balance with the good work he does for charity."

Absolutely not. Couldn't care less about that.

"Or are you referring to him influencing parliament?"

That's the one. Or as motherinferior put it:

No, the rules that if you are a titular monarch you shut the f*ck up.

[SenecaFalls]

if PC abdicates, unlike just dying, it cuts off all his issue from the succession too.

No , it does not!

In fact, Charles's heirs have rights under the Act of Settlement, as direct descendants of Sophia of Hanover. Another act of parliament would be necessary to remove those rights.

[GoblinLittleOwl]

He was probably rehearsing his lines for Saturday night.
Far more productive than cosying up to Obama; perhaps he can see through him too.