The Duke of York wants his daughters to be full time Royals?

[MidnightVelvetthe7th]

www.express.co.uk/news/royal/724136/prince-andrew-requests-princesses-beatrice-eugenie-kensington-prince-charles-queen-william

This is a Sunday Express link, not a Fail one.

So Andrew wants both of his daughters to have full time royal roles funded by the public & have larger apartments at Kensington Palace. Given that the only time I ever see them in the news is for dreadful outfits & holidays, to me they are embarrassing & a bit cringy.

Andrew is complaining that they are overshadowed by William, Catherine & Harry. But if you believe & support a system of privilege by birth such as the monarchy, then it stands to reason that the direct heirs are more important than the rest.

Does Andrew have a point & IABU?!

At least his older sister had the decency not to give her children titles and to make them earn a living. Shameful.

And I think her children have a much better life as a result, Ann is very smart.

The whole bowing thing changed as well. Previously (ie before Camilla) they stayed in their 'rank' the whole time.

Rumour was that Anne wasn't happy at bowing/curtsying to Camilla. So the Queen, as she can if she wants, changed the order at court which put the four blood princesses (Alexandra, Anne, Beatrice and Eugene) before the non-blood princesses.

Which probably didn't help Andrew's sense of entitlement any.

I'd bet cash that Charles will change that when he gets on the throne to prevent Camilla or Catherine having to curtsy to the others.

mathanxiety royals marrying Catholics no longer renounce their place in the line of succession since the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013. They still do if they convert to Catholicism, however.

The same law overturns male primogeniture, so that if Prince George had been a girl his place in the line of succession would have been guaranteed. It means that Charlotte won't lose her place if the Cambridges have another boy, either. Presumably she'll eventually be the Princess Royal.

I find it utterly ridiculous that any of them bow to each other other than to HM.

Unaccountably enough Andrew is reputed to be HM's favourite son.

Maybe he is less arse-like in the presence.

In order to set yourself up as an example, you have to assume that the people to whom you are providing this example are actually in need of it. It's an incredibly arrogant and disrespectful belief

I totally agree, but then "arrogant and disrespectful" describes their attitude very well, despite their pretence to the contrary

I'd bet cash that Charles will ... prevent Camilla or Catherine having to curtsy to the others

You're probably right, but I imagine he'll be very keen to see that the bowing and scraping to Camilla is properly in place - a sickening thought in itself

And I think her children have a much better life as a result, Ann is very smart.

I agree.

Peter especially, seems to lead a very 'normal' life. Even though he is the Queens oldest GC.

Zara married out of 'royal circles' and having met Mike Tindall numerous times both pre and post marriage, 'becoming royalty' hasn't changed him in the slightest.

Unaccountably enough Andrew is reputed to be HM's favourite son.

Mothers of sons eh? Blind as ever

They all plan their own funerals, as we do. The Queen Mother was a Queen. That is why she had a state funeral. All she would have planned would have been who was invited (generally not specifically), the music and which readings etc. It was state funeral with her crown on the coffin as I recall.

Zara is lovely. And rumour has it so is Anne

Andrew is a complete and utter twat. I've always thought that and I'm old

This story did it for me.... I bet some of the royals are really embarrased with the pair of them, Andrew & Sarah, both as bad as each other in my book.

"Unaccountably enough Andrew is reputed to be HM's favourite son."

Because he's most like his dad?

"And I think her children have a much better life as a result, Ann is very smart."

I wonder also how much lack of interest in them has also played a part?

Margaret's kids weren't followed that relentlessly, were they?

Media -wise it's always been William & Harry, hasn't it?

Actually, as a Queen Dowager (and therefore former queen consort) the Queen Mother wasn't eligible for a state funeral. She had a public ceremonial funeral, same as Diana and Margaret Thatcher. The pomp and ceremony is virtually indistinguishable, mind you.

State funerals are usually reserved for sovereigns. The last one was for Winston Churchill in the 60s, who qualified via an act of parliament in recognition of his exceptional public service in leading the country during WWII. We won't see another one until QEII dies.

I don't see why he wouldn't ask for this. It's clear the British public have a huge tolerance for giving Royals endless cash for very little in return. We have almost no tests for how much bang we get for our buck, which leaves us open to constant claims of "it's a good investments" (meanwhile, the NHS is required to perform endless studies on efficiency...).

What's two more?

Perhaps if this is what he wanted for them he should have already been steering them in that direction?

Peter Phillips organised the street party for the Queen's 90th Birthday on Pall Mall.

It was organised by firm Sports and Entertainment Limited, who he is the London director of.

Although it was a not-for-profit event, Peter's business was paid an undisclosed fee from the money raised by ticket sales to charities and members of the public.

He also sold his wedding photos for £500k to Hello invoking the wrath of his family as they all featured in them. He didnt care as long as he got paid for them.

Normal life for Peter Phillips my arse. They all cash in on their status.

They all cash in on their status.

As normal as a 'royal' can be.

He is the Queens oldest GC. He can't change that!

He is the Queens oldest GC. He can't change that!

He can change his attitude though.

They all can.

Profiteering from a not for profit event and most people dont have £500k for a house to live in.

But he charge that for his wedding pictures.

The longer people excuse their behaviour on account of being Royalty the longer they will continue to pull these stunts.

So Kate has to curtsey to Beatrice and Eugenie? I find that hard to imagine. It's all like a bad novel.

Kate will in time be required to curtsy to her own children. Her parents already "have" to, I would imagine that they never actually have though.

I don't get why so many are surprised that Beatrice and Eugenie have precedence over Kate - she's not in line for the throne at all, why would it be otherwise?

I am not a royalist so I don't really see why any of them should be there but I am bit put off by the number of people who seem to think that Beatrice and Eugenie aren't suitable because they're not as thin/stylish as Kate.

Does Prince Philip bow to Charles et al?

I don't know if he does currently as I think he may still outrank him. If the Queen predeceases him he will be obliged to.

There's a new Netflix show about them (Queen/Phil) and a whole scene based around him not wanting to bow to his wife.

Is anyone aware that the royals were recently granted a total exemption from "freedom of information". No other public body has this right. It means they can use this "secrecy" for massive personal advantage. Spending public money in secret without being held to account and for their own personal gain is one advantage.

Another is the fact that the queen and Charles can have direct access to the PM with the power to DEMAND laws are changed to suit them. All in secret.

Philip doesn't bow to anyone other than the Queen. The Queen set the precedence to make sure he was the senior male once her father was no longer around.

I seriously doubt he ever bows to her in private (as he should going by their rules).

If the Queen dies first then he'll have to bow to Charles, as he had to bow to King George VI