To think Prince George will never be King?

[SerfTerf]

Or if he is, the next generation won't be?

We were talking about it at lunch. I just have the strong feeling now that the monarchy will fizzle out at some point in the next 50-100 years.

It's not an active "want" just a notion.

Two of us talking earlier felt similarly but the other three were aghast.

So, AIBU?

They really are no better than anyone else, the queens children are hardly role models for any of us. I don't get how people hang on to their every word and laugh insanely at anything they say considered remotely funny. It's bizarre.

Anne seems the most sensible

elliestyle - I don't think we should have a monarch as our head of state - however the state does "make" on the deal with the royals - basically we get the income from the Crown estates (which the queen owns), in exchange for the civil list. At the moment, the crown estate makes around £382m a year (which goes to the treasury), but the civil list costs £8m (ish).

We could scrap the civil list but the queen owns the crown estate and the "deal" would end, giving her direct control over the crown estate again. (It is only relatively recently that we've made a profit on this deal, historically it was better for the monarch to sign over the crown estates profits in exchange for a civil list payment, each monarch has to sign it over, and Charles could just refuse, scrap the civil list and keep the money directly).

I don't think the royals will be forced out - Charles might be unpopular now, but there would be an upswing in popularity and sympathy after the queen dies (so long as everyone in "the firm" acts respectfully).

I can see William turning down the job, but not being forced out.

I've no great love for the royals, but I suspect people don't want wholesale change.

However, I think George's chances come down to firstly, how much damage Charles gets to do and secondly, how William plays it.

Charles isnt popular and unlike his mother hasn't grasped that people like the monarchy best when they keep their mouths shut. He has a lot of opinions and has the potential to do a lot of damage to the royals reputation if he tries to foist them on the nation. The saving grace for the institution is that he may not last very long.

William doesn't show much enthusiasm for the role. I suspect he'd prefer to be left alone to enjoy his family and his wealth. And I don't blame him for that.

But he needs to play it carefully. He could, for example, decide to slim down the role and influence of the royal family and importantly, reduce the money they're taking from the public coffers. Which I think would work well for all concerned.

However, if he expects to get away with a lot less work than the queen, but still commanding all the pomp, privileges and cash, then I foresee trouble brewing.

Invisible the queen doesn't own the crown estates, it isn't her private property, how obscene that would be. The civil list was scrapped in 2013 and the queen now gets a sovereign support grant which is a percentage of the profits from the crown estate. The crown estates are accountable to parliament and if the royal family were to cease tomorrow they certainly wouldn't be allowed to keep them, instead they'd rightfully revert back to the UK.

Charles isnt popular and unlike his mother hasn't grasped that people like the monarchy best when they keep their mouths shut. He has a lot of opinions and has the potential to do a lot of damage to the royals reputation if he tries to foist them on the nation. The saving grace for the institution is that he may not last very long

Beautifully put

I think it was the historian A. N. Wilson who wrote that the biggest threat to the continued existence of the House Of Windsor is the continued existence of Prince Charles - a view I find it hard to argue with

I'm also interested in his reported wish to "slim down the monarchy" and the implication that this might be done to bring the monarchy more up to date, save the taxpayer money and so on. Is this really the case, or does he simply wish to avoid attention being diverted to more "popular" members of the family, and to keep more of the available money so he can expand his life of almost edwardian extravagance?

Ah but sconesnotscones with that screen name you can only be Irish and the irish tourists would be the least likely of all tourists to put buckingham pal on their must-do list when they visit london. Even so ive managed to see it twice. I didnt buy a tea towel tho. I should. Actually im gonna get one next time i go for the craic. Christmas presents. The craic unwrapping them on xmas morning!

If Charles wants to save the taxpayer a bit of money he might want to cut down on his extortionate travel costs. I recent trip cost £500.000, a private jet with Camilla cost us a whopping £154K, a royal train trip just for him £46.000 ,
He obviously couldn't give a flying f**k about the hard pressed taxpayer. The sense of entitlement is unbelievable.

Wow! HOW does he spend that much?

It makes me viscerally angry, the thought of people being born into such immense privilege,

See.. I always find this statement and its variations ironic.

I suspect someone living in the 3rd world would feel the same about me and you.

That's not the same at all, Emillee. Unelected, undemocratic head of state we're talking about here.

Not sure I see the difference at all. Both accidents of birth.

I think George will become King but it will probably be after most of us have departed this life. Charles will be a quiet old man as King for a few years (I guess 15 years at most), and there is no great clamour for the alternative of an elected head of state.

I'm no royalist and think that if the will of the people is that they go, it would be no bad thing.
They would have to leave the UK. It would not be possible for them to stay as it would cause huge political and social upheaval. Where would they go, I wonder? Who would want an ex-king/queen and their extended family?

Sooner they're gone the better.

If Charles wants to save the taxpayer a bit of money he might want to cut down on his extortionate travel costs

Or at least stop blathering on and on about how the rest of us everyone should consider the environment. It's not even the waste I mind so much - it's the hypocrisy

I'm always reminded of Edward's wedding, where many royals were transported by minibus (it was said the King of Jordan loved his very first bus trip ). If ever there was a time to showcase Charles's green credentials that was surely it, but no ... ickle preshus had to have a Roller

The biggest problem with the Royal Family at present is, unfortunately, the dear Queen's four children (possibly Anne excepted). Charles has no charm, seems totally out of touch and is (and always has been) unpopular (unlike his two lovely boys). Andrew is horrendous, Edward, well the less said about him the better and Anne, hmmm....she's ok but can't really take to her.

Camilla, on the other hand (and I say this as a huge Diana fan but also saw her for what she was), is great. I met her three years ago at a 'do', funny, clever and very fond of William and Harry.

not sure i see the difference at all, both accidents of birth
Apart from the immense wealth, privilege, palaces, servants all provided by the taxpayer for one family......no no different at all. Just because both are accidents of birth doesn't make it right. The dictator who rules North Korea is an accident of birth, as was Sadam Hussein, Colonel Gaddaffi........All equally wrong in different ways.

Diana wanted out, Harry has said he wanted out, William looks bored rigid, they just want the taxpayers' money for doing nothing. Can't see what the bunch of hypocrites are even for.

They can get out if they want. Abdicate and give up the money. But you can't have the money and not do anything for it.

And nobody would care if Harry stopped doing any royal duties and in return took no money at all. And instead earned his living.

I agree Smudge they really do need a reality check. William especially often seems resentful and irritated at having to do public duties, a classic case of wanting his cake and eating it. He has to know that all that immense privilege and lifestyle comes at a comparatively small price.

Tourism - blah blah ..,
Been to Winter Palace. Versailles and now visiting umpteen German Palaces - no kings or queens, but still bringing in millions of tourist dollars. Even the pyramids bring in dollars and when did you last see a pharaoh?
The monarchy is an unnecessary extravagance - get a grip and get rid