Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To believe the Queen shouldn't be pushing her son forward?

56 replies

counterpoint · 19/04/2018 20:03

I know this is mumsnet and the Queen is a mum and who of us have not at one time or another pushed our little darlings forward to prime position in any school/other activity?

But, this is the British Commonwealth we are talking about. A legacy from the British Empire. An attempt to equalize the status of those countries we pillaged, divided and even destroyed (?).

So, am I being unreasonable to think the Queen has gone too far to put forward Charles to take her place in this non-hereditary position of Head of the Commonwealth when so many more deserving, struggling countries have talent to help make a real difference going forward?

OP posts:
ForalltheSaints · 19/04/2018 21:02

I would not have chosen Charles myself, but don't blame her at all. If it helps keep the Commonwealth, at least as a cultural and sporting entity, then so much the better.

WickedGoodDoge · 19/04/2018 21:03

I’d kind of assumed he automatically got it!

lalalalyra · 19/04/2018 21:05

Even thought it wasn't automatic that he was her recommendation there was no way she was ever going to say anyone other than him - it would have been the end of the monarchy the second she did because if he wasn't fit/right for being Head of the Commonwealth then why would he be right/fit for being Head of State.

DropItLikeASquat · 19/04/2018 21:05

As much as Charles is not adored by many, he is a fantastic advocate for the welfare and stability of a Provence or country. He has been brought up from a very tiny age to be in this role and is the right man for the job.

mathanxiety · 19/04/2018 21:06

Without Charles as it’s head it would either fall into insignificance; or the countries would get even worse with their abuses against human rights.

The idea that the Commonwealth provides some sort of buffer against human rights abuses must be a joke, surely?

peacheachpearplum · 19/04/2018 21:07

She's entitled to put him forward if she thinks he's a good choice. I think he'd probably be a good choice.

Glumglowworm · 19/04/2018 21:09

I think Charles as the head makes sense. He will be king, assuming he outlives his mother. The British monarch has been head of the commonwealth for most if not all of its existence.

I think it’s arguably a good thing to have the head of the commonwealth not be a politician.

I’m not a particular fan of prince Charles but he’s spent his entire life preparing to serve and he’s done a lot for many charities. I think he takes the role increadibly seriously.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 19/04/2018 21:10

Do we actually know how many of the Commonwealth nations would even want Charles? Apologies for the Mail link, but I remember this being reported all too well: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-496366/Commonwealth-chiefs-tired-dine-Charles.html

And why would the Queen bother to express this wish if she was already confident they'd be keen to have him?

jasjas1973 · 19/04/2018 21:12

I ve always believed that she is'nt in any way political and she is a figure head only, hence why she rubber stamps some pretty awful laws that have come her way..... but oh wait! when it comes to her own son, she then does became political and has views on matters and is'nt afraid to voice them.

The next head of the Commonwealth is fcuk all to do with her, she is'nt elected, what next? voicing her opinions on the next PM ?

RedDwarves · 19/04/2018 21:14

The Commonwealth has done very little to address the pervasively negative impact of colonisation, and I say that as someone who lives in a country which was colonised, in which the native people were displaced, determined to be non-people, had their children forcibly removed from them, and much more. The Commonwealth has done nowt for them.

Personally, I hope we become a republic after the Queen dies.

expatinscotland · 19/04/2018 21:18

I'd rather we dispensed with this outdated crap that is monarchy altogether.

Whisperquietly · 19/04/2018 21:21

I honestly think no one really cares. The Commonwealth is an irrelevance no matter what anyone says. The whole thing is a total embarrassment at the moment when we've done our best to give their members the heave ho.

Tell that to the 52 member states or, for e.g. Mozambique and Rwanda, who applied and were accepted as members in the last 20 years. Clearly these countries believe that there are advantages to being members...

Efrig · 19/04/2018 21:29

He’s unemployed though isn’t he? He needs something to do.

Landed · 19/04/2018 21:44

He needs to be seen to be undertaking a responsible role. After all the younger ones look as if they are trying. He and Camilla just look tired.

Cantusethatname · 19/04/2018 22:03

He's an embarrassment.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 19/04/2018 22:12

He and Camilla just look tired

I believe there are any number of properties - many of them thankfully out of sight - they could retire to if they wished

Clearly these countries believe that there are advantages to being members

Perhaps it's something to do with preferential treatment when it comes to aid and budget deficits?

MorningsEleven · 19/04/2018 22:17

@KindergartenKop

Well I'm putting DS's name in the hat. He loves a slap up dinner (Beano style soup, cottage pue, crumble with custard), bit of dancing and blethering. And he is used to having his every desire catered for.

Original poster
counterpoint · 19/04/2018 22:26

Maybe it's time the commonwealth countries were freed completely from this enforced clique built on slavery and exploitation?

OP posts:
ScreamingValenta · 20/04/2018 17:04

It's now been announced that Charles will be the next head, so the Queen got her wish.

LakieLady · 20/04/2018 17:15

I think the post should be advertised and recruitment conducted in accordance with the principle of equality of opportunity.

Now, how do I get to be secretary-general of the UN?

MrsJayy · 20/04/2018 17:23

Lets face it her Majesty is an elderly lady she needs to put these things in place and Charles is her option So there he is. Personally I think Harry would be better but hey ho.

Original poster
counterpoint · 20/04/2018 18:38

I agree, the natural choice would have been Harry if she wanted to more fairly distribute the roles down her line.

On that note, giving this role to Charles may be as compensation for skipping him (and his divorcee of a wife) by passing the Crown on to William. Makes sense, I guess.

OP posts:
peacheachpearplum · 20/04/2018 18:42

Either we have a hereditary monarchy or we don't so if we don't get Charles we should end the whole thing (unless he dies first of course, then it is William.)

ScreamingValenta · 20/04/2018 18:47

AFAIK the idea of the Queen deciding the crown should 'skip' Charles isn't constitutionally an option. It isn't her choice which of her descendants inherits. Charles would have to take the decision to abdicate.

For what it's worth, as a Republican, I don't see Charles as a worse choice of king than William, if we must have a king at all.

TabbyMack · 20/04/2018 18:50

On that note, giving this role to Charles may be as compensation for skipping him (and his divorcee of a wife) by passing the Crown on to William

For a start, Harry is about to have a “divorcee of a wife” so I have no idea what point you are trying to make with that. Not to mention, Charles is a divorcee too.

But there is zero chance of the Queen passing on the crown to William. She wouldn’t be able to even if that’s what she wanted since we have a HEREDITARY monarchy.