Queen and Prince Charles

[Fatnorthernwoman]

The Queen is 94 Prince Charles is 71 if the country goes into lock down with over 70s self isolating who is in charge of the country? Can the Queen work remotely from one of her homes or is it Prince William who will need to do any royal meet and greet

The news reported that although she would not be going out on any state visits ,She would still be having a weekly meeting with BoJo . In any case she doesnt really have a role in running the country in modern times anyway !

My fear is that HM and Charles would (very sadly) get the virus and not survive. William would then be on the throne, and the next adult in line (until George, Charlotte and Louis come of age) would be - Harry!

I want HM and C & C to shut themselves away until this is all over.

Royal assent isn't a formality it is required by law. No assent no new laws
The actual giving of Royal assent is a formality. Once a bill is passed by both houses of Parluament The Queen will give Royal Assent. She cannot in all reality refuse. How do you think we banned foxhunting? I hardly think the Royals were in favour of that one! The best thing the Royals can do is stay holed up so people dont come out to see them. The biggest danger they face is that people see that they are glorified wavers.

The biggest risk that the Queen poses at the moment is that she dies (of anything) and people gather for her funeral

Goodness, hadn’t thought of that. That would be disastrous. I love the queen anyway, I hope they keep her far away from it all.

I cant believe this OP.
The Queen does not run anything, and everything she does do is a formality.

She can appoint ministers, but so can the Prime Minister so if the royals all died that wouldn't stop.

She can issue Royal Pardons to criminals, but she doesnt really do that.

She does need to sign laws in order for them to come into effect, however it's not an issue. The last time a monarch refused to sign a law was in 1708. The royals dont use their influence on that; they just sign what they're given.

She appoints archbishops, but she's just told who to appoint. She doesnt decide.

She can declare war, but needs government approval. She never has.
She can decide dissolve parliament and force new elections. She never has.
She technically commands the armed forces but in reality, she doesnt do anything. If the whole line of succession died, armed forces would carry on. She can also name someone else the commander-in-chief if she is very very I'll, so she would likely name the PM.

She also bestows honours. Not really vital to the running of the country.

Everything she does is just.... for show. The few powers she does have dont actually affect the running of the country because she doesnt use them. No Royal would now. Unless the government turned all Nazi or something.

I really don't know that much about what the Queen actually does apart from having posh dinners with other supposedly important people and opening things like parliament.
I realise is not like in the past at when the Kings could do what they wanted.
I suppose all the entertaining visitors gives the politicians more time to get on with stuff

This has to be a wind up ? Nobody can be this thick or ill informed.

Thanks for informing me about royal family. I didn't grow up in UK so all I really know is from the newspapers and TV. I saw all the fuss about Harry and Meghan leaving the firm and thought it was actually a job.
At least with a leader who is elected then you have a chance to change them.

@ajandjjmum
George doesnt need to come of age. He is before Harry. George would be king. A Prince Regent would be named to rule in his place until he turns 18, but that wouldn't need to be Harry.

The Queen is not in charge of the country!

The queen may be a figure head but she is the one person who can if necessary stop Boris so in reality she is in charge
Do people actually think that a 95 year old woman with limited education and who gained her position through being born and a twist of fate has power over an elected Parliament? We live in a Parliamentary democracy, not a presidential democracy. So 'stopping Boris' would be 'Stopping Parliament, elected by the People'. And they are OK with that? Just blithely taking democracy for granted?

The Queen is an unnecessary throw back from a time when we knew no better. I don’t believe all the “good for tourists” crap either. The country would be better off without them.

The biggest risk that the Queen poses at the moment is that she dies (of anything) and people gather for her funeral

This is the doomsday scenario

@moondance19
The figures are actually available quite readily. On balance, the Royal family generate more for the economy than they cost

Then there is also the benefits from their diplomatic trips. They do a great deal to help smooth relations between us and other countries. As stupid as it may sound, a visit from the Royals does boost our popularity with other countries and helps during trade talks or other alliances. Maybe wont be so in a couple generations, but everyone loves the Queen so she helps

As others have said, the queen is a figurehead only. She doesn’t have power.

Royal assent can be granted on the Queen’s behalf by the Royal Commissioners (under instruction from the Queen).

It is absolutely a formality. It hasn’t been withheld since 1707.

The Parliament website states
“ Does the Queen give Royal Assent in person?
The Queen can give Royal Assent in person but this has not happened since 1854. The Queen's agreement to give her assent to a Bill is a formality.”

The royals always sod off to hole up out of the way when there's a plague.

She can hop on a video conference call like everyone else who works from home.

She can get her hair done nicely and pop on an ironed blouse, then wear her PJs and slippers on her bottom half, like everyone else who WFH. Sorted.

I must say, I never thought about that. It would certainly be a very muted end with none of the expected pressure to change the system once the Queen had died. And no issue about whether Camilla would be Queen or not in name. Some ardent royalists might well be okay with William becoming King now.

To answer the question about what would happen if Willian were also to die before George becomes an adult. (a very unlikely scenario, them all dying). It wouldn't be Harry now he's given up his HTH title, it probably wouldn't be him anyway. Kate would be the Queen Mother (unless she dies too) so it would most likely be her, I think, which would be quite acceptable, all she'd be doing is having weekly chats with BoJo and signing papers, and appearing in public once COVID-19 has passed.

I think it's very unlikely they'll all die, though.

The monarch reigns but does not rule. But she still has a full working day. She must sign her official papers and unlike her uncle David she likes to read them all first.

The weekly audience with her PM (poor girl) where she may 'advise, encourage and warn' does not need to be done in person.

The ribbons can wait.

The Queen has huge symbolic importance. I think some people are unaware of how much her death would rock the country. SHe's just always been there. Even the fact we won't be seeing as much of her in the months to come is a big change. People like my elderly mother find seeing her on the TV very reassuring. I hope they find some way of filming her from time to time as she stays in isolation.

Isolation is not so bad when you have footmen and the Household Division.

At least with a leader who is elected then you have a chance to change them.

This sounds great until you realise we could end up with someone like Trump.

DramaDrama Actually I agree. Her father George VI played a huge role in the World War II in keeping people's spirits up with his radio speeches. Surely the Queen could record more speeches; why does this only have to happen on Christmas Day? I'd much prefer listening to her than BoJo any day!

And maybe Charles could play a part here too? He hasn't been afraid to speak out on environmental issues in the past, so maybe this would be the time for another contribution?

Yes, get them on tv, showing happy isolation!

It wouldn't be Harry now he's given up his HTH title, it probably wouldn't be him anyway. Kate would be the Queen Mother (unless she dies too) so it would most likely be her, I think, which would be quite acceptable, all she'd be doing is having weekly chats with BoJo and signing papers, and appearing in public once COVID-19 has passed.

At the moment it would be Harry. Not using his HRH doesn't change his place in the line of succession.
If George was to become King as a minor then without the regency act being amended the Regent would be Harry, as he is the next in line to the throne who is over 21.

Kate would only be the Queen Mother if William becomes King and she Queen first. Unless a special regency act is made, as was the case when Prince Philip was put in as potential regent rather than Princess Margaret, Kate will not be regent.