Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales

[KindergartenKop]

Why is the DoC taking part in the state opening of Parliament? Was the PoW involved when the Queen opened Parliament?

Do you think there is a plan for them to share more of the top job once the PoW ascends to the throne? Particularly given he's not young himself?

Sorry. You’d already said as much. 🙂

You think?

I’m not particularly a monarchist, but ever since William was instrumental in figuring out the NotW were hacking phones, I’ve felt encouraged that he’s second in line. We could be looking at much worse in a hereditary system.

I get the impression he actually takes advice from his advisers, too, which is hardly revolutionary, but not every royal has the knack.

Yes, he needs to do this or he won't be able to print out his certificate.

It would “help” (depending if your POV, I suppose) if they made it ‘4 CofSs to include the monarch’s spouse’. As it is, if the monarch has a spouse, they get to be a sort of bonus CofS. A fifth wheel. It also means they get no practise at it. Camilla could be ~80 before she is included under current rules.

Maybe you could extend the idea further and say the heir’s spouse (currently Camilla, next Catherine) is also one of the 4 CofSs?

If we had those rules, the 4 CoSs would until recently have been Philip, Charles, Camilla & William, would currently be Charles, Camilla, William & Harry, and would become (on the Queen’s death) Camilla, William, Catherine & Harry. So that at least removes the Andrew problem.

They’re going to have to tinker with the rules in some way or other aren’t they? If they leave it as it is, we will all be holding our collective breath until Louis’s 21st birthday.

Maybe you could extend the idea further and say the heir’s spouse (currently Camilla, next Catherine) is also one of the 4 CofSs?

That's sort of being discussed now, so that Camilla can be appointed. I think it's a good idea when the heir is doing so many of the duties, and definitely needs to happen should he become Regent

It would make sense. If we’ve really moved on from ideas of blue blood and breeding, that would be a reform to prove it.

It would “help” (depending if your POV, I suppose) if they made it ‘4 CofSs to include the monarch’s spouse’

I don't think it would as one of the main things is to do monarchical duties whilst the monarch is overseas. And therefore has spouse with them, so its a de facto reduction to three, so if three are wanted, then that's the number. Spouse is more useful during incapacity

Parliament can change the law concerning number, and who is eligible for the role (and in what priority) as it's not always been this set up. I think it's OK as it is, and the Andrew situation could be solved if he just retired.

I don't think it would as one of the main things is to do monarchical duties whilst the monarch is overseas. And therefore has spouse with them, so its a de facto reduction to three, so if three are wanted, then that's the number. Spouse is more useful during incapacity

Can we not keep that a bit quiet? Any solution that means we’re not facing both Harry and Andrew in the club looks appealing. Besides, Harry is permanently overseas and he’s retained his place so far. When were this rules drawn up? Have they even looked at them since we imported the Hanoverians? Steam ship era? Sailing ship era? “Overseas” isn’t as remote as it used to be.

I’m going to have to go and look this stuff up now, aren’t I? I’m getting sucked in to the implications. Crazy system of governance we have. 😏

Oh we only made this law in 1937, it seems. It’s not even antique! 😁

They really should have changed the succession law for all living heirs, so that Anne would outrank Andrew. I'm sure everyone would agrer that she deserves it (and he doesn't)

The problem I believe is that "all living heirs" would include all kinds of random cousins/aunts/uncles and would have totally messed up things and caused potential for complications. You could argue, that if you're alive when the rule changed, then things would change. But what if you're the son of a woman who is dead? Then, it could be argued that your ranking should go up because hers should have. Arguably, the "living only" would reduce that issue but nonetheless it had potential for huge complications and bitterness.

Also, the bitterness within the live family might have been complex. Would Andrew and Edward have been happy to suddenly be replaced? Of course not. Edward's son would suddenly lose out to his sister. All the others would be shuffled around.

By doing it forward looking only they avoided having to work out those sort of details and avoided any arguments.

Also, the bitterness within the live family might have been complex. Would Andrew and Edward have been happy to suddenly be replaced? Of course not. Edward's son would suddenly lose out to his sister. All the others would be shuffled around

This happened in Sweden - when the current King and his wife had their first child, a daughter Victoria, male primogeniture was in place and so she wasn’t the outright heir. Their next child was a son, Carl Phillip, and so on his birth he became the heir to the throne. But the Swedish government had already set things in motion to change the line of succession to the first born child, of whatever sex, and did so when Carl Phillip was six months’ old or so. His older sister was then promoted to become the Crown Princess instead. The King, unwisely (!), said that he thought this was unfair on his son.

Also, the bitterness within the live family might have been complex. Would Andrew and Edward have been happy to suddenly be replaced? Of course not. Edward's son would suddenly lose out to his sister. All the others would be shuffled around.

I think some individuals would prefer being shuffled down the line to be shuffled up, TBH.

But how far do you go back… someone (many people?) could probably say that if they readjusted the “succession to the crown” positions of all the ancestral women and men in their family heritage back to a certain point then they should be on the throne not Queen Elizabeth II.

as regent for George as I believe Kate can't actually be regent as she's not in the line of succession)

The law could be changed, though, as it was to provide that Philip would be regent if Charles had succeeded as a minor; otherwise, at the time, it would have been Princess Margaret.

As things stand now, if George came to the throne as a minor, Harry would be regent, although he would have to come back to the UK as the law requires that the regent be domiciled in the UK.

This happened in Sweden - when the current King and his wife had their first child, a daughter Victoria, male primogeniture was in place and so she wasn’t the outright heir.

Yes. Victoria wasn't even in the line of succession at birth. Sweden went straight from male only (agnatic primogeniture) to absolute primogeniture, without an intervening stop at male preference primogeniture. Quite a leap.

You would think that no-one would really care about being moved from 13 to 15 in the order of succession. Both positions are equivalent to 'never gonna happen'. I was trying to work out if it had some bearing on the order of precedence as the Royal Family seem to be a bit particular about who curtseys to who or goes into dinner first or whatever it is.

As things stand now, if George came to the throne as a minor, Harry would be regent, although he would have to come back to the UK as the law requires that the regent be domiciled in the UK

And if he didn't come back it would be Andrew. Or if A did the decent thing and declined, then Beatrice

Many years ago, all 4 used to be there. HMQ, Philip, Charles and Diana.