If Charles and William die before George is 18 who would you want as Regent?

[felulageller]

Kate?
Harry??
Andrew????

What a bunfight!

Harry and Meghan. And hopefully we would have a compassionate monarchy. And they would shut the whole thing down and uk would become a Republic
😏😁

In reality : The regency act states the Regent shall be that person who, excluding any persons disqualified under this section, is next in the line of succession to the Crown
So that would be Harry. I'm guessing he could refuse but that would mean it passing to Andrew which no one would want!

Meagain would be back to the UK faster than concorde if Harry was regent/crowned.

Introduce a 'Revolving Six-month Monarchy' a bit like the Revolving Presidency for the Council of the EU.

Then people who are interested can put their name forward and it will be picked out of a hat (actually most likely a crown) live on TV.

Note: only British Citizens could put their name forward, it would be very awkward if Donald Trump's name came out of the crown, or Kim Jong-un!

Catherine as George is her son, or Edward if it has to be some one in the line of succession.

Looks like it could be Beatrice then.

Anne or the Wessex family.

Why not his mother? She seems very sensible and would always have his best interest at heart.
She’s really taken to her duties and made herself a responsible part of the royal family. I like Anne but it’s unlikely she’d outlive her nephew.

Don’t be a dope, it would obviously be Kate or Edward.

Legally it would be Prince Harry. The regent has to be the next adult in the line of succession.

@Luredbyapomegranate it can’t be Kate she is not in the line of succession

In terms of the regency act, it is the next in succession who are over 18 and not disqualified, it would be Harry, then Andrew then Beatrice. Andrew though is possibly ‘disqualified’ (clearly no one would want him anyway).

I’m wondering if the reigning monarch could pass something and name a successor - so in the case of Williams unexpected death and Charles being the age he is.

Edward would be the obvious choice to me. But actually quite a way down the succession after Beatrice, Eugenie and their daughters.

We wouldn’t get a say, that’s literally the point of hereditary succession. It would be Harry or Andrew if he refused. If not them the next in line would be Beatrice.

If I was William I’d be putting efforts into healing relationships with Harry.

Princess Anne was a Counsellor of state for about 30 years until William reached 21.

Sorry, this was in answer to a pp who said she was excluded.

JKR or Richard Osman.

Why would it not be Anne after Harry?

Because she comes after the male line of succession @Batshitkerazy

Changed now for Princess Charlotte so she comes before Louis, but it wasn’t changed retrospectively

If history is anything to go by it would either be his mother (like in the case of Edward III, although Isabella was a royal in her own right, even if it wasn’t to the English throne) or the next in line to throne (like Edward V). Both of those cases didn’t turn out great though and I think Catherine and Harry wouldn’t inflict that upon themselves.

He would most likely have a regency council, like Edward VI, which would probably contain Catherine, Harry, Edward, Anne and maybe one of the York girls as advisors and to do events upon his behalf.

Anne or Edward I guess.

I don't think Catherine can be regent as she's not of royal blood?

It would be Harry, if the current rules are followed. However, as king, Charles or William could issue Letters Patent and change the rules.

In the first years if Queen Elizabeth's reign, Charles was a still child and the Regency Act was updated in 1953 to allow the Duke of Edinburgh to be Regent if required, instead of Princess Margaret (her sister). However, this may only have been possible because he (Philip) was in the line of succession in his own right as a descendant of Queen Victoria, whereas Kate is not.

I do wonder if they'll pass an act after the coronation to nominate Edward or Beatrice. The legal options aren't great. Similar to nominating Philip for Charles rather than Margaret.

It's almost, almost, like a hereditary system makes no sense.

The Regency Act, passed by George VI and still standing, says "the next adult in the line of succession is regent providing they are a British subject and resident in the United Kingdom."

So Kate doesn't qualify, she's not in the line of succession. Harry has moved to the US and has made it clear he is no longer a working royal. This unfortunately means Andrew is next in line. So if both Charles and William had died I fully believe Harry would return to working royal life and the UK specifically to prevent Andrew taking that role on!

I thought it was Catherine? That's what I read. She's not in the line of succession, but I understood that she could act on George's behalf with the Counsellors of State.
I know that Philip was going to act as Regent for Charles in the event of HMQ's early demise, so that must be the pattern.
Happy to be corrected if that's not the right information!

I think it would be Harry.
And this is the reason he was not allowed to travel on the first plane to Balmoral with William. The press and many posters on here were trying to make out he'd been deliberately excluded and forced to travel later because of the Meghan and Harry situation. In fact it's protocol.
If the plane had gone down, there would have been a problem regarding the line of succession and regents.