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

[felulageller]

Kate?
Harry??
Andrew????

What a bunfight!

Surely there should always be four suitable Counsellors of State? Given they are non-working, I don't think Harry and Andrew should retain these roles.

Which would make the four Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward and Louise, I think. It doesn't help us much!

Actually, I've contradicted myself, as Beatrice and Eugenie are also non-working and I also think Counsellors need to be over 21 so that rules Louise out.

So on that basis, I think the four would be Edward, Anne and then I'm not sure which other relations?

Counsellors of State don’t have to be working royals. they always work in pairs as well so the experience of being a working royal isn’t always vital.

Louise isn’t old enough. You have to be 21, 18 only applies to the heir

@JustLyra Sorry, I wasn't clear, I know they don't, but I mean I think they should, which would be a neat way of removing anyone who doesn't want to be involved or isn't suitable to be involved.

What are you talking about?
It's normal for people to want to understand how the system works...it's our head of state and if you have a system based on succession then these questions are perfectly reasonable.

If they don't like or want people questioning what happens upon their death then don't make important decisions dependent on their births/deaths 🤷🏽‍♀️

The regent doesn't have to be the next in line for the throne. Henry viii appointed a regency council of 16 men to act as regent for his son Edward vi. The next in line to the throne after Edward were his older sisters Mary and Elizabeth.

So if Charles and William are gone and Harry and Andrew are unsuitable the next 4 above 21 working royals are Edward, Anne, the Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Kent!
I'm guessing the vast majority of the public couldn't pick the last 2 out of a line up!

Not Really. She has been a senior royal for some time now and also 'in training' for being Queen Consort some day.

Definitely Haz

The Regency Act of 1937 would have to be amended (as it was in 1953, but only until Charles was 18) or scrapped for it to be anyone other than the next in line to the throne

in no way qualified for the position
In what way is anyone qualified?

Whoever comes next. That is the point of a hereditary monarchy, you do not get to choose.

@ajandjjmum the last list before Prince Philip died compiled on 1 January 2001, had Prince Philip at number 556 in line to the throne.

I have a recollection reading somewhere he was something like 160th at the time of him marrying Elizabeth

To put that into context when he married Elizabeth Princess Margaret would have been next in line for the throne and now her son David Armstrong-Jones is 24th in line (many others would also have had children since their marriage)

When Anne was born she was 2nd in line to the throne now she is 16th

@Enko 556th 😲

Do you know how far the list goes? I sort of thought it stopped at some point. I've never seen it listed beyond about 20.

Beatrice is a counsellor of state, until George turns 18 or 21 (depending on who is monarch at the time) and displaces her. It's Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew and Beatrice at the moment

Oh- sorry! I just realised what you meant with your posts. So if we're talking suitable working royals, I'm not sure if there are four!

I've definitely seen a longer list than this, but this one goes to 100:

britroyals.com/succession.asp

Theoretically, the line is infinitive but obviously, it stops at some point I would guestimate 1000 but I do not know there.

this list has 100 is kinda interesting to look at for example at 87. HH Prince Sverre Magnus of Norway and underneath him Princess Ingrid. Ingrid will eventually become Queen of Norway (After her father the crown prince) but because the British throne doesn't put females in earlier retrospectively (until George was born) Sverre comes before Ingrid in this line...

So if we're talking suitable working royals, I'm not sure if there are four!

William, Edward, Anne, Duke of Gloucester. You also have the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra as working royals.

A lot of people don’t realise just how many engagements the Queen’s cousins have been doing. As recently as 2019 the Dukes did as many, sometimes more engagements than William and Harry.

Well went googling (Always dangerous) this list has 5000 so my guess at 1000 was very wrong

the list is from before Elizabeth passed.

Thanks! I sort of assumed all the Queens cousins had retired from being working royals.

That was the list I knew I had seen before!

Interestingly, and off topic...
1-1-1-1-4-a-a-a-(a) Descendants of Edward D Windsor

X.
[Issue excluded by the His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act of 1936]

Does this mean, that if Charles were hypothetically to abdicate, he wipes out the rest of his line and the crown goes to Andrew? Or, it just effects him (and any very unlikely future children)? Edward never had children, IIRC.

Edward VIII’s abdication speech abdicated his line.

Charles couldn’t abdicate for people already born. He could abdicate for any future children (extremely unlikely and fair way down anyway, but theoretically possible).

Prince and Princess Michael of Kent have retired. The duke of Kent has cut back massively in recent years.

The Duke of Gloucester is still as active as ever. He does a lot of overseas engagements.

I love stuff like this

what I noticed was that

Konstantinos II K Greece (*1940) m. Anne Marie af Danmark [268, above]

X.
[269-276, above]

So basically because Konstantinos of Greece (exiled now) married a Danish Princess the Danish Royal house is up higher so their issue (the x) goes after their mother's line and not the father's like as it's up higher and obviously they do not go in twice.

So many of them are similar it really shows how many marriages within the royal circles there used to be.