Harry to be removed from the line of succession?

[Thinkingabouttherapy]

Apparently this has been discussed at the Balmoral summit: an act of parliament to remove Harry and his heirs from the line of succession as they are no longer U.K. residents or working royals. Makes sense to me - I doubt many people would object. Don’t the Swedish royals have a similar rule? They only keep their titles & place in succession if they live in Sweden? Handy precedent there.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/prince-harrys-position-line-succession-33518669.amp

And in 15 years at least one of them will be having children because it is there duty.

It would not surprise me if it's been discussed, but I'd be very surprised if they did it.

Firstly it sets a precedent that in the future the RF may come to regret.

Secondly, what if there became a reason he needed back in? What's the mechanism to do this? God forbid if anything happened to the Cambridge family en mass would the public really prefer Andrew to Harry?

So unless they can address Andrew at the same time it's a risky strategy. But the more you cull the more precedents you set...and each one undermines the principle of the primary bloodline being the basis for monarchy.

Once you decide to chop and change this you are raising legitimate questions about why not elect a head of state?

You'd also give more oxygen to H&M which given the risk of him ever becoming King is small what's the point? Whatever reasonable reasons there may be we can guess how they would spin it.

I do think however there will be greater emphasis on how security/travel is addressed for the Cambridge family. Which for them is a shame, but something I'm sure H hasn't lost any sleep over being too embroiled in his own pity party.

Good points, @BreadInCaptivity , I'm inclined to think the same.

Wouldn't you have to remove all non-working royals? That's loads of people.

@BreadInCaptivity yep the point isn't Harry it is what happens to his future descendants.

We never know the UK could need his 3x great grandchild to become monarch because the rest don't have heirs, are the wrong religion, are too ill or whatever. it's unlikely but it's happened before in British history.

You would have to go through the entire family tree and remove some of their more distant European cousins -

You have reminded of this list (it is now clearly out of date)
https://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/top%2B100%2Bin%2Bline%2Bto%2Bthe%2Bthrone/3051062.html

I think years ago some reporter went to meet some of them and found that some had "normal" jobs.

I'm sure Harry would fully support this, although it's a slim chance, it must be a bit worrying to think there a possibility you and your wife could end up as king and queen

I think if you have a system that relies on something as arbitrary and yet as clear as a line of succession, you shouldn’t mess about with it. Otherwise you may as well have an elected head of state.

Monarchy has to function according to its own rules or it becomes completely meaningless. However, should (by some tragedy) Harry become next in line, I’d put money on the UK becoming a republic anyway … unless Archie was super suitable to be King and married to Mia Tindall or similar, in which case we could have another Glorious Revolution.

I think that Harry ( and DC) plus Andrew should be removed from the LOS and both H and A should be removed as Counsellors of State .
It seems crazy having a man and his DC who live in the US with no intention of returning to the U.K. in these positions.

Yes but he still has William, George, Charlotte and Louis ahead of them and then their children when they're adults.

I agree the line of succession shouldn’t be meddled with
As long as a Monarch resides in the U.K. that should be the only stipulation
We have had past Monarchs from abroad so can’t change the rules now ( unfortunately)
Plus who knows Archie could grow up to be a lovely person - especially if brought up by a Nanny 👍

The chances of Harry or his children ever reaching the throne is so slight that the process involved in doing this would be a complete waste of time and money.

Well if Prince Michael of Kent had to give up his place because he married a Catholic I don't see why it can't be done. Although that doesn't mean it has to be done or it should be done.

Can't remember how it affected his children. It was a big story at the time, odd as he was doubly damned as marrying a divorcee who was a Catholic although following her divorce she did get her marriage annulled by the church.

He's been reinstated, as have others who married Catholics.

It seems a bit pointless, and a whole load of hassle for no real gain.

I think the Counsellor of State aspect needs looking at, but that is probably about widening the pool of people eligible and then allowing CoSs to be chosen from that pool. So it is possible to bypass the dodgy ones without any drama.

Is it though? People are interested in Harry and Meghan because they genuinely like them, or they hate them but can't look away or just enjoy the gossip. Not because he's currently 5th in line to the throne and only going to drop lower.

It would be a pointless exercise that would mean nothing. Harry and Andrew would for from a 0.0001% chance of either becoming king to a 0% chance.

Yes, they've taken Harry and Andrew off that gig, and given it to Anne and Edward.

That’s because at the time the law was that anyone Catholic or married to a Catholic couldn’t take the throne. The law has changed since then.

It didn’t affect their kids because they were Christened in the Church of England.

It won't happen, no government would wish to be seen to be doing something that would be a gift to those who wish to abolish the monarchy.

In any case given the mess this government has inherited, far more important things to spend parliamentary time.

Really desperate for funds? 😂

He inherited a huge amount from his mother, and the Queen

He will never be desperate for money

I would say that the Monarch, heir and the counsellors of state have to be resident in the UK - they are the ones taking care of the business side of the constitutional monarch.

Royals who work representing the monarch for patronages or foreign trips should also be UK based.

So if at any point Harry was next in line -he’d have to decide then if he wanted to be heir - he’d have to move back to the UK or be removed from succession.

Surely it’s a bit irrelevant given there’s now three others before him (George, Charlotte and Louis). So it’s unlikely he’d get the throne anyway as they’d have to all die, so little point other than to cause tension.

In the US (where there is a fascination with the British Royal Family) and in countries like Colombia (to the government there) it is a huge advantage to them. You don't seriously think Nexflix did a $100 million deal with them just because they liked them.

Well let’s wait and see, shall we? 😌 People probably thought the same about Andrew at one point..

I don't think it'll ever happen. Even if Charles or William really, really, really wanted to remove Harry (or Andrew) from the line they have to think of the wider consequences of such a decision.

Once you start meddling with the line like that, or removing titles because someone steps out of line, then you highlight that it can be done. Even suggest there are times when it should be done

Think back to when Diana died - Charles was one of the most unpopular men in the world. All the calls for William to be put his place etc. imagine the amplification of that if there was a precedent of removing people?

As much as Harry, and Andrew, are an issue for them they know that the next person the media are questioning could be them. Or George, or Charlotte or Louis.

Starting to meddle in things like the line of succession, and removing the automatic right of it, is the start of the end for them all and they won't risk that for themselves or the Wales children.