Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Thread gallery
5
CrimsonStoat · 26/10/2025 20:13

Isn't he much more likely (if abdication is ever likely) to go to Highgrove?

Hanschristiananderson · 26/10/2025 20:14

Akiwimum2 · 26/10/2025 20:11

Has anyone considered maybe Charles has a plan he and Camilla will live at RL together in retirement? I agree Camilla would not like to live there on her own as a widow. Charles is quite old, receiving weekly cancer treatment, maybe he wants to hand over his reign before his death and a base in London? Charles likes grand large properties and had a close relationship with his grandmother who lived at RL for most of his life so he will have a close attachment to the home and fond memories. It would be a sensible place if he was to retire early. The gossip about plans for Camilla to move to RL started from Prince Andrew just after QE's death as a smear campaign. I can't see Camilla wanting to live in a huge property with such a reputation and grandeur on her own. What are your thoughts on RL being an early retirement home plan? It's also a shame William and Catherine couldn't move into the RL property when they moved to Windsor with 3 young children instead of Andrew and Fergie staying put, the property has a swimming pool, special historic play house and tennis court, Williams children should have had access to use these child friendly attributes instead of letting it fall in disrepair and no one using them besides the occasional visits from his adult children who only had toddlers at that time.

Show quote history

I wondered if it’s being kept for Harry to be honest.

bluegreygreen · 26/10/2025 20:16

Would be surprised if he abdicated - he waited long enough for the job - but as you say @CrimsonStoat he still has his lease on Highgrove which he clearly loves

Original poster
ShenandoahRiver · 26/10/2025 20:29

Given how tainted RL must seem to them now I’d imagine it will remain empty for years once Andrew leaves.

OP posts:
MrsLeonFarrell · 26/10/2025 20:31

I really doubt Charles will abdicate. I also doubt that any senior royal would want to live in Royal Lodge in the medium future.

wordler · 26/10/2025 20:38

Camilla has her own property in the country, and I think as a widow and former Queen she would be allowed to stay in Clarence House as a London base. I think Highgrove will be turned into a commercial enterprise connected to the gardens and retail products.

I think they'll refurbish Royal Lodge and then rent it out with a reduced grounds footprint.

I imagine Sophie and Edward will downsize to one of the smaller properties in Windsor once their kids both out of the house. It's got to be expensive running that huge home.

wordler · 26/10/2025 20:55

thedramaQueen · 24/10/2025 17:03

Oh I agree with you on there being no system in the world that is truly a meritocracy.

But I would argue that the symbolism of having a RF makes trying to create a meritocracy impossible - as it is at odds with it. Removing the RF would be a step in the right direction, but it certainly would not result in a meritocracy on it's own.

I think the events that have unfolded have resulted in many people questioning the existence the RF in modern day UK, therefore, what we are seeing is damage limitation from 'the Firm' to try and prevent this wider discussion.

Show quote history

I strongly feel the 'damage limitation' is mainly coming from a lot of non-royal people with influence on the government who have the records of who knew what and when as far as Andrew's shady trade envoy dealings, and his terrible behaviour connected to Epstein.

There's no way he managed to do all the shady trade stuff without being seriously enabled by government ministers and senior civil servants who all had oversight on what was going on, including intelligence briefings on all the potential 'spies' he was meeting with.

His numerous encounters and visits with Epstein were also not done without the UK security services knowledge, and it would definitely been discussed by senior politicians.

Now, whether they are covering their backs because simply covering up Andrew's misdeeds is bad enough, or whether there were many other powerful men who were in as deep as Andrew is another element.

And that's just the UK side of things, the cover-up in the USA is even worse.

thedramaQueen · 26/10/2025 21:07

wordler · 26/10/2025 20:55

I strongly feel the 'damage limitation' is mainly coming from a lot of non-royal people with influence on the government who have the records of who knew what and when as far as Andrew's shady trade envoy dealings, and his terrible behaviour connected to Epstein.

There's no way he managed to do all the shady trade stuff without being seriously enabled by government ministers and senior civil servants who all had oversight on what was going on, including intelligence briefings on all the potential 'spies' he was meeting with.

His numerous encounters and visits with Epstein were also not done without the UK security services knowledge, and it would definitely been discussed by senior politicians.

Now, whether they are covering their backs because simply covering up Andrew's misdeeds is bad enough, or whether there were many other powerful men who were in as deep as Andrew is another element.

And that's just the UK side of things, the cover-up in the USA is even worse.

Show quote history

You could be right. However, questions are now being asked about the role of the RF in modern day UK.

We can ultimately get rid of corrupt government and politicians but that can’t be said of the RF.. and there lies the problem.

I also don’t think we’ll find out the full story until Trump has gone or 50 years from now when the powerful people involved are all dead.

CathyorClaire · 26/10/2025 21:25

ShenandoahRiver · 26/10/2025 20:29

Given how tainted RL must seem to them now I’d imagine it will remain empty for years once Andrew leaves.

I'm concerned about who will pay for remedying the alleged current dilapidation and then ongoing maintenance given I think A has quite deliberately dodged any obligations in this respect.

Again I don't think I need three guesses..

jumpingthehighjump · 26/10/2025 21:35

wordler · 26/10/2025 20:38

Camilla has her own property in the country, and I think as a widow and former Queen she would be allowed to stay in Clarence House as a London base. I think Highgrove will be turned into a commercial enterprise connected to the gardens and retail products.

I think they'll refurbish Royal Lodge and then rent it out with a reduced grounds footprint.

I imagine Sophie and Edward will downsize to one of the smaller properties in Windsor once their kids both out of the house. It's got to be expensive running that huge home.

Umm I don't think so for some of that.
Sorry, don't want to be rude but Highgrove would never ever be turned into a commercial enterprise! If you knew the area you'd know why
And Camilla will never leave Wiltshire!

wordler · 26/10/2025 21:59

jumpingthehighjump · 26/10/2025 21:35

Umm I don't think so for some of that.
Sorry, don't want to be rude but Highgrove would never ever be turned into a commercial enterprise! If you knew the area you'd know why
And Camilla will never leave Wiltshire!

Show quote history

I mean commercial in that it will be an extension of the current commercial enterprise there - it won't be a family home as it is now but a year-round centre for events and workshops etc. Traditional crafts, organic gardening etc. So what it does now, but just more of it, and more use of the whole house.

HilaryThorpe · 27/10/2025 04:37

I agree that Royal Lodge is likely to get the extensive refurbishment needed and then be rented out. I would have thought that Camilla would want to stay in Ray Mill as her country home and continue to spend time with there her children and grandchildren, as she does now.
i don't see why William and Catherine would soon be moving into their "forever home" if they didn't plan to stay there.
i think there will be a lot of downsizing and ongoing work to make the estates more eco friendly.

HilaryThorpe · 27/10/2025 04:39

...there with

Rumpoleoftheballet · 27/10/2025 05:50

Friendlygingercat · 23/10/2025 16:48

There is a trend in some of the European monarchies to restrict royal titles and privilages to only direct heirs. For example In late 2022, Queen Margrethe II of Denmark made the controversial decision to strip four of her grandchildren—children of her younger son, Prince Joachim—of their royal titles. Most of the Euopean monarchies no longer have an expensive coronation - simply an oath taken before the parliament to uphold the constitution. I think this is the kind of direction William may go in.

I don’t believe for one moment that William will do that and until it happens, I’d take everything he says with a pinch of salt. He apparently has a great PR team behind him, as does each faction of the family. KC was meant to have a slimmed down coronation but there was no evidence of that.

Rumpoleoftheballet · 27/10/2025 05:52

The royal family all knew what Andy was doing, probably way before members of the public, and chose to do nothing publicly then. Why anybody thinks they’d care any more now always baffles me.

HilaryThorpe · 27/10/2025 06:23

Rumpoleoftheballet · 27/10/2025 05:50

I don’t believe for one moment that William will do that and until it happens, I’d take everything he says with a pinch of salt. He apparently has a great PR team behind him, as does each faction of the family. KC was meant to have a slimmed down coronation but there was no evidence of that.

Show quote history

As someone who remembers the 1953 Coronation, I would say it was definitely slimmed down this time.

jumpingthehighjump · 27/10/2025 06:26

HilaryThorpe · 27/10/2025 06:23

As someone who remembers the 1953 Coronation, I would say it was definitely slimmed down this time.

Show quote history

Not through choice but because of Health and Safety. Wooden tiers were thought not to be a good idea to seat Very Important People on

HilaryThorpe · 27/10/2025 06:38

Eight thousand people down to two thousand. Ceremony shorter, fewer people with historic roles and weird titles. Simpler robes and tiaras.
I don't know if you have watched all the film or TV coverage of the 1953 one, but it was much grander and more formal and went on for hours.
We had loads of neighbours in watching it on our 9 inch Pye television. 😂

NOTANUM · 27/10/2025 07:02

Only 3 people have been held accountable for their roles in the Epstein scandal - all of them British: Andrew, Peter Mandelson, Ghirlaine Maxwell.

I’d argue our sense of right and wrong is superior to the US where the perpetrators have gone entirely unchecked (bar GM, but pardon probably incoming).

MrsLeonFarrell · 27/10/2025 07:20

wordler · 26/10/2025 20:38

Camilla has her own property in the country, and I think as a widow and former Queen she would be allowed to stay in Clarence House as a London base. I think Highgrove will be turned into a commercial enterprise connected to the gardens and retail products.

I think they'll refurbish Royal Lodge and then rent it out with a reduced grounds footprint.

I imagine Sophie and Edward will downsize to one of the smaller properties in Windsor once their kids both out of the house. It's got to be expensive running that huge home.

I could be wrong but i seem to remember reading that Edward and Sophie only live in one wing of their house. Which is still large but not as large as the whole thing.

I think you are correct that they will downsize. The late Queen gave all her children enormous houses that are really incompatible with modern life and standards. It's another example of the 1950s standards which got stuck because she reigned such a long time.

mustytrusty · 27/10/2025 07:41

The only people who need to be dealing with it are the police. If my uncle was a pedal who’d paid off victims I wouldn’t have the luxury of being the one to ‘deal with it’. Neither should they.

Alignedplanks98 · 27/10/2025 07:51

RainbowBagels · 23/10/2025 22:43

Of course the Royals want Parliament to focus on anything apart from them! Im glad more people are ignoring them. Of course there are important things to debate, but that also includes why we have a Parliament colluding with the Royal Family to keep their dealings secret from the public.

Show quote history

Absolutely this!

Everyone keeps saying “this is for the RF to sort out” but I believe they have proved themselves time and time again to be unsuitable to manage their own financial affairs!

There is far too much creative accounting and murkiness surrounding what is public and what is private money.

Andrew’s financial activities need thoroughly investigating for sure, and what his lenders got for their money.

But also the wider set up needs to be far more transparent! For example, there was all of that dodgy business surrounding Fawcett and the fencing of gifts, and the bags of cash and questions surrounding cash for citizenship or access.

And I think there is a big question mark over how much money is paid to them for “expenses” for charitable visits because they don’t all happen free of charge!

I believe it’s a possibility that the RF covered up Andrew’s activities because what he was doing was on the extreme end of how they all operate and he was just more blatant and thick about covering it up!

Even if I am wrong, we shouldn’t in this day and age have any secrecy surrounding the finances of our head of state. There should not be any reason why there isn’t total
transparency imho.

Alignedplanks98 · 27/10/2025 07:57

MrsLeonFarrell · 27/10/2025 07:20

I could be wrong but i seem to remember reading that Edward and Sophie only live in one wing of their house. Which is still large but not as large as the whole thing.

I think you are correct that they will downsize. The late Queen gave all her children enormous houses that are really incompatible with modern life and standards. It's another example of the 1950s standards which got stuck because she reigned such a long time.

Show quote history

I believe that Sophie and Edward extended their lease on Bagshot Park recently for another 150 years, so that their children could live there! So I don’t think anyone is thinking of down-sizing! The aim is always to perpetuate and protect privilege.

https://www.goodto.com/entertainment/royal-news/where-does-prince-edward-live-bagshot-park

It’s another peppercorn rent situation.

Where does Prince Edward live - and can you visit Bagshot Park?

Here's what we know about the home of Prince Edward, King Charles III's youngest sibling

https://www.goodto.com/entertainment/royal-news/where-does-prince-edward-live-bagshot-park

Alignedplanks98 · 27/10/2025 08:11

bluegreygreen · 23/10/2025 21:30

The government for ages has hidden behind the myth that the Erskine May rule stops discussion of the Royal Family in parliament. It doesn't.

The Speaker has just had to clarify that because of all the online discussions. Erskine May simply sets out that if the Royal Family (and some others such as judges) are to be criticised, it should be done properly in a formal motion. I've said it on here several times.
The government or the opposition could allow time for a motion to be discussed.

Speaker's comments are in this article
https://archive.is/pg1F6

Actual text of Erskine May
As indicated at para 20.10, unless the discussion is based upon a substantive motion, drawn in proper terms, reflections must not be cast in debate upon the conduct of the Sovereign, the heir to the throne, or other members of the royal family.1 The same principle applies to the Lord Chancellor,2 the Governor-General of an independent territory,3 and judges of the superior courts of the United Kingdom4 (including persons holding the position of a judge, such as circuit judges and their deputies, as well as recorders).'

Show quote history

And yet when successive applications have been made to discuss members of the RF in Parliament in a “proper” manner, they have been rejected!

www.theguardian.com/global/2025/feb/01/stop-shielding-uk-royals-from-parliamentary-scrutiny-says-labour-peer

Swipe left for the next trending thread