The Heir, The Spare and the “Baby Brain” -The Prince Harry and Meghan show rumbles on…

I imagine he is desperate to stay where he is so it was a risk worth taking (Charles is already cutting off his money so that threat is off the table). Getting the public all upset by creating the illusion of Harry and Meghan being physically evicted in "favour" of a royal who is pretty much despised by all sides is a good gamble if it forces a pause/change to moving him (especially to FC)
 

Husky said:
I'm getting interested in Charles' personality.

Why does he give it to Andrew, supposedly one day after Harry's book was published? And even more give it to the much despised Andrew?

Is he out for revenge? Is he such a person?
Or is he under Camilla's influence?

I wonder how King Charles will run the country. Will he be a gentle king who prefers to not draw much attention, directing discretely from the sideline? Or will he be a tough man who changes the RF severely.
Click to expand...

From what I've read about him, he seems to want to be a much more activist King than previous monarchs. As shown by the "spider letters" that he writes to elected officials, organizations, etc to express his views. Unfortunately this may be a problem as the role of the monarch now is more of an adviser (although they still have to sign off on legislation to put it into effect).

According to more than one book I've read about him, he also seems to be okay with conflict within his own office because he apparently believes that it results in better decisions and more loyal staff. Unfortunately that too is a problem because he is deliberately ignoring a lot of backstabbing and turbulence that is counterproductive and toxic.

Regarding the current huff over Frogmore, IIRC he also moved to have Harry removed from the group of royals that can stand in for the monarch when they are out of the country - sorry, I can't remember the name, it's not the Privy Council. Usually the royals that are in line to the throne and old enough to serve are part of this group. The rationale for this IIRC is that if Harry's main residence is outside the UK, it didn't make sense for him to be in this group. If that is true then I can see the argument being made that there is no need for H&M to have a permanent home in the UK in a property owned by the BRF. But whether it's Charles himself making that argument or one of his staff persuading him of that....who knows.
 
overedge said:
Regarding the current huff over Frogmore, IIRC he also moved to have Harry removed from the group of royals that can stand in for the monarch when they are out of the country - sorry, I can't remember the name, it's not the Privy Council. Usually the royals that are in line to the throne and old enough to serve are part of this group. The rationale for this IIRC is that if Harry's main residence is outside the UK, it didn't make sense for him to be in this group. If that is true then I can see the argument being made that there is no need for H&M to have a permanent home in the UK in a property owned by the BRF. But whether it's Charles himself making that argument or one of his staff persuading him of that....who knows.
Click to expand...
It's counsellors of state, those who can stand in for the monarch if he or she is incapacitated or out of the country. Usually it is the monarch's spouse and the first four adults in the line of succession. So for King Charles it would be Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice. To have counsellors of state step in they have to appoint "two or more," and there was apparently concern that Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice are not working royals, and Harry doesn't live in the UK anymore (there's some question about whether keeping Frogmore Cottage meant he was "domiciled in the UK" which is one of the legal requirements to be a counsellor), leaving only Camilla and William. So Harry and Andrew weren't removed, but Charles' other siblings (Anne and Edward) were added as counsellors, meaning there were more options.
 
Ya'll are assuming Andrew is smart. I think Andrew is spoiled and doing a temper tantrum thing that probably work great with Mummy. Big brother's probably not going to put up with that stuff.
 
MLIS said:
It's counsellors of state, those who can stand in for the monarch if he or she is incapacitated or out of the country. Usually it is the monarch's spouse and the first four adults in the line of succession. So for King Charles it would be Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice. To have counsellors of state step in they have to appoint "two or more," and there was apparently concern that Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice are not working royals, and Harry doesn't live in the UK anymore (there's some question about whether keeping Frogmore Cottage meant he was "domiciled in the UK" which is one of the legal requirements to be a counsellor), leaving only Camilla and William. So Harry and Andrew weren't removed, but Charles' other siblings (Anne and Edward) were added as counsellors, meaning there were more options.
Click to expand...

Yes, thank you, that's the group I was thinking of.

However, the report I read said that Harry was already part of the group and was explicitly removed.
 
overedge said:
From what I've read about him, he seems to want to be a much more activist King than previous monarchs...

According to more than one book I've read about him ...
Click to expand...
Thank you! This was an interesting read.
Do you think that all those decades of the press mocking him and Diana-fans hating him had an impact on his personality? Did he become bitter?
 
Husky said:
Thank you! This was an interesting read.
Do you think that all those decades of the press mocking him and Diana-fans hating him had an impact on his personality? Did he become bitter?
Click to expand...

From what I read, I don't think "bitter" is the right word, although at times he was certainly resentful of Diana getting more attention than him. It may have made him more sensitive to how he was perceived. The public re-introduction of Camilla as his partner was very carefully stage managed - although this may have been more the doing of his PR people rather than his own plan.
 
overedge said:
Yes, thank you, that's the group I was thinking of.

However, the report I read said that Harry was already part of the group and was explicitly removed.
Click to expand...
Yes, he was already part of the group, he automatically became so on his 21st birthday, as a counsellor of state for his grandmother. He hasn't been removed, Anne and Edward have been added (and would likely be chosen over him if the need arose).

If he is not "domiciled in the UK" he is ineligible to be a counsellor, the requirements are they must be British subjects, of age, domiciled in the UK, and not disqualified from being monarch (i.e. Catholics). So being asked to give up Frogmore Cottage may mean that he becomes ineligible if he doesn't have a home in the UK, but he hasn't been removed from the group (yet?).
 
Here is an article I think explains why Anne and Edward were added to the list. So if I read correctly prior to the addition Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew and Beatrice were on the list to fill in for Charles. Seems logical as they don't seem to want any chance of Andrew carrying out that role nor Harry who chose to move away.
www.independent.co.uk

King Charles replaces Harry and Andrew with Anne and Edward in amended Regency Act

The King’s intention was announced in Parliament on Monday
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
marbri said:
It's reported he (Andrew) is doing everything he can not to move out of his current abode.
Click to expand...
If Charles reduces his allowance as he said he would Andrew won't be able to afford the upkeep on his current abode. I don't know why he & Fergie don't move into the house she bought - last year? several years ago? Maybe it's not grand enough either. I happen to think a prison cell would fit him just right but what do I know?
 
My understanding was the intention was not to remove Harry as COS but instead to bump him down further so there's no risk of ever calling him on, but now that he no longer has a UK domicile, does that mean he's been removed?
 
Husky said:
Harry just did an interview with a trauma expert who diagnosed him with ADD. Spoke about PTSD and how therapy helped him to break free from his family.


www.dailymail.co.uk

Prince Harry interview RECAP: Gabor Mate speaks to Duke

RECAP: This was MailOnline's live blog for Prince Harry 's conversation with 'toxic trauma' therapist Dr Gabor Maté.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
I saw that last night although he hadn’t met with Harry yet. He had many excellent points.
 
If the Queen gifted the house to H and M as a wedding present, how can Charles evict them? Is her gift not honored?
 
MacMadame said:
She didn't gift them the cottage as in signing over a title to them. She gifted them the right to live here.
Click to expand...
That's correct. But of course Charles isn't honoring what the Queen wanted if it gives him a way for revenge. I doubt H&M will ever see the 2+ million pounds they spent on renovating or what they've spent on upkeep. It would not even be a one-family residence if it hadn't been renovated. It was staff quarters for 5 people before. But by all means let someone less heinous than H&M have it.
 
I still do not think it is right to go against the Queen's wishes. Just IMHO, it makes the "gift" of a right a non gift because it can be taken away at the whim of the next queen/king.

To put Andrew in there really makes it look even worse as he likely should be living in the local pen.
 
"What the Queen wished" is a double-edged sword, because the Queen wished was for Prince Andrew.to be protected and indulged at seemingly any cost. Both were official, but while the gift to the Sussexes was a positive one, the gift to PA was a negative one, ie, what wasn't done.
 
taf2002 said:
But of course Charles isn't honoring what the Queen wanted
Click to expand...

Winnipeg said:
I still do not think it is right to go against the Queen's wishes. Just IMHO, it makes the "gift" of a right a non gift because it can be taken away at the whim of the next queen/king.
Click to expand...

They're called 'grace and favor' homes for a reason. The Queen moved plenty of other family in and out of them during her time. When she gifted the use of Frogmore to Harry and Meghan, she expected they'd be living there full-time as working members of The Firm. Maybe turning it over to another tenant is what she wanted under the new circumstances.
 
taf2002 said:
That's correct. But of course Charles isn't honoring what the Queen wanted if it gives him a way for revenge. I doubt H&M will ever see the 2+ million pounds they spent on renovating or what they've spent on upkeep. It would not even be a one-family residence if it hadn't been renovated. It was staff quarters for 5 people before. But by all means let someone less heinous than H&M have it.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that they earned more by telling how small and uncomfortable this cottage is.
 
Barbara Manatee said:
When she gifted the use of Frogmore to Harry and Meghan, she expected they'd be living there full-time as working members of The Firm. Maybe turning it over to another tenant is what she wanted under the new circumstances.
Click to expand...
She was alive when they stopped being working members of the BRF, and she could have "ungifted" it to them while she was alive.

Her fierceness and stoicism for the public is well known, especially through WWII and the grim economy of the post-War period, and she even came around eventually to acknowledge the public's general feelings about Princess Diana when PD died, but when it came to her own family, it appears she was as cowardly as the average bear. Especially if it truly was her wish to evict them, but left it to her son.
 
She was newly widowed and was herself dying of an unimaginably painful cancer, but still doing her job as best she could. Seems pretty harsh to call her cowardly for not having the strength or interest to personally deal with a lease. With Harry and Meghan living happily in California, it probably didn't seem like an urgent issue, either.
 
airgelaal said:
It seems to me that they earned more by telling how small and uncomfortable this cottage is.
Click to expand...
I think the small and uncomfortable cottage was Nottingham Cottage (1324 square feet) on the grounds of Kensington Palace. Frogmore Cottage (5089 square feet) is a quite large home by most people's standards.
 
Barbara Manatee said:
They're called 'grace and favor' homes for a reason. The Queen moved plenty of other family in and out of them during her time. When she gifted the use of Frogmore to Harry and Meghan, she expected they'd be living there full-time as working members of The Firm. Maybe turning it over to another tenant is what she wanted under the new circumstances.
Click to expand...
She may have wanted it but she didn't do it. She could have gifted it to Eugenie. That would have made more sense than Charles giving it to Andrew. BTW I never read anything that said H&M complained that FC was small & uncomfortable. Maybe I missed it.
 
Here's what Harry himself wrote
It got so bad that one day I had to phone Granny. I told her we needed a new place to live. I explained that Willy and Kate hadn’t simply outgrown Nott Cott, they’d fled it, because of all the required repairs, and the lack of room, and we were now in the same boat. With two rambunctious dogs…and a baby on the way…
I told her we’d discussed our housing situation with the Palace, and we’d been offered several properties, but each was too grand, we thought. Too lavish. And too expensive to renovate.
Granny gave it a think and we chatted again days later.
Frogmore, she said.
Click to expand...
Does this sound like a "wedding gift"? It's good to have a grandmother to call and complain and get whatever you want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

YukiNieve
2024 Spring/Summer Ice Shows in Japan (notte stellata, SOI, Re_Pray, BOI, PIW, FaOI, Hyoen, Everlasting 33, FOI & probably DOI, The Ice)
2 3 4
Replies
100
Views
27K
YukiNieve
YukiNieve
ostile17
"LUXE", the third installment of Daisuke Takahashi's "Hyoen" - Yokohama Arena, May 15-17
Replies
13
Views
4K
ostile17
ostile17
TAHbKA
Samokhvalov's interview with Buyanova
Replies
8
Views
4K
rfisher
rfisher
TAHbKA
Ermolina/Flade's interview with Zhulin
Replies
0
Views
3K
TAHbKA
TAHbKA
TAHbKA
Konov's interview with Zhulin
Replies
17
Views
7K
kwanfan1818
kwanfan1818
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information