Posted on 01/19/2014 10:33:59 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
It is being dubbed the “gentle succession” – as the Queen gradually begins to relinquish some of her traditional duties as monarch.
As she approaches her 88th birthday in April after almost 62 years on the throne, she has agreed to hand over part of her workload in a historic “job-share” arrangement with Prince Charles.
In a royal first, he will be taking on more head of state-style responsibilities as the Palace starts to make tentative plans for his eventual succession.
Courtiers yesterday described the softly-softly move as “wise” – and “just plain common sense”.
The first sign of the partial power transfer will be the merging this week of the Queen and Charles’s press offices.
In future any announcements concerning the monarch and her 65-year-old eldest son will now come from the same source. Palace sources insist the switch will be entirely seamless.
Princes William and Harry will also play their part in the new set-up, with both assuming far more responsibility since they relinquished their military roles.
(Excerpt) Read more at mirror.co.uk ...
Charles reminds me of Edward VII. Too long without real employment. He will be pretty lackluster I think
“...she has agreed to hand over part of her workload in a historic “job-share” arrangement with Prince Charles.”
Which means one brainless twit handing over part of her non-existent “workload” over to another brainless twit.
Too bad they both can’t run for Congress. They would fit in well.
I am lucky enough to be a friend of the Prince of Wales, and he's not an idiot.
The Prince is, on most issues, a staunch conservative. Because of this significant sections of the mass media does its best to try and make him look a fool - as they typically try to do with most conservatives.
It surprises me to some extent to see people on Freerepublic falling for such tactics, because they seem all too aware of them when they are applied to American figures - and the British press is, if anything, for the most part even more left wing than the US press.
People also don't seem to understand that virtually every speech made by the Prince of Wales is written for him by British civil servants acting on the instructions of British politicians. The nature of the constitutional monarchy means that it is important the Prince is never seen to be in significant conflict with Her Majesty's Government on any major issue. One reasons the Prince has made so many speeches in recent years on environmental issues is because it represents one of the few areas where he does tend to agree with the 'progressive' line of British governments. They don't want him speaking on issues like gun rights (which he supports) or stronger sentences for criminals (which he also supports) or a wide range of other conservative issues.
The Press also tends to highlight these speeches, while paying much less attention to cases where he is meeting with and supporting troops and veterans (which he does regularly, and which is also largely supported by the current government - but not necessarily by the media).
He's a good and decent man, who is unfortunately not really in a position to defend himself. I'm his friend and I will do so. And when he becomes King - assuming he does - he will do his best and do his duty to his country, and to the Commonwealth - as he has all of his life.
I do - but I am lucky enough to know him, and not have to judge him just through how he is presented by the press.
It was my hope she would skip a generation, and make Charles’ eldest son king.
Perhaps there’s no way to do that.
The Queen cannot do this. Parliament could - it has the power to pass a law altering the succession (as it is currently doing to give females the same right as males) but the Queen cannot do so.
But Parliament would only do it for extremely compelling reasons - or if both the Queen and the Prince of Wales asked them to (which might happen if she reaches 100 and he'd be nearly 80 but is unlikely to happen unless something like that takes place).
People should understand that being King is an immense responsibility - and so is being Heir Apparent. The Prince of Wales has been Heir Apparent since he was five years old - he has never really had a chance at much of a normal life, and when he becomes King that becomes even more true. Even if he didn't want to be King, he would take the Crown at this point partly just to keep that burden from falling on William - he is not going to force his son to give up his chance at something close to a normal life for as long as possible.
As a matter of fact, she hasn't. There are certain bills for which a different phrase is used (just mentioning that as a point of interest, given it's quite rare to encounter anybody who is even aware of the formal phrase). And the Queen doesn't proclaim it - the Clerk of the Parliaments does.
But she has to give consent. The United Kingdom is a Constitutional Monarchy and the Constitution gives the power to make laws to Parliament. The Monarch could only refuse assent in very extreme cases which are defined by the Lascelles Principles - and no such case has arisen during the reign of the current Queen. The last time a King even came close to refusing assent was in 1910. The last time it actually happened was in 1708.
The existence of the power prevents Parliament presenting such bills in the first place, because it would be used if it had to be.
Incidentally Her Majesty did refuse consent to a Bill in 1999 - a Bill that would have given Parliament the ability to overrule the Monarch in a dispute over whether Britain went to war or not - but that is different from refusing assent (refusal of consent stops Parliament from even debating a Bill and can only be used in the case of a few very specific royal perogatives.)
Interesting that you know the Prince of Wales. I know two people who know him (one is married to a famous actress) and neither of these two people like him.
Thanks for sharing this info. You would never know that by what you read in the press.
Being likable isn’t the top qualification for being good at one’s job. Plenty of people say that 0vomit and Clinton are very likable.
Well, not everybody who knows me, likes me either. I don’t know why - I’m charming :)
Seriously, people can know him and not like him. It happens that I do. What concerns me isn’t whether or not people like him or not - just whether or not, he’s judged fairly. And I think the media has made it very hard for people to judge him fairly. That’s a product of them being largely left wing and rarely being fair towards either conservatives or conservative ideas, and the virtual worship of much of the media of the late Diana, Princess of Wales (who I met a few times, but did not know well - she seemed to me like a lovely lady and a loving and devoted mother, but she certainly was not the near-deity that some elevated her to), which lead them to treat him as some sort of cartoon villain.
Skip all that.....go directly to Harry !
Well, this one friend continually refers to him as “a jerk.” I think Charles flirts with his wife too much. But he should be used to this - in England this woman is pretty much adored.
I have not liked a lot of Charles’ public statements which I’m sure - not withstanding who writes them - reflect his own values. Did he not say he wants to be “Defender of All Faiths”? or was that wrong?
The term is actually Latin - Fidei Defensor, which can be translated into English as either Defender of Faith, or Defender of the Faith. There are rumours - but they are completely unconfirmed - that when he is King, he wants the former to be used rather than the latter in his English language 'Style'. It could be true.
If it is, it reflects nothing more than his desire to be a King for all his people in both Britain and the Commonwealth. He wants to defend freedom of religion - including and especially freedom of religion.
Here is an extract from a speech he made last month:
For myself, I have for some time now been deeply troubled by the growing difficulties faced by Christian communities in various parts of the Middle East. It seems to me that we cannot ignore the fact that Christians in the Middle East are, increasingly, being deliberately targeted by fundamentalist Islamist militants. Christianity was, literally, born in the Middle East and we must not forget our Middle Eastern brothers and sisters in Christ. Their church communities link us straight back to the early Church, as I was reminded by hearing Aramaic, Our Lord's own language, spoken and sung a few hours ago.
Yet, today, the Middle East and North Africa has the lowest concentration of Christians in the world – just four per cent of the population and it is clear that the Christian population of the Middle East has dropped dramatically over the last century and is falling still further.
This has an effect on all of us, although, of course, primarily on those Christians who can no longer continue to live in the Middle East: we all lose something immensely and irreplaceably precious when such a rich tradition dating back two thousand years begins to disappear. It is, therefore, especially delightful to see such a rich panoply of church life here to-day, including the Antiochian, Greek, Coptic, Syrian, and Armenian Orthodox Churches, the Melkite, Maronite, Syrian Catholic, Chaldean, and Roman Catholic Churches, as well as the Church of the East, and Churches established, dare I say it, somewhat more recently, including the Anglican Church!
In saying all this about the difficulties facing the Christian churches in the Middle East I am, of course, conscious that they are not the only faith community in this region suffering at the moment, nor is the Middle East the only part of the world in which Christians are suffering, but, given the particularly acute circumstances faced by the church communities in the Middle East to-day, I felt it worthwhile to draw attention to their current plight. It is important to note, above all, that the decline of Christians in the region represents a major blow to peace as Christians are part of the fabric of society, often acting as bridge-builders between other communities.
When he becomes King he wants to be a King for all Britons, for all citizens of the Commonwealth Realms, and he wants to Head of Commonwealth for the entire Commonwealth. He is Christian - and he will take his role as Supreme Governor of the Church of England seriously - but he will defend the rights of all to worship freely. So yes, he may well prefer to be Defender of Faith, rather than limit that only to his own. But he makes the distinction very strongly between those who simply live a life of peaceful faith - and those who take an extremist view and use their religion as a justification or excuse for violence.
It's worth remembering that his mentor, the man he was closest to outside of his own family was brutally murdered by people who claimed their Roman Catholicism was part of their justification for killing people - and he saw the same group bomb his country repeatedly. He sees the difference between true religion and religion as an excuse for violence more clearly than most people - and treats those who simply want to worship as they wish with respect, while having nothing but contempt for those who practices the perversions of terrorism.
British clintons.
Plus, William has a very important credential....... he is young.
By force of vigor and personality he might restore the authority of King his grandmother threw away
Thanks for the history lesson.
I'm kind of the opposite...not everybody who knows me, hates me. I don't know why, I'm meaner than a snake....
The only really mean snake is the cotton moth.
Maybe you can be called cotton mouth from here on
The IRA is a left-wing terrorist organization and is not supported by the Catholic Church. I don’t remember the Vatican praising the butchering of Lord Mountbatten.
And, please, no more lectures on the wonders of Prince Charles. I have enough problems following American politics. If you want to talk about Queen Elizabeth, I’ll engage.
He will get to preside over the event where Buckingham Palace is turned into a Mooookus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.