Extinction Royal Family?

What is the role of the Royal Family?  Have they gone too far?

Her Majesty the Queen is Head of State in a constitutional monarchy.  This means that while Her Majesty as Sovereign is Head of State, the ability to make or pass legislation resides with an elected Parliament.  The Queen is Head of the British State of the United Kingdom and serves as a symbol of the Country.

Apart from that, the Queen and the Royal Family undertake duties and represent the Nation as a focus for national identity, unity, and pride.  The taxpayer helps to fund the Royal Family in their duties by way of a Sovereign Grant (previously known as the Civil List) and in 2020-21 this amounted to £87.5million. (Click here for more details).

As Buckingham Palace has always stated “the Queen and the Royal Family remain politically neutral”. According to the web site, Queen Elizabeth must remain “strictly neutral with respect to political matters” and is “unable to vote or stand for election.”  Her Majesty apparently never gives her advice or opinions publicly.  It’s the last thing she would do.  She totally understands her role in life and has undertaken her duties as Monarch with integrity and selflessness.  She remains apolitical but that cannot be said for the remainder of her family. 

It is therefore imperative that other members of the Royal Family remain neutral from politics and refrain from voicing their own opinions.  How then, can a paying nation be proud of a family when they ‘step over the line’ into politics?

It is well documented how Prince Harry and Meghan Markle regularly involve themselves in politics and controversy, so perhaps it is time they make a clean break, if they continue to wish for independent lives, and drop the titles; after all, everything they have done so far has been negative towards the British Royal Family and no doubt, even more mud flying and washing of dirty linen in public is to come in Prince Harry’s ‘book’- for what is said about the Royal Family and the very institution which symbolises our very Country, may affect us all.

However, now we learn that the ‘Heir to the Throne’, Prince Charles has launched his own TV Channel!  This, in my opinion, is a step too far.

What next “Good Morning with The Queen”; “Play your Cards Right” with Prince Andrew?

On his own web site it states “The main part of The Prince of Wales’s role as Heir to The Throne is to support Her Majesty The Queen as the focal point for national pride, unity and allegiance and bringing people together across all sections of society, representing stability and continuity, highlighting achievement, and emphasising the importance of service and the voluntary sector by encouragement and example.”

I am not against ‘modernising’ the Royal Family, but that doesn’t mean they must become ‘celebrities’, nor dabble publicly in politics. This will not lead to national pride and unity, quite the reverse.  It’s enough seeing these ‘celebrities’ at their weddings and functions.

The Royal Family have a role, a duty to their Nation as a symbol for national pride, unity etc.  They are not ‘celebrities’, nor should they side with one part of the nation on certain subjects so political like Climate Change, or Brexit.

However, when a subject turns to them for help, they should pay more attention.  Like the time a mother of a special needs boy wrote to Prince Charles begging him to support some sort of inclusion into mainstream, to help to be accepted in society, but was pushed aside.  Could not Prince Charles have written one of his infamous ‘spider notes’ to someone in Parliament for the sake of a paying subject? (Read more)

He clearly states in his reply to this mother that ‘he cannot become directly involved in matters of this kind’.  Matters of this kind? – The lives of those less fortunate within his nation? Yet if it is of interest to him personally, then that is a different matter altogether. 

Prince Charles attended a meeting in Davos to campaign to alter climate change agreements without disclosing his private estate had an offshore financial interest in what he was promoting (click here and here)

After his speech, Clarence House tweeted pictures of him shaking hands with Greta, in an encounter described as “two climate icons” meeting.  Is this how we want the Royal Family to be a symbol of our nation? 

He even recently suggested that he feels the Nation should pay more tax in response to Climate Change! One might say hypocritical in the least, when it was reported that the Duchy of Cornwall is exempt from corporation tax (read here).

Clearly, Charles is willing to speak out on issues that are close to his heart, as now he has launched his own TV Channel on Climate Change

Is this representing the nation as a focus for national identity, unity, and pride or is it feeding an intransigent future King?

It is very clearly understood by the vast majority of the population that the Monarchy is for formal and ceremonial purposes and that this special Family are looked to for guidance in darker days, support and unity of the Country, and representation of our Nation on the Global stage as well as at home.

A few years ago, the media described members of the Royal Family who subjected themselves to supporting a Charitable cause ‘It’s a Royal Knockout’ as “breaking royalty’s magic”, “a disastrous TV show”, “but for the dignity of the British monarchy, It’s A Royal Knockout was a disaster” yet statistically it was a hit with 18 million viewers and raised over £1.5 million.  Reportedly the Queen disapproved of the event and all her courtiers had advised against it.  It may be that at the time it caused embarrassment and probably some loss of dignity and ‘magic’ of the Royals, but with hindsight it must be remembered it was for a charitable cause and for good.

But it has not been reported that any ‘courtier’ or ‘advisor’ has advised against the Heir to the Throne using his own TV Channel to dictate his opinion to the nation?  Has anyone advised the Heir to the Throne that it is not his place to publicly declare he believes it would be a good idea for his subjects to pay more tax?  It is not to raise money for any good cause, nor will it bring unity or pride.

The campaign organisation for the abolition of the monarchy, Republic, are clapping their hands with glee every time this man opens his mouth.

I, for one, certainly do not want a Republic.  President Johnson? President Blair?

This would cost the nation probably more with no return on our investment and it certainly would not be symbolic of this country.

We have a Royal Family with its history, its homes, castles, symbolism of family life, dignity, pride.  A family we look to at a time of need, a family that holds traditions yet moves with the times yet still keeps some of its ‘mystic’.  I have to say I fear we may lose all this when Prince Charles ascends the throne.  I cannot foresee a habit of a life time disappearing such as his ‘spider memos’ to Government et al and as for his TV career! Will we be entertained with the King Charles & Consort TV Show, ‘do as I say, not as I do’ weekly event?

If he is to follow, then I pray he looks to his mother for inspiration.  Perhaps it is time to ask, should Prince Charles to step aside for Prince and Princess of Cambridge to reign?

According to a YouGov poll, Her Majesty is popular by 76%; yet the next in line rakes in a dismal 45% in popularity with Camilla, The Duchess of Cornwall behind on 36%.  His son, Prince William, however, is rated 72% in popularity. (See here).

As the Republic party supposedly stated on Prince Charles “We know who he is and what he talks about, we know about his interference (in policy),” Smith says. “Will most people want to put up with someone like that (as king)?”   The CEO of the Republic movement also said after the Winfrey interview with Harry & Meghan, ‘the situation has fired the starting pistol of rethinking whether the monarchy survives once the Queen has gone’.  

Yet here we have the future King giving even more ammunition on the subject every time he seems to say or do anything!

When the day comes, I for one, will mourn the passing of the Queen so deeply.   For Her Majesty has truly supported this Nation from the day the Crown was laid upon her head.  She has remained not only true to her duties as a Monarch with style, selflessness and integrity but has served impeccably, a unifier of a country sometimes divided; managing to strengthen the identification of the monarch with the aspirations of the people, and at the same time enabling the monarchy to adapt.

Apparently, the Republic movement have a petition out to ensure the Queen is the last Monarch.  Perhaps it is time to adapt the monarchy for the good of the nation, and once again crown an already steady, traditional family in the waiting – The Prince and Princess of Cambridge?


Please Share our Poll!


  • She swore an oath to the people and she has not upheld that promise! The whole family through their arrogance should be decommissioned, their monies stopped and all properties returned to the people of the United Kingdom.

  • Horatio Tremoine

    I think we need an elected monarchy a la Pope, sovereign for life but replaced by someone who is fit to reign rather than rule … the current heir to the throne is a serious disappointment and I doubt he has the intellectual fibre or political nous to sustain the monarchy, may he pass gracefully so that we can reaffirm the role of our Sovereign

  • Molly bennett

    Why do we not allow the queen to decide! after all she has done the job for so long now she knows better than most all it entails !!!and more importantly which of her children could handle this enormous responsibility to the people of our country especially to the memory of all who have fought and died in wars to preserve the freedoms we all enjoy today, she has lived through these battles and lost family !!!that surely gives her a better understanding of the responsibility of the royal family to its country.

Leave a Reply