What a vindictive grandmother the Queen is turning out to be.

Again it’s not as it’s monarch versus minor royal. You can’t compare it to the every day.

This is why you’re clearly not really a republican, at least not anymore. You think she should have special powers as a monarch, and that that trumps being a grandmother, excusing her vindictive behaviour. Hardly the words of a republican.
 
You think she should have special powers as a monarch, and that that trumps being a grandmother,
Yes it’s called a constitutional monarchy that’s exactly what it means.
Btw I’m a republican not an anarchist or communist I think reform should come after the current queen (it won’t btw I know that as well).

So I’ll ask you then why does her grandson want to exploit the nation and keep titles and money from a country he no longer lives in.

he’s hardly poor and she certainly isn’t so why do they still need the titles and our money. ???
 
Yes it’s called a constitutional monarchy that’s exactly what it means.
Btw I’m a republican not an anarchist or communist I think reform should come after the current queen (it won’t btw I know that as well).

So I’ll ask you then why does her grandson want to exploit the nation and keep titles and money from a country he no longer lives in.

he’s hardly poor and she certainly isn’t so why do they still need the titles and our money. ???

For your support of the Queen on this to make an ounce of sense to me, you’d have to explain why the Queen is “entitled” to exploit those royal privileges and Harry isn’t. I think we’re agreed that none of them should be able to, societally, but why do you argue that the Queen is “right” on this, and right in making her grandson’s life as difficult as possible? For the Queen’s argument to uphold, she has to relinquish her own ability to exploit the taxpayer, surely?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this about the use of the word 'royal' in relation to the non-profit that they are looking to establish to continue the charity work?
Seems like a storm in potentially branded teacup to me.
 
, you’d have to explain why the Queen is “entitled” to exploit those royal privileges and Harry isn’t.
Because she is the queen, the monarch of this country the person in who’s name all our laws past present and future are made in and harry isn’t.
you do realise what the powers of the queen are don’t you legally speaking I mean as you seem to equate her with the old biddy down the road.
 
Fao atypical the legal constitutional powers of he uk monarch -

Powers of the Queen:
  • The power to appoint and dismiss the Prime Minister
  • The power to appoint and dismiss other ministers.
  • The power to summon, prorogue and dissolve Parliament
  • The power to make war and peace
  • The power to command the armed forces of the United Kingdom
  • The power to regulate the Civil Service
  • The power to ratify treaties
  • The power to issue passports
  • The power to appoint bishops and archbishops of the Church of England
  • The power to create peers (both life peers and hereditary peers).
If the Queen pleases, she can ride in a horse carriage down Rotten Row, where others can only ride horseback. Her picture will appear on postage stamps, but she will not need them; her personal mail is franked. She can drive as fast as she likes in a car which needs no license number.
 
This must have torn at the Queens heartstrings, she is a loving grandmother I am sure and would not do anything to hurt him on purpose. However, she has a responsibility in her role as Queen and has to protect the Country she has served so very well. She acted correctly as her role requires her to.

I do see both sides of this but the Queen has a duty to the nation. Harry and Meghan chose what was in their best interests and good luck to them both and they deserve to be happy, but not at the expense of the country and the Royal family.

I am a royalist, but Andrew and now this shenanigans with Meghan has made me think maybe just maybe this will in time lead to a far slimmer constitutional role than at present. I don’t see a republic anytime soon, but I think it will happen one day
 
I'm sure Caroline Flack had money too, makes no odds as to how this could affect people's wellbeing.
I am not suggesting it does. Doods. It is however their choice and he will have known there would be constitutional issues. Hopefully my earlier post reflects my thoughts. I genuinely wish them well and believe they have done the right thing for them. However they wanted out of the royal life (fair enough) but also to profit from it. They are not banned from the family and i am sure the Queen will welcome them with open arms on future visits.

I think the social media comments in certain quarters are unnecessary for all concerned. The press and the like are equally unnecessarily savage. Let them live their lives freely and privately like most folk, if that is really what they truly want. I suspect they did want to have their cake and eat it financially though, but yes give them privacy
 
col, giving them their privacy now is a bit too late don't you think?
I'd say the lack of privacy they received after they met and then got married and had their lives treat like a commodity in the gossip columns and rags is why they are withdrawing from royal life and that trumps any constitutional issues.
 
Because she is the queen, the monarch of this country the person in who’s name all our laws past present and future are made in and harry isn’t.
you do realise what the powers of the queen are don’t you legally speaking I mean as you seem to equate her with the old biddy down the road.

Ok, you really don’t come across as a republican mate. To Harry, she should be nothing more than a grandmother, regardless of his monarchical views. To me, she is nothing.
 
Come on Atypical - his life really isn’t going to be that difficult is it?
Perhaps not, but I can’t imagine my own grandmother ever being this vindictive towards me. Can’t be much fun for anyone.

Put it this way, if she’d found a way to print money for herself she’d have definitely let me in on it. Even if I wanted to go and live in Canada shock horror.

Harry may have had plenty I didn’t but I wouldn’t swap Nanas with him.
 
Last edited:
Doods, It is a horrible life to be born into, it would not be for me either despite the money and so called privilages. Harry was clearly a troubled soul following his mothers hounding to death, who wouldn’t be. He has generally had positive press and was a very well liked man, respected by most people, I don’t recall him having the press and social media giving him a hard time throughout his life. Clearly we all make observations and assumptions. He has always been happy to speak to the media on good news days and use the media for his good causes and his army life, so you have to expect a degree of attention as a Prince.

I don’t like or agree with the way the press follow him around from time to time or report on things like his holidays etc, but he received tax payers money, tax payers security so his whereabouts and visits are in the public domain. He waited until after marriage to do this, he could have done it well before now if he genuinely did not want that life, he is 35, not 21, he brought Meghan into it, they chose a flamboyant public wedding and approved it to be live on TV. I don’t know too many people who get all they want from life. I do know a couple of so called celebrities and they seem to accept that when you are in the public eye you are accountable and unwanted attention comes along with their chosen occupation as publicity is wanted when it suits. I appreciate it can be hard and soul destroying at times and Harry has suffered far more than Meghan in this way and his mental health, like anyones, is important, vitally so.

I do not like the way the press or social media behave and certainly don’t trust the press, but the laws of the land permit them to do as they do (mostly). I do not blame Harry and Meghan for their choice to leave the institution, they are not leaving his family, well not like Meghan seemingly has left her dad, anyway. I support them in their right to leave and live the life they want with future privacy. Just not at the taxpayers expense. Nobody can undo the past, we all have choices in life, some we regret hopefully most hopefully we do not, but there are always consequences to our choices and we may not always like them, some unexpected ones. Some sadly come at a heavy price. I have no wish to know what they or any other celebrities are up to, but clearly some do and as such the press will report on it.

Perhaps if the press were more intrusive on Andrew then several ladies may not have been seemingly trafficked for his amusement and others lives may have been better and Epstein outed far sooner than he was, to boot, who knows. Their has to be balance, but where thats sits will differ for everyone in truth.
 
Exposing evidence of wrongdoing, especially by those in positions of power is called investigative journalism, those invited to official duties or charity events are reporters, the shitehawks who hound people in the public eye are not even in the same league.
 
But still, it’s fine for her to milk her own cow but not for her grandson to?

If the constitutional law dictates yes. The Queen has not turned her back on them they are very much an important member of the family. Do you think they should be funded by the tax payer still whilst living a private life and allowed to use their brand for personal gain?

Meghan is returning to acting I read, if she does, she will no doubt be paid well and court publicity if she does, they will attract interest and stories as a result. They are not really shunning publicity and seeking total privacy. I hope they can have as private life as possible, but they seemingly wanted to max every penny in doing so which is not necessarily a good look. They wanted to use a brand to create wealth on the back of a role they wanted out of. Fair do’s for leaving, but do it with grace and dignity, not to have your cake and eat it
 
If the constitutional law dictates yes. The Queen has not turned her back on them they are very much an important member of the family. Do you think they should be funded by the tax payer still whilst living a private life and allowed to use their brand for personal gain?

Meghan is returning to acting I read, if she does, she will no doubt be paid well and court publicity if she does, they will attract interest and stories as a result. They are not really shunning publicity and seeking total privacy. I hope they can have as private life as possible, but they seemingly wanted to max every penny in doing so which is not necessarily a good look. They wanted to use a brand to create wealth on the back of a role they wanted out of. Fair do’s for leaving, but do it with grace and dignity, not to have your cake and eat it

It’s not about what I think Col. It’s not about the Queen’s role as “monarch” either. What I’m questioning here is her approach to the rift with her grandson. Regardless of her “role”, she should be a grandmother first and foremost.

All just adds fuel to the fire that he’s not really Charles’ son to be honest. Look what she’s done for her son Andrew. All is forgiven. What Harry has “done” doesn’t even compare!
 
Back
Top