It appears that Her Majesty has made it quite clear that
she wishes her son, Prince Charles to succeed her one day.
She announced this in a speech she made at the recent
Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM).

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43820328

What do posters think of this and how will it affect us
in Australia?

Your thoughts please.

//It appears that Her Majesty has made it quite clear that
she wishes her son, Prince Charles to succeed her one day.//

Have you considered the possibility that she may outlive him?

Despite the exclamation mark, this is perfectly natural; it also happens that Charles is direct heir to the throne, so of course he will succeed the Queen. Unless the republicans get their way, it will make no difference to Australia; just a different bum on the same seat. Some of the more irrational, emotional Australians might decide that they should vote for a republic because Charles is a bit of a dill, and our 'heirs' will be paying the bill for a change for many years to come.

Yes Charlie is a bit of a dill. He has actually been taken in by the global warming scam, which doesn't say much for his brain power, but the Greens should love him. He's a nice enough bloke & will do little harm, & perhaps a bit of good.

Toni,

The Queen is 92. Prince Charles is 69.

The odds of her surviving him are not too great.

I wouldn't be too concerned about it.

Dear ttbn,

The position is largely symbolic and is not hereditary.
Some have suggested a non royal head would project a more
modern image. However the Commonwealth has confirmed that
Prince Charles will be the new leader of the organisation
of Britain and its former colonies once he succeeds his
mother on the throne. This must be a huge relief for Prince
Charles especially since the Commonwealth leaders made this
announcement at a meeting in London after his mother stated
on Thursday that she hoped her son would lead the Commonwealth
after her.

Dear Hasbeen,

Prince Charles is a longtime champion of environmental
cause - which he apparently sees as a priority for the
Commonwealth. So you're right. He just may do some good.

Foxy,

I thought you were talking about succession to the throne, which clearly is hereditary. Your second post makes clear you were not.

I really could not care less about the Commonwealth. Most of the member countries have nothing in common with the Anglosphere. While I'm happy with the monarchy, even with Charles (Camilla makes up for him), I think that the Commonwealth is rather ridiculous. When the Empire finished, the only countries included in a 'special' relationship should have been the U.K, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

Good. Great idea.

ttbn,

" When the Empire finished, the only countries included in a 'special' relationship should have been the U.K, Australia, New Zealand and Canada."

What about South Africa, an original member from 11 December 1931?
What about Northern Ireland?

Would you let the Channel Islands in?

Dear ttbn,

I doubt if the question of "heredity" was ever at risk as
far as Prince Charles is concerned. Although
the rules of succession have been changed somewhat not
so long ago to allow for girls being able to succeed,
it did not affect Prince Charles. See the link
given below, even
though he may eventually end up being one of the oldest
heirs to the throne or he may even step aside and pass it on
to the next in line if he has to wait too long. The indications
appear though that his mother may be thinking of passing on the
baton to her son sooner than later.

Anyway, it must have been rather comforting to him to have
such a public acknowledgement from his mother considering
the speculations in the media in the past about his son
Prince William's popularity and him being the preferred king.
His mother's public acknowledgement would have been a very
comforting booster.

As for who should have been in the Commonwealth? That decision
should have been made when the organisation of
Britain was being formulated - as to whom to include in their
colonies. It's a bit late now to exclude anyone.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3856958/next-in-line-throne-prince-charles-king-kate-meghan-children/

Hasbeen - Quote "He has actually been taken in by the global warming scam" Because a percentage of his portfolio has money invested with companies that will benefit from the global warming scam.

Is Mise,

No. None of those; I didn't leave anyone out.

ttbn,

Then why your choices?

That's what puzzles me.

I'd have the Channel Islands in as they are part of the Islands of Britain.

Dear Philip S.,

The Prince's track record on green issues speaks for itself
and according to "The Guardian", Nov. 07, 2017,
the Prince has "never chosen to
speak out on a topic simply because of a company that the
duchy may have invested in." We're told that the Prince
did not have any direct involvement in investment decisions.

Foxy - People only found out what he had hidden when the Panama Papers were leaked. Hidden by a trust fund.

//I'd have the Channel Islands in as they are part of the Islands of Britain.//

What, the Isle of Man doesn't get a look in? What did the Manx ever do to you, Is Mise?

Dear Philip S.,

Here's a link on the Paradise Papers. It's worth a read:

http://www.theguardian.com/2017/nov/07/prince-charles-profit-best-friend-hugh-van-cutsem-offshore-firm-paradise-papers

I'll try again:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/07/prince-charles-profit-best-friend-hugh-van-cutsem-offshore-firm-paradise-papers

Here is an interesting link, that raises quite a few interesting
and in my opinion - valid points:

http://www.afr.com/news/world/europe/prince-charles-and-the-endless-wait-for-succession-in-the-british-royal-family-20171115-gzlna1

Toni,

"What, the Isle of Man doesn't get a look in? What did the Manx ever do to you, Is Mise?"

Nothing, I just forgot them. Sorry for that Ellan Vannin!!

Prince Charles has spent a lifetime waiting to be king,
the job he was born to do. Now he has another position to
wait for. The next head of the 53 nation Commonwealth of the
UK and its former colonies. This however won't happen until
he succeeds his mother on the throne.

God Save the Queen for God forbid we get Queen Camilla Park yer Bowels as a sovereign !

Dear Albie,

I'm pretty sure that will never happen.

When Charles becomes king, Camilla will be known
as - Princess Consort, not Queen.

Toni. 20 years ago I was tipping Queeny would outlive Charlie. The odds have shortened considerably in that time, could be a photo finish. Charlie has never found the great pleasures of tobacco like his grandfather, who snuffed his last fag at the age of 56. Queeny comes from a female line of long livers and lovers, her old mom lived in three centuries, not too many do that.
Have you considered they could both go together in a joint suicide pact, that's a bit way out, but it would help the sales of our ailing Aussie gossip mags, a boost for the economy and all that malarkey.

Issy, are you going to include Coney Island, Charlie can open the new ferris wheel, we could have the whole shebang on board, Goofy, Pothead, Porky, The Horse, Harry's Hot Chick, Old Dill Phil, etc etc.

Foxy, without the Commonwealth how would we pick up a swag of gold medals? Like we thrash the Ethiopians at swimming, they are still using floaties! I believe we are the World Champs at the mega sport of lawn bowls. Plus those black people look so nice with their silver and bronze medals, standing below us with our shiny gold ones, we are so inclusive, we could give em' plastic medals, but no, real metal ones, how's that for fairness? As long as they don't want to march around the Peter Beattie Memorial Park when all is over, its all win win...well for us.

I suspect that Prince Charles won't have to wait much
longer. All the indications are that his mother is
getting ready to hand over the reigns with her
announcement that her wish was for her son to be the
next head of the Commonwealth. And that seems to also
be a good choice as we're told that "Charles is as well
travelled as his mother and is a longtime champion of
environmental causes, a priority for the Commonwealth.

Its members include small island nations in the Caribbean
and the Pacific that are among the countries most vulnerable
to rising seas, fiercer storms and other effects of global
climate change.

Leaders at the recent meeting signed a "blue charter" to
protect the world's oceans and committed to stronger cyber
security and freer trade.

The next summit in 2020 will be held in Rwanda, which was never
a British colony but has been persuaded to join the club.
Former Portugese colony Mozambique is also a Commonwealth member,
and Togo is considering joining.

British officials have been paying more attention to the
Commonwealth since the UK voted in 2016 to leave the European
Union. The Commonwealth could provide a platform for
British diplomatic and cultural clout outside the EU."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/prince-charles-to-succeed-queen-as-commonwealth-head/

Hello there FOXY...

I don't think Charles will do any harm to the Monarchy, after all he's been schooled in all the correct things since his investiture as the Prince of Wales. I've heard it said he's a bit of a dill, and in some measure he probably is in some specific areas. However he's a trained pilot both on Rotor Wing & Fixed Wing, and as HASBEEN can attest to that no mean feat. Moreover he is/was Col. in Chief of the British Parachute Rgt. and a qualified Parachutist in his own right. Nobody held his hand when he accomplished his first decent, Royalty or otherwise.

While it's true he does look a bit of a geek with his old fashioned hairstyle, but he does have to maintain a certain image as the heir to the throne. What I'm trying to say, Chas. is no mug, not by a long shot. He does have to behave in a certain manner. And be assured, he's no mamma's boy; Lord Louis MOUNTBATTEN of Burma, made sure of that, prior to the IRA knocking him off. He'll do all right, believe me.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank You for those words.

I think that Prince Charles who's spent a lifetime
waiting to be king (the job he was born to do) should
be given that job sooner rather than later. I mean, his
mother is 92 years old. Time for her to move on.

As for how he will perform as king?

I don't think we have much to worry about there.
There are, enough traditions, protocols
and rules in place that won't allow him to divert too
greatly. He will have to comply, as his mother was forced
to do regarding the funeral of Princess Diana.

It looks like this discussion has now run its course.
Thanks to everyone who contributed.
All The Best.

The Queen has just announced that Henry VIII will succeed her. I'll go along with that, haven't had a decent beheading in yonks. Could be worse we could get Prince Dill, nah!

Dear Paul,

It will be interesting to see what happens as the Queen
gets older whether she will allow Charles to be crowned
King or merely take over some of the duties as she's
already indicated she wants to happen regarding the
Commonwealth position. Either way, I'm not sure how this
will affect Australia, if at all.

cont'd ...

Mum was such a staunch monarchist and was hoping to live
to be 100 so that she could get a letter from the Queen.
Well she didn't make it. Mum died on 26th January, 2018-
aged 96. Still she died on Australia Day, which to her would
have been the next best thing!

Paul,

Don't knock Prince Charles unless you have achieved more than he.

Charles:

1 September 1972 – 27 July 1973: Sub-Lieutenant in the Royal Navy.
27 July 1973 – 1 January 1977: Lieutenant in the Royal Navy.

Commanded a minesweeper.

Helicopter pilot; qualified navigator, et al.

Paul:

??

That's right Issy, because they can't get a real job, they play with the war toys. I have nothing against Charlie Windsor, or his old mom, seems a lovely, but snobby, old stick.

You forgot to mention his ability at unveiling plaques, and opening school fates. The blokes been privileged all his life, has had all the advantages money can buy, Didn't ask for it, accident of birth. Charlie has had a top quality education, so he's rather articulate and knowledgeable, so he should be, otherwise he would be a complete dumb arse.

My contribution in life has been far more productive than that of Charlies, I dare say yours has as well. I've had a hand in the improvement of peoples lives through work and service etc etc. Which hasn't included sailing in some tub around the Rock of Gibraltar. But I am sure Charlie has made some small positive contribution in some other ways, but I am not sure in what ways.

Hi Foxy.

"It will be interesting to see what happens as the Queen
gets older whether she will allow Charles to be crowned
King or merely take over some of the duties"

I can hardly wait in anticipation. In fact I've just signed up to 10 year subscriptions to a half dozen trashy women's gossip mags, including 'No Idea' and Woman's Monthly's. I must admit I love reading that latest expose', from unnamed insiders, in the palace, (probably from the Queens corgis) as to what the latest royal shenanigans are! Anyway, if I get bored with that reading, there is always the latest scone recipe to knock up.

Paul,

Contrast,

"Could be worse we could get Prince Dill, nah!"

with,

" I have nothing against Charlie Windsor, or his old mom, seems a lovely, but snobby, old stick."

Just to be pedantic,
"...Which hasn't included sailing in some tub around the Rock of Gibraltar."

Gibraltar is a promontory so can't be sailed around (strictly speaking).

Dear Paul,

Don't knock all women's mags. Many of them provide so much
joy for so many women - and have been around for decades.
I remember being in Los Angeles and feeling very homesick
when I came across the "Australian Women's Weekly" at a
newsagency. It brought me to tears (and thoughts of home)
seeing that familiar magazine. Many immigrant women learned
English from reading these mags.

As for Royalty? I'd rather have the Queen than Mr Trump.

Issy Price Dill is Phil, not Charlie.

"Gibraltar is a promontory" I knew that, you can walk from Spain to Gibraltar and not get your feet wet. You can't make a "Gibraltar monkey" of me.

Foxy, I've got nothing against women's mags, just being my irresponsible self on this topic. I have little interest in the goings on with the British royal family.

Dear Paul,

Fair enough.

Foxy, that is not to say I would not vote for a republic tomorrow. I find it repugnant that other human beings should be glorified, and worshiped in some strange way as the monarchy is. I hold no belief in the superior entitlement through birth of others, the so called royalty of some. I am too much of an egalitarian to accept that mystical nonsense. In my eyes all human beings are born equal, some earn respect and admiration, through actions and deeds, but none are born superior.

Dear Paul,

I don't think that the Monarchy is "worshipped." I think
rather than using the word "worship" perhaps a better
term would be "affection." And I personally don't object
to having a Head of State who is above politics.

Most people are involved with celebrity culture in some
form. Americans especially. Take - the Kennedy, the Bush,
the Clinton, the Roosevelt (back in their day) dynasties. And
possibly soon to be the Trump dynasty?

Many people are more thrilled to meet the Queen and are far
less impressed with the current British PM - T. May.

Then also you have the thrill that people get out of having
titles bestowed upon them like - Sir Richard Branson, Sir
Tom Jones, Dame J. Dench, Helen Mirren, Sir Elton John,
and the list goes on.

Funny world we live in.

Foxy,

Much as I admire the Monarchy as an institution, some of the past Monarchs have been right royal pratts.

I have a title myself, a minor one, but I don't use it, except when in Britain when it comes in handy especially for getting bookings; ranging from British Rail to the Ballet.

Some Poms have built in deference.

Hi Foxy, I did not mean "worshipped" in the literal sense, rather some kind of cult worship of something which in reality is not warranted. Affection, people have affection for their dogs and cats so I suppose they can have affection for people whose persona is possible a distortion contrived by the popular media, there's those women's mags again.
Take this example, Camilla wife of Charles, is generally held in low regard, whilst Catherine wife of William is held in much higher esteem by the royal lovers. This is simply a creation of the popular media, and may well be a distortion of reality.

On a personal level, we are about to be presented with three new mokopuna, grandchildren, but not in the European sense of the word, there mothers are nieces, one a grand niece Hiamoe (Wendy), but in Maori culture those children have a similar status to ones direct grandchildren. This will make 11 direct, plus I don't know how many indirect. The two in Sydney have asked that Auntie represent their own mothers, one has passed on, one is in NZ at the births, which are due in June, July and in Brisbane in August. More exciting than celebrity culture for us.

I've grown up with having my family admire the
British Monarchy. And it's just something I have
taken for granted over the decades.

Thank You for your contributions once again to
this discussion.

Congratulations, Paul;
I'm expecting my second great, grand-fatherhood soon.

Thanks Issy, and congratulations to you as well, soon to become a great granddad once again. We are expecting two boys, and one I think will also be a boy, but the parents have chosen not to know, or are not saying. Our grand niece is having her third at 26, and her auntie, our niece, is having her first at 32. Strange to see two girls, both very much hapu, with one referring to the other as auntie.

I think he will do a lot of good

Hi Foxy, so were my parents, like her mother, my mother was a devout Catholic, so another agenda there. My father in particular was a protestant to no great extent, rather a 'red ragger', but at the same time an extremely conservative person who believed in the monarchy, British heritage and all that, as many Labor men did in those days. It's hard in this day and age to reconcile that a person could be, on the one hand an agitator for change, and at the same time hold extremely conservatives views on a whole range of social issues. My father was the greatest influence on my political thinking, encouraging me to be both a committed unionist and active Labor Party member.

If it was not for the media constantly peddling gossip and reporting on the trivial goings on within the royal family I think as far as Australia is concerned as a multicultural society, they would slip into total irrelevance and soon be consigned to the dust bin of history. In my younger days I thought that the destruction of the constitutional monarchy was absolutely necessary before real social change could take place, I no longer believe that.

In a perverted twist the future titular head of British based conservatism, the Monarch, could act as a catalyst for social change, so they can serve a useful purpose. For the true conservatives, Charles is already viewed as "suspect", holding strong opinions on social issues, and at times being rather forthright about them, Dangerous to the cause so some conservatives do believe.

Dear Paul,

My family fled from the Soviet Regime. They lost family
members, their country, and everything they held dear.
However, they managed to make a life for themselves
here and instilled in me the importance of
education and being independent. I think that Prince
Charles will make a good King because of his concerns
for social issues and he may have a positive effect on
the country. Who knows. The Monarchy has already changed
in many ways, regarding divorce for example. Who knows
what the future will bring - especially regarding Australia?