On October 19th, Queen Elizabeth “reluctantly” cancelled her two-day trip to Northern Ireland, citing exhaustion. We later learned that the Queen was checked into the hospital later that day, and that she stayed overnight for “tests.” She was back at Windsor Castle the next day, the 20th. The news about the Queen’s hospitalization and cover-up came out on the 21st, which is the same day the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge headed off for vacation. By all accounts, the Cambridges only returned to the UK over the weekend. Meaning, they were gone, in the wind, for ten days of the Queen’s “health crisis.” Prince Charles, meanwhile, kept his own schedule of events, travels and more during that same time frame.
Many have been focused on how terrible and lazy the Cambridges looked, but it’s actually far worse than that. William is one of the “Counsellors of State,” and in the Queen’s absence or incapacity, he would have to make decisions in her place. Or, he would have needed to do that if he wasn’t on vacation. That criticism is built into this rather shady story about how Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, will need to take a larger role in the coming weeks/months.
Palace aides are drafting plans for the Duchess of Cornwall to take on a significantly greater role – and it is possible she could even be appointed to an elite group of senior Royals who can carry out duties on behalf of the Queen. The Monarch is still receiving her daily red boxes of Government documents. But constitutional experts last night expressed concern about the preparedness of the Royal Family if she becomes unable to fulfil the basic role of a Head of State. Significantly, however, sources say that Camilla, who was praised for a speech last week in which she called for more urgent action to tackle sexual violence against women, will be asked to help manage the workload.
Under rules enshrined in law and detailed on the official Royal website, four members of the family are currently entitled as ‘Counsellors of State’ to take over from the Queen if she is unable to perform her duties – if, for example, she were abroad or unwell. These Counsellors are Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince Andrew and Prince Harry, chosen because they are the four next in line to the throne and at least over the age of 18. This rules out William’s children George, Charlotte and Louis. But neither Prince Andrew – who is fighting sex claims lodged in the US – nor Prince Harry, who has quit official duties and now lives in California, are currently working members of the Royal Family.
Vernon Bogdanor, the author of Monarchy And The Constitution and professor of government at King’s College London, said: ‘A Counsellor not domiciled in the UK cannot act, so that excludes Harry. The next in line and over the required age of 21 would be Princess Beatrice. However, most of the functions of the Head of State can be devolved. It is not, for example, constitutionally necessary for the Queen to attend the State Opening of Parliament.’
Two Counsellors of State are required to act together in a ‘quorum’ to perform crucial functions, such as providing Royal assent to bills passing through Parliament and appointing High Court judges. Without such assent, these functions of Government cannot be enacted.
Dr Craig Prescott, a constitutional expert at Bangor University, said the current situation posed a potential problem for the smooth running of Government. ‘There is a small but genuine risk that the non-availability of Counsellors of State could impede the operation of the constitution. It could certainly make the day-to-day running of Government much more tricky. The Counsellors of State are a Plan B from a constitutional point of view, but what happens when Plan B isn’t quite ideal? The Queen may look to add the Duchess of Cornwall, who would become a Counsellor of State when Charles is King anyway. Or they could go down the line to Princesses Beatrice or Eugenie, or add more members of the family, like Princess Anne or Prince Edward to the list.’
A source close to the Palace said: ‘This is a constitutional headache. With an ageing monarch there are talks about what will happen if the Queen is unable to work for some reason. You can’t have Andrew and Harry do it and Charles and William are extremely busy.’
Basically, for ten days, Charles was the only viable “counsellor of state” in the UK, because Andrew is a rapist, Harry got out before he was exiled and Lazy Bill was on vacation. So this story is pointing out several things at once: that other counsellors of state need to be added, that Camilla will likely be given more power and responsibilities, and that William is a constitutional lightweight who eschews even the most basic role of “sitting there, in the UK, in case of emergency.” Also: Charles went to the G20 summit in Rome over the weekend. Meaning the only official counsellor of state in the UK for about 48 hours was Prince Andrew. Yiiiikes.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, WENN.
Lol at William is so busy that he can’t do one of the few official roles that he has. Busy doing what!?
Holidaying, avoiding Kate, visiting Rose, beating down Carole’s pro-Kate propaganda, trying to promote himself over his father in the tabloids, instructing Jason to avoid a Bot Sentinel investigation in to KP’s role in the Meghan attacks, scheming against his brother and wife. Busy busy busy busy busy.
We can’t forget his plotting to take over America. Prince Humperdinck is swamped!
@JT: Exactly william isn’t busy at all. I seriously don’t understand why the royal rota are so afraid to call him out. He went on bloody holiday when the queen needed him the most to step in for her. I know that they want to pretend to be a regular family and hands on parents, but even in normal families holidays get canceled when a family member is seriously ill.
Apologies. I forgot about William’s very important job of being an asshole. The poor dear, he must be exhausted.
Every member of the BRF has carried out their planned schedule since the queen canceled her NI trip. I don’t think think she is experiencing a health crisis so much as being forced to face facts that she is 95 years old and can’t carry on like she used to.
I think the counsellor issue is Charles embiggening Camilla, reminding the world Andy is a pedo, and taking a swipe at William. Three birds, one stone.
He leaks valuable information in exchange for good coverage. They’re just looking out for themselves.
The end line of the post made me laugh out loud LOL Andrew… LOL And these comments are the best
I know!! How delusional they are! Busy, busy, busy being lazy. That’s all he is busy doing.
Watch William try to step up in the next few months. He only does that when he has been publicly shamed into doing so,like the way they suddenly had so much to prove with the Sussexes out shining them.
He’ll maintain a semblance of stepping up but once you look at the numbers, it’ll be same old, same old. Burger King will do a flurry of events which will get stretched out and then he will disappear. The holidays are just around the corner so the poor sausage will back on vacation soon enough.
They do the same with Kate. Every year they say Kate will step up, she is coming into her own, it’s her year, etc.. and every year she has the same amount of engagements. This year she has 40 so far. That’s pathetic. But she is SO important to the Monarchy and the Queen totally depends on her….
I had a great laugh at Us Magazine claiming the Queen is “close” to Kate and calls her the “voice of reason.”:
@ Tessa, they should have named KKWeen Buttons voice of two seasons, spring and fall as she is never heard from during the other two seasons!
I would bet cash that, in his heart of (cold, shriveled) hearts, he’d love to follow his younger brother to a new life.
If she was unable to perform her duties, Charles wouldn’t have gone to Rome. BTW, the Queen was seen driving her car on the Windsor estate today so she doesn’t seem to be incapacitated. I think her main problem is she gets tired often and she can’t stay on her feet for long periods. As for this Counsellor of State thing, I think it’s much ado about nothing. The Mail on Sunday has no info on Harry and Meghan so they brought up this story instead. If the Queen can’t work Charles will step in. According the royal rota, he’s been doing that already and I’ve even seen one of them comparing Charles to the US Vice President.
Their elitism, racism prejudice and overall stupidity prevented them to really see the reverberations of pushing Harry aside.
Now they are twisting themselves into knots to make do with William while also keeping the charged of Elegant Bill a d CEO Kkkate “preparations for kingship”
I don’t know if this is actually in the works or if it’s CH trying to get this to happen but makes sense to “promote” Camilla. She’s the next queen/consort/whatever they’ll call her compared to Beatrice who is 10th in line (and there might be a hesitancy to promote Andrew’s daughters to power). If they want to promote someone to replace Harry and/or Andrew, Camilla going first makes sense.
Why Camilla, though? Why not Edward? That makes more sense to me.
Or Ann. She’s one of the hardest working royals in the family.
Because Camilla is the next consort and Edward is 14th in line and only going to go down and not up. Same with Anne (she’s 17th and in about 10-15 years, she could be out of the first 20 completely)
Camilla will be a Counsellor of State when Charles is king, so this isn’t any great shock. If they choose to move her up now, she’s simply taking the place of Philip. It is supposed to be the first four people in the line of succession over the age of 21 PLUS the monach’s spouse. Presumably to have an odd number for tie-breakers if needed.
If they’re going to make up a rule about Harry not being one (‘not domiciled in the UK’ hasn’t been on the Royal.uk list of requirements before)? Then it is Charles, William, Andrew, Beatrice, plus possibly Camilla in Philip’s role.
When Charles is king? William, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Camilla.
IF William is king? Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Kate. That’s if George is under the age of 21 when William is king. Once he is 21+, it boots Edward off the list.
William will return shortly. Since, quite simply, you need at least two of them to act in tandem, this tells me Charles and William cannot work together.
Or else Andrew’s oldest daughter would be pulled in with no changes needed.
@CWS, good point about them having to work in tandem! I could see a situation where Charles is trying to get Camilla added as an additional “vote” on his side, whereas Andrew might want to hand more power to his daughters instead. It feels like the power struggles are starting to become more overt.
Also, updating the counselor of state list once Harry left is another example of “things the courtiers should have been working on behind the scenes in addition to planning for the Queen’s death announcement and funeral”.
Aren’t the York sister’s not fond of PWT and KKKate because she mean girlllled them?
I am not sure Charles will allow the York sisters to be on Counsellor of State. He is adamant about their not doing royal work.
It really seems like they are trying to say that William is lazy and worthless without saying it. According to this you need two counsellors of state for some of the duties so if you have Charles and Andrew – that is not ideal obviously bc Andrew is a rapist but its still official and legal under the law. But like Kaiser said Charles was out of the country this weekend and it seems William was as well.
I’m surprised at this point that they don’t have a rule that two counsellors have to be in the England at all times, given the Queen’s health.
I wish they would be more direct in calling out William. It is a fact that he is lazy. The court circular is available for all to see; just make an article about that. The press wouldn’t even have to add any embellishment or innuendos.
Denmark is better organised on this, ArtHistorian can give the particulars. In their case, it is a ‘Regent’ who is named while the monarch is out of the county. The list of possible regents includes Fred, Joachim, Benedikte, and recently Mary was added to the list. Mary is not in the line of succession, just like Camilla isn’t, but can serve in the capacity of Regent for short periods.
“Regent in Denmark seems very much comparable to the British Councilor of State. In theory the British version should work – however, the greatest weakness of the British monarchy is the people who make up the BRF. The problem in Britain is that Harry has exited the institution, it is no longer a secret that Andrew is a criminal so his is an extreme liability to the institution and William is just terminally lazy. In effect, there is only Charles to fill this role when the Monarch is unable to fulfill her constitutional duties. They can’t use Andrew because they need to protect the image of the institution, Harry lives on another continent (so there’s practical considerations + he’s made it clear that he’s left the institution) and William just refuses to do the work. It is not the way things are organizes that’s the problem, it’s the people who’s supposed to fill these roles who are. And that is the biggest weakness in any constitutional monarchy in a nutshell: this institution is, in fact, very much dependent on the quality of the people who embody it.
@ArtHistorian – this is so interesting because you’ve pointed out the real issue. It’s not just the quality of the current RF, it’s also that, apart from Charles, there isn’t anyone who actually wants to do the work of maintaining the monarchy.
What’s wrong with appointing Edward to replace Harry and Beatrice to replace Andrew? Why skip blood for a married in?
Because Camilla is the next consort (regardless of what your opinion of her may be) and as @notasugarhere points out above, she’s going to become counsellor anyways when Charles is King so it makes sense to pick her over the 10th in line (Beatrice) and 14th in line (Edward). If she becomes counsellor while the queen is still alive, she’s just getting the “job” a bit earlier.
I don’t know if the requirement is 4, but if Andrew and Harry are out, then they need one more. So why not Beatrice or Edward?
If they need to replace BOTH Harry and Andrew (and I doubt they’ll replace Andrew because he’s still domiciled in the UK and legally allowed to be head of state. Morally, of course, he shouldn’t be) then it’ll be Camilla and Beatrice (because she’s closer to the throne than Edward) only. Not Edward because, again, Camilla is the future consort so it makes sense to give it to her and not the 14th in line.
The idea is four in the line of succession + the monarch’s spouse. If they oust both Harry and Andrew (legally unlikely)? It would be Charles, William, Beatrice, Eugenie, and Camilla (as spouse of future monarch as tie-breaker). They generally always have five — four in the line + spouse. Edward is behind both B&E in the line of succession, so they wouldn’t skip Eugenie for Edward.
There are plenty of countries with the queen as head of state and yet they manage to pass laws and run their government without her direct involvement. So this councillor of state business is much ado about nothing.
It may be Charles trying to find a way to oust (or diminish) Andrew’s power as a Counsellor. If he has to get the Counsellor’s to agree to a Regency, Andrew might refuse. If Camilla is there and gets a vote? Things go differently.
Exactly. If the royal family’s inability to sign off on legislation and such is getting in the way, then change the rules so they aren’t part of it at all. They’re already almost totally useless. Let’s make it extra official.
The royals couldn’t have made a better argument for how useless and unnecessary the British monarchy is if they tried.
These people are not prepared for a monarch in declining health. They took for granted Elizabeth being so stalwart and her determination to be Queen until she literally drops dead. Now they’re scrambling because she can’t be the reliable workhorse she used to be.
William behaves like a boy. It’s kind of astonishing.
@ Merricat, it’s not astonishing, it’s unacceptable and disgusting!! Chaz needs to start putting his feet to the fire. I think I have mentioned this before. Burger King is so greedy as well as lazy, Chaz should withhold his allowance. If the Lambridges want to take a trip to Mystique, they must work for it. Limit the number of homes they have, limit their monthly expenses as well as limiting budgets for the homes. The Lambridges do not need more than one home. As there are plenty of royal properties where they can stay during visits and family gatherings.
Bottom line; make The Other Brother work for his allowance. And his stick figure hyena wife as well.
Even more astounding when you consider that QEII became queen when she was just 26, and for the most part, she hit the ground running. Yet they still talk about William “preparing,” “getting ready,” etc., even though he’s pushing 40, and nobody prominent is saying WTF. I can’t believe how much the BRF *and* the media coddle him!
Let Edward work already, Chuck! And add Anne too. They probably understand the duties better than Camilla, who is already working as hard as her health allows.
Camilla has had to cut short tours because of health issues. She may do fewer duties, but she still does more than Kate.
~If this was such a critical issue then Charles and William should not have been allowed to be out of the country at the same time. Particularly since W was vacationing not working and had already been away for several days. He should have come home while Charles was away.
~Camilla will not automatically become a councilor. Prince Philip being made a councilor was one of many exceptions made specifically for him. The order of precedence was changed so he would rank higher than heirs otherwise he would have had to defer to Charles and William. The official name of the Royal house was changed. Etc. But these changes were largely because he was a male consort. And because he and his Uncle ( Mountbatten) were BTS fighting for more power/control.
~This highlights the fact that Anne because of previous sexist rules has been downgraded in the line of succession by her male siblings and nephews and their children. It’s preposterous that Beatrice and Eugenie would be considered before her simply because they are Andrews children.
The Order of Precedence is about who curtseys to whom at family gatherings. It is not about who is a Counsellor, in the line of succession, or Regent.
Philip being a Counsellor wasn’t a special exception. It is the first four in the line of succession over the age of 21 PLUS the monarch’s spouse. Philip being named possible *Regent* for Charles was the exception. They had to get approval of Parliament, plus the approval of Princess Margaret who would rightfully have been named Regent.
This is the way this monarchy works. They didn’t change the rules until 2012, so Anne and her milk-peddling, horse-race peddling children are not going to be Counsellors.
Prior to Philip was the monarch’s spouse automatically a councillor? I did not think that was the case but I stand corrected if it was. I know the order of precedence is not directly related to being a councilor I just mentioned that as an example of one of several changes that were made specifically for Philip. Also, I doubt the Queen would want Camilla to be made a councilor now before Charles is King. Remember she only reluctantly accepted Charles’s marriage to her. It’s a long time ago now but the Queen changed the order of precedence to ensure Anne and Alexandra would not have to curtsy to Camilla. That is how strong her feelings were about Camilla. There is still a debate about whether or not Camilla should be allowed to be called Queen when Charles reigns. She isn’t called princess of Wales. Given her a title that potentially comes with actual power now seems like a huge step.
Although there were regency laws prior to this, it was under George V that the counsellor of state was set up under the 1910 Regency Act. It states that the monarch’s spouse and the next four in line in succession who are over the age of 21 and domiciled in the UK are counsellor of state. (There is an exception for the heir apparent and presumptive to become counsellor of state at age 18 since that is when they can ascend the throne without a regency).
So Charles wanting to add Camilla is skipping ahead a bit. She will be once he is monarch by law. As to why he wants her there sooner, well I agree with nota that it’s likely relating to overruling Andrew.
It has nothing to do with Camilla. The Queen changed the Order of Precedence many times, mostly because Anne and Alexandra didn’t want to curtsey to anyone. She changed it so they wouldn’t to Diana, to Fergie, to Sophie, to Camilla, to Kate, etc. She also changed it so Beatrice and Eugenie wouldn’t curtsey to Kate.
Camilla is the Princess of Wales. She chooses not to go by that title, nothing to do with the Queen or orders by the Queen.
The Queen isn’t as against infidelity and divorce as you seem to think. She was going to let Margaret marry Townsend, keep everything, and only her kids would be out of the succession because of marriage to a divorced Catholic. Three of her four adult children are divorced. Her nephew is divorced. She recognizes it is a reality in the modern world. Given her beaming smiles at Camilla and Charles’s blessing service, I don’t see her as unhappy about the marriage.
Whatever. This family is so bloated compared to other European families.
Hopefully this will lay bare for the British public how the catastrophic behavior of the BRF over the past few years has serious consequences.
They made there mess.. they protected the wrong royals. I hope the media has a field day, because if they are focused on them they can leave the Duke and Duchess of Sussex alone. I’m sure the sun soaked Cambridge’s will return eventually.
So it sounds like someone is adding in the part about senior royals not working or not domiciled in the UK. As usual they are adding rules just for Harry (and Andrew). The law is the counselor of state are the monarch’s spouse and the next four in like who are over 21. Harry is over 21 and a UK citizen , that should be enough if he wants to get involved.
Big ‘if’ though.
Seeing what we have seen from Harry and his calling to duty and his grandmother, he probably would get involved (to help out).
He absolutely will not. Just trying to live his life has exposed him to death threats and character assassination. If he’s not coming back to the Firm he’s not going to help out in this capacity. And it might endanger projects with his foundation.
He tried to fulfil his duty and they pushed him out. Why on earth would he want to step back into any iteration of that role?
Legally its his role and he seems to love his granny, and it’s a temporary need.
Personally I don’t like how he was dismissed so casually. It should be Harry’s decision.
Of course it will be his decision. Yes, legally it is his role. Being a Prince is also legally his birthright. But there is no way that if he’s not going to help with the Firm that he’ll do this. There are plenty of temporary things he could do with the Firm that he hasn’t done, whether it’s temporary has no bearing on this. This is a major procedural part of the monarchy functioning. He’s not going to get involved in that and expose himself or jeopardize his initiatives at home.
He loves his granny but that’s as far as it goes. He didn’t stay in the Firm for love of her. Why would he do this?
They can lie in the bed they made.
The Regency Act of 1937 first stated that counsellor in state needed to be domiciled in the UK. Of course back then the context was a looming war with Germany.
@Nic919, yes, according to the following site. It was written about back in Jan. 2020. From what I gathered, it seems they really only involve themselves when it’s a royal issue. The grey men advisers are probably more involved than any members of the family. Charles probably has read whatever comes in the government boxes more than the Queen. I agree with those saying that Harry probably has little to no interest in any of this at this point.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/01/21/craig-prescott-harry-and-meghan-regency-counsellors-of-state-and-a-slimmed-down-royal-family/
Kate as CoS when William takes the throne.
‘Oh! Oh my gosh, yes! Um, counselor of…er yes of state!’
“Yes, I, um, am so thrilled to be attending this Privy Council meeting, um, it’s so important all of your activities, because um, you know, it is so important for the councillors to get together and have their meetings, em, so, you know, it’s hugely important for you and us to meet, it’s very very important to be active and meeting together, so yes….”
LOL
It will be such hard work, after meetings, a vacation would be in order for her and for Will.
This whole “problem” only shows how dumb it is to have monarchy.
I’m surprised they would consider Camilla for this before Prince Edward. (I get that Beatrice and Eugenie come before him but still, he is a son of the Monarch and a working Royal)
The line of succession is the line of succession, therefore Beatrice and Eugenie are ahead of Edward. And Camilla will be a Counsellor of State soon enough, why not move her up early?
Some of their hats just annoy me. Especially those asymmetrical ones worn by the queen, to make her less look her age? Ninety-nine percent of them are irksome like that, lol.
Edward and Sophie are working royals and pretty scandal-free. You would think they’re obvious choices. But then Charles would have to play nice and hand over the title of the duke of Edinburgh that was intended to be Edward’s after the death of his father.
Yeah, the entrapment scandal and abandoning her business 1.5 million in debt (which she never repaid), her meangirling of Meghan, and her sycophantic kissing up to W&K? Sophie isn’t the jewel some thought.
Edward is below Andrew, Beatrice, and Eugenie in the line of succession. That’s why Edward would not be in this position. And Sophie never will be. The only person *not in the line of succession* allowed as Counsellor is monarch’s spouse.
Just to call out – just because Charles and William are traveling and aren’t in the country doesn’t mean they can’t act on behalf of the Queen.
The Queen used to travel constantly and she was always working from whatever location. They don’t have to be present to do it.
I still think this is about Charles and William. Maybe a touch of issue with Andrew and Harry and Beatrice.
Or…, you know…. Get rid of this royal assent bullsh**. Radical idea for them I know, but it’s not like they have real power – nor should they. The queen does her duty and assents. What happens if Charles or William decide to pretend they have a say? It’s just a formality. An expensive one.
I was curious to see if Harry indeed would lose this status automatically and found no straight answer.
“Domicile” is not a simple term to define. It is not the same as residence. It is basically that all citizens born in the UK from UK parents are domiciled in the UK abd must pay taxes in the UK.
It is mostly tax related and is a official status to be a UK citizen non UK domiciled, not authomatic. Many rich people ask for this for tax purposes. But I did not find how many days they must live in the UK to fulfill all the obligations …
In Brasil, you are considered resident if you are a citizen and spends 30 days per year there.