Duchess of Cambridge: What Now for Catherine? Future Duties, Roles, Responsibilities

[Daria_S]

I have no issues with regards to debating numbers of engagements. But Kate has done hundreds of official engagements, she has been on numerous official foreign tours. She would have done her first official solo tour if not for her pregnancy. She is active in the Royal Foundation. Her charities have nothing but glowing remarks for her.

Now she and William have a young family and Kate is prioritising the raising of her children as her main 'job' for the time being. Good I say.

Obviously things are still moving forward. There is a lot of talk of another major tour next year.

Given the fact that neither William nor Harry are full-time I don't think its fair to single Kate out.

Her numbers are right in step with Harry's and her focusing on family is just as much work as flying an air ambulance.

Of course this is the life of a royal. They exist to be criticised and Kate's a big girl and can handle herself. She doesn't need me defending her.

Excellent post. This constant harping on Catherine to perform more, when she's a part-time Royal is getting a bit tiresome. If the charities, and the Queen are pleased with her performance, who are we to criticize?


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Rudolph]

If Charles and Camilla were a younger more glamorous couple, the press wouldn't have any issues. Ageism works against them.

The tabloids want W&K to be the Fred and Mary of England. The public face of the monarchy and the glamour couple.

The problem is Britain already has an heir to the throne. The tabloids want Kate to the young Princess of Wales and Queen in waiting. The problem is Britain already has a Princess of Wales.

W&K get criticised because they're in the wrong generation for the tabloid press.

Its interesting that the 'serious' papers have no issues with Cambridges. The Times and the Telegraph couldn't be more positive.

Its the low end papers like the Sun and DM that have to resort to gutter journalism.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[...]
Its interesting that the 'serious' papers have no issues with Cambridges. The Times and the Telegraph couldn't be more positive. [...]

Even if a wind escapes the Queen by accident, The Telegraph will tell us that it smelled like Chanel No 5... Really, if there is one monarchist newspaper, then it is The Telegraph...

 

[Skippyboo]

And in 20 years when there is an elderly King Charles, a middle aged Prince and Princess of Wales, the press will be calling for George and Charlotte to be more visible at Royal events.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

Even if a wind escapes the Queen by accident, The Telegraph will tell us that it smelled like Chanel No 5... Really, if there is one monarchist newspaper, then it is The Telegraph...

Now that is what I would call breaking news.

 

[Honeybees]

I suspect that a move towards more children, sporting and arts based charities and organizations are highly likely for The DOC.

 

[Osipi]

I suspect that a move towards more children, sporting and arts based charities and organizations are highly likely for The DOC.

I think so too. For the most part, I think what we will see is William, Harry and Kate taking on charities and organizations that will fit nicely into their Royal Foundation. Youth, Conservation and Armed Forces covers such a vast area of possibilities. There will also be what I would call "loner" patronages such as William has with FIFA and Kate with the Scouts and Harry with his Sentebale in Lesotho. The possibilities are endless.

An amazing thing just hit me. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if in the future, both Kate and Charlotte become part of the Girl Guides. It *is* a royal tradition after all.

 

[Honeybees]

Excellent post. This constant harping on Catherine to perform more, when she's a part-time Royal is getting a bit tiresome. If the charities, and the Queen are pleased with her performance, who are we to criticize?


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

. The Court publishes an official list at the end of each year which is widely reported on and I could be wrong but DOC was very far down that list last year. It is relative but I remember reading the media in England commenting on DOC engagements against H.M, DOE and even Princess Anne.

 

[cepe]

. The Court publishes an official list at the end of each year which is widely reported on and I could be wrong but DOC was very far down that list last year. It is relative but I remember reading the media in England commenting on DOC engagements against H.M, DOE and even Princess Anne.

The Court doesn't publish any statistics regarding public royal engagements.

All the figures quoted in the media generally comes from one source: a retired gentleman, Mr Tim O'Donovan, who send his data to The Times every year. Other papers then repeat the information

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

That is one of the weird preoccupations by the British media: counting who-was-where-and-who-did-what. I have not seen this sort of lists in other monarchies. They are not so interested in that. The King is the King and the royal family is the royal family. That is it. This constant calculating makes life a hell for British royals. Give them a break, I would say...

 

[Honeybees]

Duc you are aware no doubt of the origins of this list and why it is published? The role it plays regarding The State? England, unless there has been a sysmatic and/or tragic occurrence of which I am unaware, currently has no king.

The Court doesn't publish any statistics regarding public royal engagements.

All the figures quoted in the media generally comes from one source: a retired gentleman, Mr Tim O'Donovan, who send his data to The Times every year. Other papers then repeat the information

I believe that there is an official list prepared by The Royal Household for The Government annually. This has to do with budgeting and I am also aware of the annual count done every year from the published Court Circular.

 

[Osipi]

. The Court publishes an official list at the end of each year which is widely reported on and I could be wrong but DOC was very far down that list last year. It is relative but I remember reading the media in England commenting on DOC engagements against H.M, DOE and even Princess Anne.

This comparison I find very unbalanced and very unfair to Kate. Last year, Kate was the only one that was pregnant and suffering with HG.

I agree with Duc_et_Pair that it is a weird obsession. None of the British Royal Family are puppets on a string. They do what they do and its generally laid out and planned well in advance by the "Firm" that decides these things. Its not a race. Its not employment where certain mandatory hours and appearance need to be met and they get paid for it and most certainly not a popularity contest. They just do what they do.

 

[Honeybees]

Osipi, love the girl guides suggestion and yes there is a significant royal history to this It was alleged that whilst in Wales DOC, taught a group of guides how to gut a fish. I only recall her recently doing one Scout visit. They remain amazing organizations, the girl guides and the scouts. It would be great to see royal patronage and involvement.

 

[HRHHermione]

Osipi, love the girl guides suggestion and yes there is a significant royal history to this It was alleged that whilst in Wales DOC, taught a group of guides how to gut a fish. I only recall her recently doing one Scout visit. They remain amazing organizations, the girl guides and the scouts. It would be great to see royal patronage and involvement.

They have a royal patron already- the Queen- which is why Kate volunteered with the scouts but never became their royal patron. And I believe the Duke of Kent is their president?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Honeybees]

They have a royal patron already- the Queen- which is why Kate volunteered with the scouts but never became their royal patron. And I believe the Duke of Kent is their president?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

Apologies I did mean when the current Royals, if any, fulfilling those roles are no longer around. It feels wrong somehow to discuss HM and other senior royals not being here.

 

[Rudolph]

That is one of the weird preoccupations by the British media: counting who-was-where-and-who-did-what. I have not seen this sort of lists in other monarchies. They are not so interested in that. The King is the King and the royal family is the royal family. That is it. This constant calculating makes life a hell for British royals. Give them a break, I would say...

The issue with engagements is very odd here because the BRF themselves do not actually provide a count. It will say the Princess Royal met with the ambassador or that the Duke of Kent attended a meeting.

Its up to others to decide if Princess Anne did three 'official' engagements or just one.

The other big issue here is the 'value' attached to these numbers. If royal A does 5 five engagements and royal B does three engagements the press automatically deems royal A the harder 'worker' regardless of the types of engagements.

Last year by the press count Kate did 94 official engagements to Harry's 97 but that was enough to put her in last place so she was deemed to have worked less than Harry.

Given that no member of the BRF receives a salary for any of this and it makes for some strange commentary.

 

[Osipi]

Apologies I did mean when the current Royals, if any, fulfilling those roles are no longer around. It feels wrong somehow to discuss HM and other senior royals not being here.

Actually, I was more or less referring to Kate and Charlotte being involved in the Girl Guides not so much as in an official capacity but as things moms and daughters do together.

 

[Skippyboo]

Duchess of Cambridge: What Now for Catherine? Future Duties, Roles, Responsib...

Sophie is the President of the Girl Guides in UK, Patron is the Queen. The All England Club aka Wimbledon has the Duke of Kent as President with the Queen of Patron.

As repeated earlier, the Royal Household does not keep or release a official count. A private gentleman makes a list and sends to the Times. Just like on this forum with Iloveberties count.

With the expenditure review, it's more the household spent this much on salaries, entertaining, travel. The cost of travel for an overseas trip would be known. There's isn't a budget per day. The household gets a set percentage of the profit of the crown state but how they use it is up to them.

Kate can't take over positions already filled by other royals unless the give them up such as DoE did with Fields in Trust and William took over. She also can't decide herself to be Colonel in Chief of a military regiment. She has to be appointed by the Queen.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[HRHHermione]

Sophie is the President of the Girl Guides in UK, Patron is the Queen. The All England Club aka Wimbledon has the Duke of Kent as President with the Queen of Patron.

The Duke of Kent is also the President of Scouting UK, and their patron is also the Queen.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[AdmirerUS]

Actually, I was more or less referring to Kate and Charlotte being involved in the Girl Guides not so much as in an official capacity but as things moms and daughters do together.

Kate's involvement in the guides has been supportive and mostly local - not stealing any thunder from the Queen and Sophie.
How cool would it be to have Kate be your guide leader-mom? I'm sure it would get out of control. But a regional presence, dropping in for troops around Anmer would be niiiiiice.

 

[Osipi]

Kate's involvement in the guides has been supportive and mostly local - not stealing any thunder from the Queen and Sophie.
How cool would it be to have Kate be your guide leader-mom? I'm sure it would get out of control. But a regional presence, dropping in for troops around Anmer would be niiiiiice.

Trust me, it gets in your blood. My grandmother was a Girl Scout leader and my mom was my Brownie leader and I followed scouting through high school and was both a Brownie and Daisy leader and my daughter was a Girl Scout. Drats.. she only has boys so that ends the tradition.

Oh you do know that the best thing about Girl Scouting as a teen is um.. the Boy Scouts right?

Kate was a Brownie and in official capacity she took on volunteering to patronage a few units, I believe, of boy scouts in Wales. I don't think Kate would do just a "photo op presence" for any kind of scouting but get involved on a personal level with her own kid.

 

[Skippyboo]

The scouts in the UK are coed so George and Charlotte could both join if they wanted to.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

The scouts in the UK are coed so George and Charlotte could both join if they wanted to.

Dagnabit. Age showing again. Nevermind.

 

[Dman]

Kate's involvement in the guides has been supportive and mostly local - not stealing any thunder from the Queen and Sophie.
How cool would it be to have Kate be your guide leader-mom? I'm sure it would get out of control. But a regional presence, dropping in for troops around Anmer would be niiiiiice.

I think it would be great if she got involved in the scouts in a more official way.

 

[hernameispekka]

I think it would be great if she got involved in the scouts in a more official way.

But I mean... can she? Isn't that niche already filled by other royals. She has done stuff with the scouts plus been at a garden party focused on the scouts. I don't know what other things she can do without "stepping on their territory"

 

[Dman]

Sophie is the President of the Girl Guides in UK, Patron is the Queen. The All England Club aka Wimbledon has the Duke of Kent as President with the Queen of Patron.

As repeated earlier, the Royal Household does not keep or release a official count. A private gentleman makes a list and sends to the Times. Just like on this forum with Iloveberties count.

With the expenditure review, it's more the household spent this much on salaries, entertaining, travel. The cost of travel for an overseas trip would be known. There's isn't a budget per day. The household gets a set percentage of the profit of the crown state but how they use it is up to them.

Kate can't take over positions already filled by other royals unless the give them up such as DoE did with Fields in Trust and William took over. She also can't decide herself to be Colonel in Chief of a military regiment. She has to be appointed by the Queen.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I think it would do some good for Catherine if she was handed down some responsibility. I'm looking forward to The Queen appointing her to a few honorary colonelcy's. She's a senior royal, she can handle stuff like that by now.

 

[Osipi]

The thing is that when the time comes and its the right time, Charlotte and Kate could create as much attention for the "cause" with doing what moms and daughters have done for ages.

It'll be news and give attention to the Girl Guides and everyone and their grandmother will want to be one. That's what media attention does. Kate doesn't have to be a "patron" or "official royal sponsor". Just the fact that the royal great granddaughter is a Girl Guide in a regular troop somewhere is something will give realms of stories to write about.

Unless Charlotte does something scandalous such as roasting a marshmallow the wrong way.. the press will make out of it what they will.

Right now with Kate being focused on her family, the spotlight is still on her and as Dman suggested that more official roles be implemented, I disagree. It wouldn't make a difference at all.

 

[Rudolph]

Kate's first major appointment will probably be something military but even something as traditional as royals and the military is rapidly changing.

Regiments are disappearing overnight. The military is currently half the size it was when Andrew was in Falklands War. The British Army is at its smallest size since the Napoleonic Wars. The army can barely scrape enough soldiers together to Troop the Colour each year.

So yes Kate will receive military appointments by virtue of who she is but the problem is finding a regiment for her to be colonel of.

 

[Dman]

The thing is that when the time comes and its the right time, Charlotte and Kate could create as much attention for the "cause" with doing what moms and daughters have done for ages.

It'll be news and give attention to the Girl Guides and everyone and their grandmother will want to be one. That's what media attention does. Kate doesn't have to be a "patron" or "official royal sponsor". Just the fact that the royal great granddaughter is a Girl Guide in a regular troop somewhere is something will give realms of stories to write about.

Unless Charlotte does something scandalous such as roasting a marshmallow the wrong way.. the press will make out of it what they will.

Right now with Kate being focused on her family, the spotlight is still on her and as Dman suggested that more official roles be implemented, I disagree. It wouldn't make a difference at all.

Yes, we all know Catherine private time is focused on family. I just think her official roles should grow a bit. I think it's time to hand some more official responsibility down to her.

 

[Rudolph]

Who knows how the monarchy will operate under Charles but we definitely know how the Queen runs things.

Kate will be given responsibilities in time but the Queen isn't go to force anyone to 'retire' to make room for the youngsters. There is a reason why people like the Gloucesters and Kents are still around and hold down important positions even though they're down to close to 40th in line to the throne and that's because of loyalty.

I know this gets repeated often but Kate's time will come just like William's time will come just like Harry's time will come.

The Queen is from a different age of the world. She has an Edwardian court still heavily influenced by the memory her mother and Victorian grandmother.

And she still may reign for another decade.