General News for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 1: January 2013-December 2014

[muriel]

It's more to do with the fact that Catherine has taken one less holiday than she has done engagements this year. It's about work to holiday ratio for people, including myself.

Have people missed the fact that she is on maternity leave?

Not that it is a direct analogy, but all UK employers offer 12 months maternity leave.

 

[Skippyboo]

George was not with the nanny. He was with his grandparents in Buckleberry . The nanny starts when WK return. The photos of the nanny were taken before WK left. Source of this journalist Emily Andrews twitter feed.

When George was born, KP said the Cambridges would not be employing full time child care help at this time. At this time is the key words. Now times are changed, George is probably weaned and Kate can do engagements and such away from their London base. In order to do more engagements, they needed to get a nanny. You can't complain about the lack of engagements and then complain that she isn't home taking care of her child.

 

[MarNoe]

Could anyone explain to me the reason of criticising their holidays?

Aren't they paying themselves or I missed something?

Thanks in advance.

My sentiments exactly. I really think the old adage (Shakespeare?) "methinks the lady doth protest too much" represents just a bit of jealousy. Whether they take them now or later, if they haven't already, they will have earned these breaks away from scrutiny.

 

[AdmirerUS]

George was not with the nanny. He was with his grandparents in Buckleberry . The nanny starts when WK return. The photos of the nanny were taken before WK left. Source of this journalist Emily Andrews twitter feed.

When George was born, KP said the Cambridges would not be employing full time child care help at this time. At this time is the key words. Now times are changed, George is probably weaned and Kate can do engagements and such away from their London base. In order to do more engagements, they needed to get a nanny. You can't complain about the lack of engagements and then complain that she isn't home taking care of her child.

I disagree. Having said she will not be a full time royal, I understand why people are not happy about this. She has a full time cook/housekeeper, an assistant, bodyguard and now a nanny. Soon she will need a full time manager for all those people. People just assumed she would be a full time royal, off and on as she had children. But surprise - there will be no off and on and full time will not be for years to come. In the meantime, it is reasonable for average people to think that if she is not going to work, she may not need all that hired help.

 

[Dman]

Everyone is still waiting to find out if William & Catherine will become fulltime members of the royal family. My guess is that since they have hired a full-time nanny, full-time duties are coming up.

 

[Skippyboo]

I disagree. Having said she will not be a full time royal, I understand why people are not happy about this. She has a full time cook/housekeeper, an assistant, bodyguard and now a nanny. Soon she will need a full time manager for all those people. People just assumed she would be a full time royal, off and on as she had children. But surprise - there will be no off and on and full time will not be for years to come. In the meantime, it is reasonable for average people to think that if she is not going to work, she may not need all that hired help.

The Prince of Wales has 11 gardeners as employees which is around the same amount of people that William, Harry and Kate employ. All of which excluding the RPOs are paid by the Duchy of Cornwall which will pay for William's family until he is King.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Have people missed the fact that she is on maternity leave?

Not that it is a direct analogy, but all UK employers offer 12 months maternity leave.

Sorry but for me with this couple it's always been all or nothing. Maternity leave is just another excuse for people to use in my book. If other royals can go back to work quicker, than Catherine can. I'd put money on her being pregnant by the end of the year and then we have another two years of barely there engagements.

George was not with the nanny. He was with his grandparents in Buckleberry . The nanny starts when WK return. The photos of the nanny were taken before WK left. Source of this journalist Emily Andrews twitter feed.

I don't believe that's true, why would you introduce a nanny into a childs life then take the child away for two weeks and then re-introduce him. That makes no sense. The nanny logically would be at buckleberry with the Middletons so George can get used to her before W&C are back.

The Prince of Wales has 11 gardeners as employees which is around the same amount of people that William, Harry and Kate employ. All of which excluding the RPOs are paid by the Duchy of Cornwall which will pay for William's family until he is King.

What's your point?

 

[Anna Catherine]

I disagree. Having said she will not be a full time royal, I understand why people are not happy about this. She has a full time cook/housekeeper, an assistant, bodyguard and now a nanny. Soon she will need a full time manager for all those people. People just assumed she would be a full time royal, off and on as she had children. But surprise - there will be no off and on and full time will not be for years to come. In the meantime, it is reasonable for average people to think that if she is not going to work, she may not need all that hired help.

When did we find out she had a cook/housekeeper? I don't remember that being announced. That being said she has to have bodyguards because of who she is and the assistant, of course, that's pretty self explanatory. The nanny is new before they had a part-time one for engagements and such. I have never assumed she would be full-time because Kensington Palace has never even implied that. It's what people want. She does work whether it's how people want or expect is a whole other thing.

 

[Skippyboo]

General News and Information for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal...Kate-hire-new-Spanish-nanny-for-Prince-George

Richard Palmer also confirms George with grandparents not nanny. WK haven't been gone 2 weeks. The nanny will have almost 3 weeks before they leave on tour to settle in with George.

The housekeeper who was a maid to the Queen came after George's birth as they moved from Wales to Apt 1a KP.

An early poster commented on the staff that the Cambridges have. Compared to other royals, the Cambridge staff is puny thus the comparison with Charles's gardeners who aren't involved with his royal duties.

 

[Skippyboo]

When did we find out she had a cook/housekeeper? I don't remember that being announced. That being said she has to have bodyguards because of who she is and the assistant, of course, that's pretty self explanatory. The nanny is new before they had a part-time one for engagements and such. I have never assumed she would be full-time because Kensington Palace has never even implied that. It's what people want. She does work whether it's how people want or expect is a whole other thing.

The housekeeper came in the summer last year as they prepared to move into the bigger apartment in KP and away from the farmhouse in Wales.

 

[Lumutqueen]

An early poster commented on the staff that the Cambridges have. Compared to other royals, the Cambridge staff is puny thus the comparison with Charles's gardeners who aren't involved with his royal duties.

And you compare what Charles does, Charles' homes and what the Duchy of Cornwall do and you can see why Charles' staff is larger. KP probably has gardeners too. Would you count them as part of Catherine and William's staff? Guess it all comes down to who pays for what.

 

[Sun Lion]

Australian Prime Minister Stepping In For W & C...

...just saw an article where the Racing NSW Chairman, Mr John Messara, actually brought up Royal attendance at the Autumn carnival personally with Her Majesty The Queen when he saw her.

Disappointing W and C won't be going.

Cheers, Sun Lion.

...both the newspaper and television are reporting our Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, will be stepping in to attend the big day of horse-racing here in Sydney, that the Duke and Duchess declined.

Mr Abbott is going to take his race-loving parents - a birthday gift to his ninety year old dad.

(Hope some of his glamorous daughters also go along.)

Shame W and C aren't going - especially if the Queen's horse competes.

Sydney Racing is aiming to rival the Melbourne Cup, Ascot, Dubai and US Breeders' Cup with this autumn racing carnival.

Cheers, Sun Lion.

 

[Princess of Durham]

George was not with the nanny. He was with his grandparents in Buckleberry . The nanny starts when WK return. The photos of the nanny were taken before WK left. Source of this journalist Emily Andrews twitter feed.

When George was born, KP said the Cambridges would not be employing full time child care help at this time. At this time is the key words. Now times are changed, George is probably weaned and Kate can do engagements and such away from their London base. In order to do more engagements, they needed to get a nanny. You can't complain about the lack of engagements and then complain that she isn't home taking care of her child.

Obviously SOME people can, why ask for a reason when there is an opportunity to criticize?

 

[Sun Lion]

Duke and Duchess To Sign First Fleet Bible On Easter Sunday.

I was a bit confused when I read that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would be attending the Easter Sunday Service at Sydney's St Andrew's Cathederal and signing the First Fleet Bible.

The Bible is held by another church and is considered one of Australia's "foundation" books.

Then I read how this Bible was flown across the continent when CHOGM was held in Perth - attended by the Queen of course - a few years ago.

So a few minutes walk between the two CBD churches - though it'll probably be transported by car, (which might take longer with Sydney's traffic and street system), would be no big deal.

The Queen, Prince Phillip, Prince Charles and Diana have all previously signed it, as well as King George V.

I can also see Andrew's signature, but others I can't make out.

(You can see photos of it on "Google Images First Fleet Bible.)

Cheers Sun Lion.

 

[muriel]

Maternity leave is just another excuse for people to use in my book.

So are you suggesting that we should do away with maternity leave per se?

I'd put money on her being pregnant by the end of the year and then we have another two years of barely there engagements.

Are you now resentful of her doing her primary duty of producing an heir and a spare?

That's what happens: people often have children 2-3 years apart, and with maternity leave, they rarely have 6-12 months back of the job before they are pregnant again.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So are you suggesting that we should do away with maternity leave per se?

Someone is rewriting my words. I know mum's who've had children and gone back to work within 2 months of having a baby. I just find maternity leave a poor excuse for Catherine.

Are you now resentful of her doing her primary duty of producing an heir and a spare?

I'm sorry but you're talking to the wrong gal if you think I'm going to swallow that hogwash. As much as I don't like what I see on the surface of Catherine, I would never view her as a baby making machine.

 

[muriel]

Someone is rewriting my words. I know mum's who've had children and gone back to work within 2 months of having a baby. I just find maternity leave a poor excuse for Catherine.

I have known professional women who have been on work conference calls a few hours after giving birth, which does not mean that is what everybody ought to do. The fact of the matter is that it is perfectly acceptable in the UK today to have a year off after the birth of a child. If all British women are entitled to it, why be resentful of Catherine having the same time off (unless it is a conscience decision to be critical of Catherine, irrespective of what the issue might be)? She is still doing the big tour of Aus and NZ, and has done a smattering of engagements, but in reality, I would have been surprised if she had materially increased her public appearances till she is back from Aus / NZ.

I'm sorry but you're talking to the wrong gal if you think I'm going to swallow that hogwash. As much as I don't like what I see on the surface of Catherine, I would never view her as a baby making machine.

It would be perfectly normal for them to try and have another baby in the not too distant future. Why then carp about it? If she did not, I would be more concerned.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I have known professional women who have been on work conference calls a few hours after giving birth, which does not mean that is what everybody ought to do. The fact of the matter is that it is perfectly acceptable in the UK today to have a year off after the birth of a child. If all British women are entitled to it, why be resentful of Catherine having the same time off (unless it is a conscience decision to be critical of Catherine, irrespective of what the issue might be)? She is still doing the big tour of Aus and NZ, and has done a smattering of engagements, but in reality, I would have been surprised if she had materially increased her public appearances till she is back from Aus / NZ.



It would be perfectly normal for them to try and have another baby in the not too distant future. Why then carp about it? If she did not, I would be more concerned.

Maternity leave is for women who have actually WORKED. I'm sorry, but you will never convince me that she has been doing all this secret behind the scenes work, as she can barely present a little speech she supposedly went over. Turning up at the occasional event and looking interested is not all that much "work".

It also demeans the millions of women who handle taxing, full time work, and then juggle child care and all the responsibilities of home.

Kate gets quite a bit from the public - including a homes whose structures are renovated via the public purse and who certainly does not pay market price for rent. Why should she expect to take the additional perk of maternity leave when she has really done nothing to earn it in the same way other working women have?

 

[cinrit]

I don't know why millions of women who can't live like Kate would be demeaned. It's hard to compare her life to the vast majority of women on this planet. It may seem unfair, but some people have more advantages than others.

 

[AdmirerUS]

Maternity leave is for women who have actually WORKED. I'm sorry, but you will never convince me that she has been doing all this secret behind the scenes work, as she can barely present a little speech she supposedly went over. Turning up at the occasional event and looking interested is not all that much "work".

It also demeans the millions of women who handle taxing, full time work, and then juggle child care and all the responsibilities of home.

Kate gets quite a bit from the public - including a homes whose structures are renovated via the public purse and who certainly does not pay market price for rent. Why should she expect to take the additional perk of maternity leave when she has really done nothing to earn it in the same way other working women have?

I think there is also something very jarring about the change.
In Anglesea they were quite normal, and on their own excepting security and having to make the odd dash out to do a public event.
Now there is a mass of staff and very little dashing out to do a public event.

Some people think this is nice - for the family to have this unique time together. And some people think that because they have made the move up to KP and a royal lifestyle, they need to pull their weight.

Both can be right at the same time. And rest assured that both Charles and the Queen are quite OK with how the Cambridges are spending their time just now.
The public may be of another POV.

 

[muriel]

I think there is also something very jarring about the change.
In Anglesea they were quite normal, and on their own excepting security and having to make the odd dash out to do a public event.
Now there is a mass of staff and very little dashing out to do a public event.

Some people think this is nice - for the family to have this unique time together. And some people think that because they have made the move up to KP and a royal lifestyle, they need to pull their weight.

Both can be right at the same time. And rest assured that both Charles and the Queen are quite OK with how the Cambridges are spending their time just now.
The public may be of another POV.

If I was funding their lifestyle, I would be worried. But I am not. They are not on the Civil List, and nor do they draw any public funds. So in that respect, the move from Wales to London does not worry me.

 

[Dman]

I'm guessing that Their Royal Highnesses are back from their fun vacation.

 

[muriel]

I'm guessing that Their Royal Highnesses are back from their fun vacation.

If they are back, they certainly appear to have brought the weather with them. Its a very sunny 15 degrees Celsius in London.

 

[Sun Lion]

I'm guessing that Their Royal Highnesses are back from their fun vacation.

The "Mail Online" is saying W and C are/were due back in the UK on Thursday, Dman.

Royal Correspondent Gavin Grey was on Australian TV this morning - it's Saturday here - saying they're expected back sometime this weekend.

Sometime soonish may cover it .

Interesting "Mail Online" article about the place where they are having a private night in New Zealand - sounds almost as nice as the Maldives - without the balmy tropicalness.

Again, being reported the Duke and Duchess are to have the whole resort to themselves - but at a very discounted price - so not too much of a burden to New Zealand's taxpayers.

(Article is by Rebecca English and titled "Will and Kate's 6,500 pound a night luxury hideaway...".)

Making a point little PG wil not be there with them.

Cheers, Sun Lion.

 

[Sun Lion]

"For George, red centre of attention awaits"

The little Prince sure is the focus of the upcoming Royal Tour.

Our serious newspaper, "The Australian", has the headline "For George, red centre of attention awaits", with a photo of grandparents Charles and Diana on the front page today.

Little PG is pictured inside - but no W and C photo.

Some Aboriginal ladies are pictured in front of Uluru/Ayers' Rock, and give details in the report of their previous encounters with Royalty.

The Duke and Duchess are expected to view the rock at sunset/early evening, and to walk part-way around it.

Sun Lion.

 

[royalistbert]

Daily Mail still going on about the holiday. Yet another story about the same holiday.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I thought today's article was about the night in the luxury resort when they are in NZ while leaving George in Wellington not the current vacation in the Maldives.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Daily Mail still going on about the holiday. Yet another story about the same holiday.

If you mean this article, the key is in the title.

Wills and Kate's £6,500-a-night luxury Kiwi hideaway where the royal couple will stay minus Prince George... at cut price, of course.
Prince William and Kate's £6,500-a-night luxury hideaway | Mail Online

 

[Roslyn]

So are they staying at Uluru on the night of the 22nd? If so, I hope they're not going to leave George alone in a tent for even a few moments.

 

[Skippyboo]

George isn't going to Uluru. He is staying at Canberra at the Govt House. The hotel is NZ is because they have 2 days of engagements on the South Island and instead of flying back and forth from Wellington, they are spending the night. The DM story is misleading because the NZ Government got a hugely discounted rate and the hotel isn't that big. So when the DM headline is 6500 a night room and they rented out the whole hotel it is mean spirited by the DM. The hotel only has 10 villas and suites so the tour party and RPOs would have filled most of it

Try this story out instead about a dying little girl, a princess dress and a upcoming royal visit.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...dge-visit-Sydney-childrens-hospice-April.html