Queen Elizabeth II at the centre of a royal row

Queen Elizabeth II has found herself at the centre of a ‘royal row’ between her two sons, Prince Charles and

Queen Elizabeth II has found herself at the centre of a ‘royal row’ between her two sons, Prince Charles and Prince Andrew.

It appears Prince Andrew wants his daughters, princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, who are 28 and 26 respectively, to have more full-time roles as royals. It was also reported by the Sunday Express that Prince Andrew wants his daughters to have larger living quarters within Kensington Palace.

“He believes his daughters are already being overshadowed by William, Kate and Harry and the situation will get worse as Prince George and Princess Charlotte get older,” the Sunday Express writes.

“He has long argued that as the only ‘blood princesses’ in the family, Beatrice and Eugenie deserve proper royal roles like their cousins, along with the same standard of accommodation at Kensington Palace.

“He fears that they will be totally sidelined when the Queen dies.”

When he put his request in writing to his mother, it is said she was so “stunned” by its contents she was unable to reply and her Private Secretary forwarded it to Prince Charles, who dismissed it.

Prince Charles, who is next in line to the throne, fears such a move — increasing the number of royals who are taxpayer-funded — would negatively impact his popularity should he become king.

Naturally, there is no official comment from Buckingham Palace.

Have you ever been engaged in ‘sibling rivalry’? What do you think about this issue?

  1. Judy Tharle  

    They are well educated. Get a job like everybody else . They have had enough holidays to last a lifetime.

    • Sue  

      Good idea

      • Ralph Chiaro  

        They live for free and are already rich. Get a job or do charity work.

  2. Tina  

    So agree with you, fat lazy cows and up thenselves

    • Jean Wallace  

      Thats a bit rude, do you know them personally?

  3. Gabriella  

    what makes them blood princesses. Their mother was a commoner after all. Seems he just wants them on the gravy train. Couple of spoit, self indulgent brats

    • Adam  

      What makes them blood princesses has nothing to do with who their mother was- the same as Queen Elizabeth’s mother, the Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, was also herself a commoner- a daughter of an aristocrat, but she herself not the holder of the actual title her father held was considered a commoner. But being a Princess of the Royal Blood, means that they held the titles of Her Royal Highness and Princess at the time of her birth, and means that they did not have to marry anyone in order to gain the title of Princess (like Diana Princess of Wales, she was The Right Honourable Lady Diana, Spencer, and upon her marriage she became HRH the Princess of Wales then at her divorce because just Diana Princess of Wales, but she was not a Blood Princess, The same as the mother of Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice, Sarah, Duchess of York was a commoner, but on her marriage to Prince Andrew became HRH the Duchess of York until her divorce), so at the time they were both born their father was His Royal Highness, and their mother, through marriage was also a Royal Highness, so therefore these 2 girls were Princesses of the Royal Blood. Also one other note, the Queen’s daughter Princess Anne’s children are not Royal by birth due to Letters Patent of 1917 by George V, the people who were allowed to used the HRH status are all the children of the monarch, then the grandchildren of the monarch through the male line, meaning all of the children of the Queen’s sons were titled as His/Her Royal Highness at birth- it is passed along through the sons, the same as a father’s last name is usually the name passed along to the children as well, and the children born through the daughters of the monarch would carry the same title and status as passed to them through their father, and not there mother- which is what happens to everyone anyway- plus at the point in 1917 it was basically beyond thought that a Royal Princess would marry anyone besides a royal prince anyway. And then the only great grand child of the monarch that could be HRH was to be the eldest son, of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales- so had Queen Elizabeth not issued her own Letters Patent in 2013 before Prince George was born, then had Prince George actually been a girl instead, under the old law she would have just been a Lady and not been called Princess or HRH until Charles became king, but the QUeen raised the status of all Prince WIlliam’s children male or female and regardless of number, to the status of HRH. But you all here talk about the “gravy train” do you really know royal finances at all? Or just like to talk? Because since 1993 the only royals who receive what would amount to a paycheck from the government for their duties were Prince Philip, and until her death the Queen Mother, all money from the Civil List (not the Sovereign Grant Fund) is spent by the family as a whole in order to cover cost of travel, dinners, etc as well as to be used for the upkeep of all government owned Occupied Royal Residences. and it pays for the travel and diplomatic cost of the Queen’s children when they are performing duties on behalf of the QUeen herself, because she cannot be in all places at all time, and all money that is required for upkeep of their offices, like a private secretaries for Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward is paid out of the Sovereign Grant, but at the end of each year, all of those cost are reimbursed by the Queen to the Grant Fund from her personal finances, so in the end cost the tax payers nothing- which with the Royal Family are now funded through the profits from the Crown Estate, which is by right the Queen’s personal properties, which now exist as a corporation of which is run by the government, and in exchange for the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in profits the Estate earns and pays the government yearly, they government only pays the Royal Family 35 million, which the majority goes to pay staff benefits, and pension funds, plus building maintenance- which really think about it, the Crown Estate owns all the Royal Residences, the Royals just rent the space out they live in, but instead of the Crown Estate taking the Required 70 million from their nearly 300 million of yearly profits, and paying for the repairs of all buildings at once (for Buckingham, Windsor, Holyrood, St James) they all need only $70 million combined to pay for all required repairs, but instead of doing so, they give out a limited royal budget which must be spent doing the work that the govenment tells them they must do, and then finding a way in all of that to pay for the repairs from that money instead of the profits which would pay for it in much less time1 So money for money, you get a better deal with the royals! They get tens of millions in exchange for hundreds of millions from the Estate, plus the US President ALONE, not counting his family or anything else, cost over $1 billion, in the royals, you get no less than 14 working royals, plus the hundreds of people whom they employee, all of which receive free job training that can be used even if they leave royal service to work elsewhere, and a contribution towards their retirement and pension funds, show me another government department that can be that large, and that big of a staff that would pull off paying everyone and not ever missing a payment or running over budget?

      • Nicholas  

        That’s not how it works though, the daughter of a lord is a “lady”, if your father is a lord you can’t be born a commoner unless he is a baronet if I remember right. The Queen Mothers father was an Earl.

        The comment you previously responded to was probably based on the old idea of royalty, that unless both your parents were royalty, then you would not be royalty or “second rate” royalty. I don’t know if this has ever applied to Britain though, it did for Germany and some other places.

      • Nicholas  

        And also, what are you talking about if Prince George was a girl by the old law he would have been a “lady”.

        That’s not how it worked, both Elizabeth and her sister were princesses from birth, there are third and fourth generation dukes that are still “princes”, since they descend from a king.

        I’m not sure where you are getting everything from.

  4. Jean Wallace  

    I don’t know if they are spoilt or ‘good kids”, but Britain can’t support any more royals on the pay list so sorry girls get a job.

  5. Carmel  

    I am not a royalist by any means but it seems to me that the British taxpayers must be sick and tired of paying these royals who seem to do nothing substantial with their lives. Some of them would turn up to the opening of an envelope. They are very well educated young women and could probably get a job if they wanted one, but who would, it’s like being on the dole you get money for nothing so why work. I know Prince Edward’s wife worked when they were first married, what’s stopping these two.

  6. Frances Pomfret  

    They might not carry the title but Anne & Edwards daughters have just as much royal blood, they are not the only ROYAL girls, they just don’t want to jump on the gravy train.

    • Norman wisdom  

      My Dear you mean, Anne & Capt Mark …

      • Sharon McDermott  

        No i think she means the queen’s other 2 children, anne and edward.

    • Nicholas  

      Yeah, I think Prince Edward didn’t want the whole thing for his kids (I might be wrong), so he asked the Queen that they should only be styled in an aristocratic way, so technically they are not princesses or princes (since the Queen decreed so).

      Annes children can’t be princes or princesses since the 1917 law only applies for male grandchildren to carry on the title.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *