Should Prince Charles give Prince William the crown? Our Royal Editor Robert Jobson will be live online today betwen 12 and 2pm to join the debate. If you have an opinion post it below and Robert will answer your comments online.

Should Prince Charles give Prince William the crown? Our Royal Editor Robert Jobson will be live online today betwen 12 and 2pm to join the debate. If you have an opinion post it below and Robert will answer your comments online.

ROYAL EDITOR: Robert Jobson joins your debate

By Robert Jobson, 09/11/2008

PRINCE Charles will turn 60 this week. He is the longest serving heir to the throne in British history-and he is still waiting.

As as he posed for birthday portraits at Clarence House, it must have crossed his mind: "Will I ever be King- and do I even want the job?"

Our 82-year-old Queen is still in fine health, and her mother lived until she was 101, so it is possible Charles could be 80 before he ascends.

And even if he does become monarch, the constraints that go with the job could "suffocate" the outspoken royal, as Princess Diana once said.

So would he really want to become a "GREY KING", out of touch and unable to voice his opinions

So would he really want to become a "GREY KING", out of touch and unable to voice his opinions.

Or will he take the dramatic step of giving up his birthright to rule and allowing the Crown to skip a generation?

Prince William, clever and handsome, and possibly with a beautiful wife by then, would fit the bill.

Wills would be in his early 40s in 2028 and would appear more RELEVANT to a new generation of Britons in a brave new 21st century world. And senior sources believe Charles's appetite to be King may be declining because of his drive to "make a difference".

As King Charles III, he would be required to keep quiet about any controversial private views and stick to his role as a non-political figurehead.

But he is passionate about issues such as saving the planet. As one former royal aide commented: "Let's be honest, the prince can be far more outspoken and achieve far more as the heir to the throne than if he was King."

Constitutional experts say Charles could sign an Act of Renunciation once he had Government's backing. Of course, William would have to want to ascend to the throne, which is questionable after he signed up to extend his military service.

And I believe Charles would be a perfectly suitable ruler. He has a great sense of duty, dedication and integrity.

If News of the World readers agree or disagree, you can post your comments below and I'll be live online between noon and 2pm today to answer questions.

But Charles cannot expect to be on the throne for long. He will undoubtedly be a transitionary monarch at best.

So it might turn out that, after all the years of waiting to be King, Charles decides he is happy just as he is.

Agree? Disagree? Scroll down to leave your comments

Twenty years ago, he was often dismissed as a bit of a crank. He was ridiculed for talking to plants, banging on about GM crops, the need for organic food, alternative medicine and, of course, global warming.

Now millions agree with his views on climate change, which he believes is the biggest crisis mankind has to face. Many also now believe he has been proved right on other issues, including his candid views on architecture.

As he says of his duties over the years as King- in-waiting: "I was sent off to do these so-called ordinary things, and they can't really expect me, having done all that, not to get stuck in to all the things I mind about."

And he hasn't held back.

He has SLAMMED political correctness, the Human Rights Act for inspiring the blame culture, plus various government policies on education, Britain's inner cities and the countryside.

His Prince's Trust grants have enabled thousands of youngsters to set up businesses.

Charles is also one of our greatest charity entrepreneurs, raising hundreds of millions of pounds in his time as Prince of Wales.

He has been able to make a difference as heir to the throne, something he could not have done as King.

And, privately, he is now content, married to his second wife and soul-mate Camilla.

His two sons have flown the nest and have emerged from the tragic loss of their mother as remarkably balanced, fine young men, a tribute to Charles the single father.

Now, some might think, all there is left for him is to become King.

But sources close to him now inceasingly believe his legacy is as the most forward-thinking Prince of Wales in history-not as an aged King for just a few years.

Your comments

This article has 140 comments

1 | 2 | Next

Pirnce Charles - Save the Crown of England; save UK; save Humanity, accordingly: Divorce Camilla; immediately marry any young princess of your choice, with noble ancestry only, and get from her at least one child per year, during the next 12 years.

By Maha Chohan.. Posted June 5 2009 at 8:20 AM.

Prince Charles deserves a chance to reign - after he divorces Camilla.

By Maha Chohan.. Posted June 5 2009 at 7:49 AM.

Prince Charles should not be king. His Uncle who should have been King had to renounce the title as he wanted to marry a divorcee. Prince Charles who was a divorcee and married a divorcee, should stand down in favour of Prince William, either that or the Royal Family should be disbanded. The constitution cannot be rewritten to suit the present
incumbents. Something should be done sooner rather later.

By A JOHNSTON.. Posted June 3 2009 at 5:44 PM.

Obanlassie,
HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, upon HRH Prince Charles' Kingship would become HRH The Princess Consort not by any other such prefix.

Also you may note that HRH Prince Henry of Wales is not called Harold.

Try not to make a fool of yourself speak to other people as though they know nothing.

By Daniel A Cotteral-Walsh.. Posted April 1 2009 at 2:25 AM.

Prince Charles may not be the most charming or interesting fellow, but at least he does what he was born to do, i.e. royal engagements, working as a representative of his country, and doing philanthropy. At William's age, he had done over eight times more engagements. Prince William has managed to spend his life tucking himself away at university and then in the military to avoid face time with the cameras and has made his distaste for the media known as well as his reluctance to assume public responsibilities. Instead, he is partying all night and shirking the only job he has had waiting for him. If I was the Queen, I would be completely embarassed. And if I was William and had a several thousands year old tradition resting on my shoulders and I was the only thing left keeping it alive, I would certainly take my role just a whee bit more seriously if he expects the public to continue to fund his lifestyle. Everyone here seems to be getting sidetracked by the fact that William looks somewhat like his mother, but hasn't done anything to prove any other similarity and if anything has given plenty of reason for doubt that the two share much in common at all. Looks aren't everything, and even that is leaving him. Being a patron of a charity is a nice PR move, as is the several engagements he has taken on the past week since being criticized for doing nothing. He has done nothing to deserve to inherit the throne and isn't honoring his birthright.

By Zoe.. Posted March 14 2009 at 2:55 AM.

None of you know what your talking about.
You watch too much telly and read too many
rubbish papers.
You haven't seen or know the Royals as I do.
HRH Prince William is not ready nor wants this job right now, neither does HRH Prince Harold ( Harry) to you lot.
HRH The Prince of Wales has no choice, His wife neither. She will have a new Title Of HRH Duchess of Normandy or Lancaster.
She will not be crowned, but will be seated below
her husbands throne to the left.
so I hope you all ahve a festive season.
Cheers from Scotland

By Obanlassie.. Posted December 11 2008 at 6:36 PM.

CHARLES A KING?....HE IS NOBODY. NO DECENCY NO VALUES NO TASTE NO NOTHING
CAMILA A QUEEN PLEASE!!!! A WOMAN OLD UGGLY AND BAD.
WHAT A DUO...THEY ARE GOOD FOR HALLOWEEN TO SCARE PEOPLE.
BIG SHAME FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY. THEY HAVE SOME STORIES...
I HOPE THAT WILLIAMS IS THE FUTURE KING.
HE IS HANDSOME( GENES OF HIS BEAUTIFUL MOTHER) HE LOOK HUMBLE, A GOOD YOUNG MAN HE HAS SO MUCH OF HIS BEAUTIFUL AND WONDERFUL DIANA.
I REMEMBER HER WITH SO MUCH RESPECT. CHARLES WAS TERRIBLE. GIVING CAMILA A BRACELET WITH A LOVE MESSAGE WHILE HE WAS MARRYNG DIANA??? WHAT IS THAT!!!!
A TITLE OF A PRINCE IS WAY TOO MUCH FOR THAT MAN.
HE DESERVE JUST THE OLD WOMAN.

By ANABELLA.. Posted November 16 2008 at 6:26 AM.

Let me tell you all what I think of " prince charles "
That man for me is empty, he does not have feelings, values or decency. What a show he is.
Married a real young decent lady with a life full of dreams, she married that idiot that did not have any feeling for her, because his mind was always on the other woman. A woman as empty as him, waiting like a hulk to get the man. Camila is old uggly and did not respect nobody. I can not understand. I think that she even smell bad.
charles does not deserve anything, please. How a man like him could be the king of England what an insult. The king should be Williams.
I also do not understand how that" royal family" could accept all the scandals of that man charles.
I hope that Diana children understand the big damage and suffering that old woman created to their Mother. I also hope they could understand what kind offather they have. I see them with the father like they adore him, I hope is just a show.
That father do not deserve the love of his children.

By CECILIA ANNE.. Posted November 16 2008 at 6:13 AM.

I think William should be king. Charles is alright but he has Camilla and I think no one would want her to be queen. There is too much background there.

By ellen shearman.. Posted November 15 2008 at 6:44 PM.

I think William should be king. Charles is alright but he has Camilla and I think no one would want her to be queen. There is too much background there.

By ellen shearman.. Posted November 15 2008 at 6:42 PM.

Freddie Flintoff would make an excellent king. Oh, wait a minute, how about Kevin Pietersen? At least he has good leadership skills.

By Jeff Peers.. Posted November 15 2008 at 5:56 PM.

The throne should go to prince William!! Kate and Wills Would make a better King and Queen than Charles and his wife.

By ann parry.. Posted November 15 2008 at 2:29 PM.

When the time comes Charles should take throne. How can William become king when his father was never king. Unless Charles dies William must wait his turn.

I was under the impression that the instrument of abdication, abdicates yourself and all your descendants.

If we are not going to follow this we might as well vote for a King/Queen as we do a prime minister, although we did not vote for the prime minister did we?

By Irene Chapple.. Posted November 15 2008 at 11:12 AM.

How about this? The queen is doing fine & has managed to keep her marriage in tact all this far. True royalty. Eligence & that! Same cannot be said about Prince Charles. And the next generations will not be any different to this! We need a king/queen who could set an example! Can they deliver? I doubt that!

By Budsy.. Posted November 14 2008 at 4:32 PM.

The answer is yes....

By chelu.. Posted November 14 2008 at 1:24 PM.

I feel that Prince Charles did make a big mistake marrying Camilla Parker Bowls, It was like he was saying to everyone Princess Diana is dead and it is now time for you all to welcome my true love Camilla. The problem is that Princess Diana will always be the one and only Lady Diana...I feel that Prince William should have the Crown, but I feel that it should be determined by the monarch itself...If Prince Charles had never married Camilla then maybe I would say he should be king without a wife, sort of like paying tribute to Princess Diana and her children which he fathered...If Prince Charles should become to old that he can't be king, then it should go to prince William...

By stephanie.. Posted November 14 2008 at 5:28 AM.

By stephanie.. Posted November 14 2008 at 5:18 AM.

80 years old and a king
you got to be joking
prince william would be more suitable.

By tony.. Posted November 14 2008 at 4:30 AM.

As a Canadian born and now living in the USA , I have always enjoyed reading Royal Biographies and now the Official Royal Website in great detail before contributing to commentaries such as NOTW .
Here is a family who salies forth on their website , with video vignettes to share with us their good works ,in tough times .I for one think they are very "hip" and a "with it" Royal Family no matter what anyone says in this tabloid . What other Royal Families share their personal family moments, photographs even their family budget on- line for all to examine?

I think Prince Charles has to be commended for his Prince's Trust , that has given so many young people hope and mentoring in a world where "me first" has sadly replaced caring for our fellow human beings. Despite the shallow and emotionally charged criticisms, submitted in this stream of consciousness, how many readers have demonstrated in their communities similar concern for our future generations or even their neighbors?

By Len Hambleton.. Posted November 12 2008 at 6:20 PM.

I live here in Canada and greatly respect the Queen and Prince Phillip for all they have done however I believe the future of the monarchy will have difficult times ahead as many of the great nations that are a part of the commonwealth may not willingly have Prince Charles as head of state.
In last few years Canada has been very quietly removing certain aspects involved with the functions of the Queen to the Govenor General and corespondance coming directly from the Govenor General and not acting on behalf of the Queen.
It is sad becuase when Victoria,BC had the Commonwealth Games is was fantastic to see the great many nations brought together based upon a rich history of the UK and the Commonwealth Union.
The saying that "All Great Things Must Come To An End" with the future on the monarchy as it is know today.
My wish is that the Royal family go throught a massive reallity check and see how great their influence is on people of the work.
Past Monarchs were know as " Ornaments of the Country" show as an example of all that was good and serving a a leader and person of high moral regard and standing to their subjects.
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth is such lady and she even in her age is respected and servers tirelessly.
She is a gracious lady whom I hope will live a long life because. The loss of her Majesty will be a great loss to the work and the Commonwealth.
To her family sit up and learn from her Majesty and the Great Lady she is!

By Christine.. Posted November 12 2008 at 6:11 AM.

LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!!

By MBR.. Posted November 11 2008 at 9:33 PM.

It will be a sad day for England when Charles takes the throne, which he must do on the death or abdication of his mother the Queen. It is not possible for William to overstep his father and become king unless the constitution of England is changed.
Succession must be adhered to.

By Ralph Wood.. Posted November 11 2008 at 9:44 AM.

CHARLES WORST MISTAKE IN LIFE WAS MARRYING CAMILLA............WELCOME KING WILLIAM!!!!!

By Tasha Summers.. Posted November 11 2008 at 4:36 AM.

Charles and Camilla have made a mockery of themselves ... the Monarchy, The Church of England, and any vows both of them have made.

Long Live HM.

William or Harry to be next please.

By shelley.. Posted November 11 2008 at 1:43 AM.

When the Queen dies we should have a referendum on whether we wish to continue with the monarchy. We, the people have never been asked. The monarchy was imposed by force and they've hung on long enough to power and obscene and undeserved riches.
I think it time for a Republic, where the thinking is quite different. In a republic every citizen has the chance to be the Head of State and the people have a chance to vote for their own choice. Aspiration is for the many in a republic, not the few who have been to the right schools, belong to the ruling classes etc. If you think that's old-fashioned, how naive you are.
So, no kings or queens please. Look east to France and west to the United States. It's the 21st. century and time for the Republic of the United Kingdom !

By Dianne Stokes.. Posted November 10 2008 at 7:20 PM.

Royalty is outdated..they breed and breed..contribute little..Charles has lived ahus special life..having someone to squeeze his toothpaste for him oh dear

By LOUIS LATNER.. Posted November 10 2008 at 6:58 PM.

LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!! Then long live KingWilliam

By Dee Harrison.. Posted November 10 2008 at 6:14 PM.

Charles is a well educated man who would without a doubt add new life to the British Monarchy. He has been in training for this position for all of his life. His mother, Queen Elizabeth II, has been a good monarch for the British. While in good health she should transition and acquiesce to her son, Charles. This statement is not political in any way, just common sense. DL

By Donna.. Posted November 10 2008 at 3:49 PM.

I'd rather have him as king rather than that Camilla Parker Bowles ,she is SCUM.

By Danny Massey.. Posted November 10 2008 at 3:27 PM.

iloveyou

By veronicalynnestEPhens.. Posted November 10 2008 at 12:49 PM.

Once the Queen is gone, can I stand for head of state please?

By Benjamin Upchurch.. Posted November 10 2008 at 10:44 AM.

Oh please God not Charles for King let us have a King William and i would not be in support of Camilla being Queen people are saying the queen could be here another 20 yrs by then i feel Charles would be too old and who knows he could die before the Queen nobody knows anything could happen

By laura.. Posted November 10 2008 at 2:27 AM.

to the person that posted that william cannot be prince of wales if charles were to no longer occupy that post. that is not true, george II created George III (his grandson) prince of wales when Fredrick, Prince of Wales died. You can't be duke of cornwall (which is where the money is at) but you would be prince of wales as long as you were heir apparent (no one can be born to displace you from being next).

it won't happen charles will reign for a brief period and do an ok job and then we'll have wills

By richard.. Posted November 10 2008 at 1:23 AM.

Oh dear Sporti.
I rather think that Kate Middleton is wasted on the Windsors. They have been "warning her off" for some time now, and if I was her father, I would forbid her to marry into that "Firm"...you know what happened to the last Princess...strangely, the Windsors called her "manipulative" too... Maybe you are a Windsor ?...

By Jon.. Posted November 9 2008 at 11:23 PM.

King Charles will bring with his crown the end of the Commonwealth, Commonwealth countries have already said as much and are just seeing out the reign of Her Magesty, probably out of respect to her.
Queen Camilla will bring the end of the British monarchy if something is not done about the situation. Camilla could never have been crowned without the death of Diana. And WILL be crowned if the Law is not CHANGED .
The ONLY way ahead for the Royal family is to crown William. with or without a bride, it may save the Commonwealth, but more importantly, it will save this realm.
There is no place or role for monarchs in the European Superstate.
If the aim , for the last 12 ,has been the end of the British monarchy, then every step that they have taken has been well advised. Charles is going to need that castle that he brought in Transylvainia.....

By JonO.. Posted November 9 2008 at 11:11 PM.

As long as that manipulative Kate Middleton is never our Queen i dont care one way or another

By sporti.. Posted November 9 2008 at 8:44 PM.

William would be good once he's grown up a bit and had a chance to take some kind of resposibility. He could do with a new girlfriend as well as Kate Middleton does nothing for his image. We want someone who is going to be a good Queen consort and Kate isn't it in my opinion.

Though I think we should give Charles a chance. I feel sorry for the guy having to wait this long.

By JD.. Posted November 9 2008 at 7:26 PM.

No i want to live long enough to see Charles crowned and as history reveals as much as some people will not like it Camilla will automatically become Queen and i for one will be delighted.

By Kathy mitchell.. Posted November 9 2008 at 6:07 PM.

Why you people even bother is a complete mystery.

He'll never be king in my country.

Long live the *Republic* of Canada.

By Dan.. Posted November 9 2008 at 6:16 PM.

The comment that the boy's upbrining is a credit to his being a single father is a bloody lie.. How nice that you like to whitewash that Diana never existed that both boys were found under a plant Charles planted. Look Diana should be given a big credit to how they both are. She did things with them than Charles ever did. He was more about plotting his next pork move than being with them. Remember when William needed surgery or he fell? Where was Charles out playing polo. Some father..Let William have the throne and Charles can go play hide and seek with Camilla Parker Bowels

By Susanna.. Posted November 9 2008 at 6:11 PM.

to
Robert Jobson
You say the Queen has a tough job and works hard. The Queen and Prince Philip look the picture of health. The Queen and Margaret Thatcher are about the same age. The Queen has had an easy stress free pampered life style and has enjoyed all the luxury that has been given to her, and she makes sure her pampered children and grand children also get this life style. Margaret Thatcher has had to work very hard since a child for what she has achieved. Her life has been tough stressful and damn hard work, no wonder she is in ill health now.Who do I admire the most? Margaret Thatcher, whose company would I rather be in? Margaret Thatcher of course. In medical terms the less work you do the fitter you are.

By lizzie.. Posted November 9 2008 at 5:48 PM.

Well, by the time the Queen would leave the planet to better places and palaces beyond, William will be - well quite like his father...old, and stubborn to be King...what happens -happens...it is part of their Dynastic Roles in life...

Willliam is a good lad, I am sure, but Charles is porbably a good bloke as well...Let's hand it over to Harry - my favorite red head, with the love of life.

By Catherine.. Posted November 9 2008 at 5:06 PM.

God help all thinking Brits. Who in their right mind even cares about this outdated, expensive and more than slightly ridiculous, non too bright family?

By Jean Booth.. Posted November 9 2008 at 4:40 PM.

I don't believe William is anywhere near ready to take over any responsible position, judging by the details of the helicopter sortie being revealed in today's Daily Mail. Long may Her Majesty reign...there's not really anyone suitable to replace her.

By Susan McKevitt.. Posted November 9 2008 at 5:00 PM.

Charles should hand over to William, he should never have the rotweiller as queen, not even consort. Because of her should relinquish his rights to become king

By Val.. Posted November 9 2008 at 4:17 PM.

Although I remain a firm supporter of the Queen I have absolutely no respect for either her off-spring and certainly not for her feckless grandchildren. I believe their respective life-styles have severely damaged the Royal Family and that the constitutional monarchy should die with the Queen. But may she live as long as her mother.

By Steve Goodwin.. Posted November 9 2008 at 3:40 PM.

Congratulations to Robert Jobson on a wonderful set of comments. It must have the most comments on any topic in the news of the world for a long time.

By David.. Posted November 9 2008 at 3:39 PM.

The throne is not The Prince of Wales's to "hand over", nor can he "advocate" [sic] without the permission of Parliament. It is that body which regulates the succession to the Throne.
You all need to return (if you have ever been there in the first place) to your history books. Your personal views count for nothing.
If you really feel so strongly about it, you need to contact your MP, and urge him/her to begin a debate in the House of Commons about the unsuitability of Prince Charles to be your next King. It would be interesting to observe this. Everything else is jibber jabber.
And as for becoming a republic (which model?) that is another question entirely.

By Thomas Rex Campbell.. Posted November 9 2008 at 3:26 PM.

I wonder if Wills, as a child, ever minded being told that he could never be a train driver because we have a much better job lined up for you. All part of the process that started with his mother I guess? The assumption that another human being can be made to fit into a slot that others have prepared for him.
Doesn't seem as if he has had much choice despite this being 2008 and people as never before so concerned with human rights. I wonder when he became aware that no matter what he did or where he went he would never really have his own life like other young men. He would be eternally shackled to a system that began many generations before he was born. A bit like an arranged marriage really.

By Maggy.. Posted November 9 2008 at 3:09 PM.

I have read several posts where some think that if Charles passes on the throne it goes to Andrew, not so, on the death of the queen (may she live long) Charles is King, period, in order for that to pass he must,advocate, then without question William is King. If Charles advocates his position before the passing of the Queen, he will simply not be the Prince of Wales any longer, and there would not be a Prince of Wales, William would still be next in line, it still does not pass to Andrew, and I might add that Will cannot be made the Prince of Wales because that Title is for the 1st son of the monarch.

By Teresa.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:35 PM.

Gail, I am beginnig to feel sorry for Camilla. She just cannot win! But she seems to have alot to do to win over the public and be accepted as Queen.

Chippy Wood, It seems from the response today you are certainly not alone. The royal family should sit up and take note.

Marilyn, I broadly agree with your statement. "IF IT AINT BROKE DONT FIX IT." But clearly some people disagree.

Ann, you seem to be one of those people who does not see the point of the royal family. But you rightly commend them for their good work.

Elle, British royalty does historically, favour women.
But Beatrice is fifth in line to throne so I think she has at best a slim chance of being Queen Bea.

Lara, you make your point well. I agree there is a lot to admire about Prince Charles.

Kevin Hurst, like you I am a great believer in tradition. But the royal family should listen to the people? It is important, as Prince Charles says, that the monarchy listens.

Jane Carr, Poor Kate Middleton. I personally think she would be great for the royals ... and I agree Chelsy too would be good fun.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:28 PM.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:27 PM.

Thank you for taking part in this online debate.

I enjoyed hearing your views and discussing them with you.

Next week the Prince of Wales is 60. Even if you want him as the next King or not I am sure you will join with me in wishing him a happy birthday.

I look forward to the next time.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:27 PM.

As for Camilla???

If, and when Charles becomes King, she will be Queen, regardles of whether she uses a different title, I don't see her ever being very popular, I don't see anything being put on legal paper as to what title she will use, I think Princess consort what a ruse to get the people to except her first then she would simply be Queen when the time came, I think she would have been more acceptable if she had remained a mistress, and in the shadows, as she does not like the travel or the work, as queen she will have to work more that she does now or I think we will see alot of back lash.

By Teresa.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:44 PM.

Yes, and we all hope that Prince William will be more of a honourable man than his father ever was.

By Frank Brewis.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:42 PM.

I THINK CHARLES SHOULD HAND OVER THE CROWN TO WILLIAM BUT ONLY AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS AS KING, IT WOULD BE CRUEL ON HIM IF HE WERE FORCED TO HAND IT OVER WITHOUT WEARING THE CROWN, AFTERALL IT IS WHAT HE HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP WITH THAT IT IS HIS RIGHTH TO SUCEED HIS MOTHER.

By GAZA H... Posted November 9 2008 at 2:41 PM.

WOW!! What a question.
Personally I would love to to see a young man on the throne, and a young family participating in all the pomp and pagentry.
Where would it leave Charles, that would be the question?
William would have to give him a new title, he would no longer be the Prince of Wales, or the Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay, and he would no longer have an income. I am sure he would be given a income from the civil list, but would it be enough for him to live on as he is customed to much more, and having his own way. As Charles already knows all this, from the Duke of Windsor, I don't see him giving up much. Charles knows what the job of monarch requires, I don't think he wants his sons to have to give up so much at a young age, when they could be in the mist of raising young families, and how much time he has been able to devote to them, as monarch it would have been impossible. Charles would not want that for them and his future g-children. He will take the crown, for his time whether he wants it or not, whether the people want him or not, to give his son more time to grow, and give his son time to be Prince of Wales.

By Teresa.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:26 PM.

Thank you for taking part in the debate.

I enjoyed hearing your views and discussing them with you online.

Next week the Prince of Wales is 60 - whether we want a Monarchy or a Republic, or Charles as the next King or William, I am sure we would like to wish him happy birthday.

I look forward to the next time.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:25 PM.

We do not need a royal family! They are obsolete! Britain is facing an economic crisis, mass unemployment, banks crashing, stocks falling and to boot continuous miserable weather! We simply cannot afford the luxury of a redundant monarchy who do not contribute to the wellbeing of their subjects. The Queen for example could raise money for the OAP's electricity/gas bills over the winter seasons. As for William, he rides the 'state' helicopter to Middleton's house for his 'conjugal' rights whilst the rest of us have to take the bus/walk/cycle (whatever means we can afford) for such pleasures! NO NO NO to the continuance of the monarchy!!!

By Lianne B.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:21 PM.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:21 PM.

I don't want Charles for king I want William.

By Trisha.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:11 PM.

Dave K,

I hadn't thought of that. Perhaps we should just have Shakespeare, Churchill or Lord Nelson on our notes and coins then we wouldn't have to keep changing them?

Allan Stewart, I am sure Charles will pleased he has your support. As for Diana being a "manipulator" in her defence I would say it takes two to tango!

Alison, Good point. Everyone deserves happiness and I am glad he has found love with Camilla. If he is, as you say "happy as he is", he should surely let everyone know now. But personally I believe he will be King because it will need a radical overhaul of the system, an Act of Parliament and a strong will of the people for the system to change.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 2:01 PM.

Lizzie,

There is a clear message to Charles if he does become King. You have to slim down the Royal Family and make it a more cost effective institution.

I am sure most people would agree with you.

Blackwell Gresley,

Camilla it seems can do no right with you. She has a tough job winning over the public.

Anne Barnett,

You are not the only one to say Charles is spoilt.
But I think those stories about him having someone to squeeze his toothpaste are - sadly - not true.

Dave,

If Charles "refuses or declines" the throne the heir to the throne would not pass to the Duke of York. William is next in line then Harry.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:52 PM.

What about the cost to the Country of 2 Monarchs in short succession? All banknotes, coins and stamps would have to be changed, and the costs of various ceremonies would cost the Country too.Our Country does not always embrace change, and some people I Know are still getting used to £2 coins. Therefore I believe William should ascend next, to limit the change and upheaval for the Country.

By Dave K.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:43 PM.

Charles should be King then his son as long as he does not turn out like his mother who was a manipulator

By Allan Stewart.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:41 PM.

I've always had a real soft spot for Prince Charles. He has every right to say ".... you, I'm going to be King. Change the law if you don't like it!" but I think he is happy as he is and the Queen will hand the throne to William eventually. As for people who are still going on about his ex-wife. He wasn't happy with her and she wasn't happy with him. He is very happy with Camilla and the boys seem to love her.

By Alison.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:36 PM.

Michaela Golden, I agree that William would appeal to the new generation, just as his mother did in the 80s and 90s. If the Royal Family want to engage the youth of today the younger royals, particularly William and Harry, should they not take that job on board and reach out to them?

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:31 PM.

David,

Personally, I think Charles will not give up the throne. He is the longest serving heir to the throne ever. I believe he will want to take the top job if he gets the chance.

He would see it as his duty. He is next in line in our current system and while the system is in place I am convinced he would do it.

But David, I am not convinced that after a lifetime of speaking out on controversial issues that he can just stop once the Crown is on his head.

That could prove constitutionally difficult.

He is not that popular - but he has worked hard to improve his image and make a difference of issues that matter to him.

The Camilla question - whether she should be Queen - is still one that could prove difficult for him too.

Rob, what is the likelihood of Charles giving up the throng? Is it out of the question? HE IS NOT POPULAR.

By david

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:25 PM.

We don't really know anything about Prince William. His achievements are a degree from St. Andrews and passing the tests at Sandhurst to become an Officer. He seems reluctant to do full-time royal duties, so why are you suggesting that he should be the next Monarch? A few undemanding royal duties are his sole achievements so far.

No, Prince Charles will be the next King with his loyal wife as Queen, or Princess Consort (the title doesn't really matter, the job remains the same). Long may they both live!

By valmae.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:19 PM.

Graham Smith makes a good point.
I am not a republican but do believe in constructive criticism of the institution.
The Royal Family is supported by a majority of the country at the moment.
But even Prince Philip said there is a perfectly viable alternative to constitutional monarchy p a republic.
It would need a radical overhaul of our system of Government too.
Some would say: "If it isn't broke don't fix it".
Until there is a major political party with a clear mandate to scrap the monarchy how can people make that choice?

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:18 PM.

Rob, what is the likelihood of Charles giving up the throng? Is it out of the question? HE IS NOT POPULAR.

By david .. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:09 PM.

E. Graham's late mother might be proved right.

The Queen's mother, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, lived until she was 101.

The Queen could match her meaning Charles would be nearly 80 when he became King.

Even Charles has said it is in the Good Lord's hands if he gets the top job.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:08 PM.

Helen Faulkes speaks for a lot of people when she says she would prefer Prince Anne as the next monarch.

She works tirelessly for the country, carries out more engagements than anyone else and talks sense.

As it stands if William's eldest child is a girl she will not inherit his Crown.

This rule seems out of date in a moden society, particularly when some of our greatest monarchs - Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria and Elizabeth II - have been women.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:04 PM.

As Republic has said before, you have to choose: monarchy or republic. If you want a monarchy you get no choice in who gets the throne. If you want a choice, you want a republic. You can't have it both ways.

It's time to ditch this nonsense. It's 2008! Let's give the people a chance to choose one of their own to take on the highest office in the land. We'll survive and we'll thrive as a republic.

By Graham Smith.. Posted November 9 2008 at 1:03 PM.

Edna,

If you believe that we should "get rid" of the royals, the only way to get change is by lobbying your MP.

None of our major political parties have a mandate for change that includes a republic.

At the moment you are in the minority, but unless the royals adapt to appeal to people like you they could be in trouble.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:59 PM.

Before my mother died in 1985 she forecast then that Charles would never take the throne, and I belief that.

By E.Graham.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:56 PM.

Gabriel is right.
What is important here is the dignity of the institution of monarchy not necessarily the personalities of the person who wears the Crown.
Over the centuries the royal family has had to adapt to survive.
Perhaps, they have to take a long hard look at the institution and the way they do things.
Many people have commented on the cost of running the royal family.
At a time of serious financial crisis when the credit crunch has an impact on everyone of us maybe the royal family should consider cutting costs and slimming down?

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:55 PM.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:54 PM.

Rosemary Mackenzie-Shaw makes a good point.

"Arrogants and selfish" - I am not sure I believe the Queen is that. I believe she has had a tough job and done it well with dedication for more than half a century.

The Diana question is one that will forever haunt both Charles and Camilla.

I remember Diana well, met her personally as a royal corresondent and thought she was a good person who tried to make a difference.

More than a decade on she clearly still has a place in the hearts of many people.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:49 PM.

Monarchy... what tosh! Get rid of the lot of them. Let's have a republic and vote for our head of state.

By Edna.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:47 PM.

Jak raises a good point.
The Camilla question is one that just will not go away.
Clarence House insist she will not be queen when Charles becomes King.
She will, they say, be Princess Consort.
I do not agree, and nor do a number of senior constitutional experts.
There will need to be a change in the law and an Act of Parliament to prevent her becoming Queen Consort.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:43 PM.

John Fleming clearly does not like the Windsors!
Personally, I think the Queen - who I have seen at work for many years - does a great job and has represented our country well. But when you witness something as historic as President elect Obama sweeping to power it does raise serious questions and make you sit up and realise change does happen. I think the next time the royals meet at The Way Ahead Group they should take note that nothing is forever. The royals have a tough job staying in touch with the people, who in the end will decide what system they want.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:39 PM.

We should get rid of the monarchy. Charles' behaviour towards Diana was inexcusable and we all know Camilla will do anything to become Queen - God help us!! Let's face facts all the royalty are ignorant, arrogant and selfish including the Queen. They have no concept how we the people have to live. Get rid of them all.

By Rosemary Mackenzie-Shaw.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:38 PM.

H,

Just to clear one thing up - William is third in line to the throne now. If Prince Charles did decide he did not want the job, William would be next in line not Prince Andrew or Prince Edward.

As it stands right now the order is:

Queen
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Princess Beatrice
Princess Eugenie
Prince Edward

Hope this helps

Rob Jobson

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:32 PM.

Charles should let William be King and then he can relax. We should preserve what's left of the image of the Royal Family which will be in danger of disintegrating once the Queen passes away.

By Gabriel.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:28 PM.

James P has a point. I agree it looks like Wills has had a tough life in our mocked up picture of him at 40! Perhaps being a royal isn't all it is cracked up to be. Mind you the one of Charles at 80 backs up the point I am making.

Jenny Davies has a good point too. But according to the most recent polls most of the people in the country still support the monarchy. But that surely does not mean they don't support change?

Helen backs this up too. It is just possible that the position of the royals may become untenable as she says if they do not adapt and be what the people want them to be. The key here as Prince Charles says is to listen to advisers, but most of all to listen to the people.

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:27 PM.

I feel we need to skip Charles and go straight to William,
Charles is out of touch with people,and william is in touch, william is very smart and very clever in in own rights,I fel that he can lead with no problem,
Charles is very very spolied and get what he wants,
and the way he treated Diana then how would he treat the subject of the Realm
time to put him out,
But let me say GOD SAVE THE QUEEN LONG MAY SHE REIGN OVER US.

By Stephen Hawkins.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:22 PM.

We should do away with the Royal family, they are parasites on the community. As for Charles becoming king, he is too immature, self centred and not the brightest star in the sky. I think it is tax payers money wasted having these people around.

By David.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:21 PM.

By David.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:20 PM.

I couldn't care less about whether Charles or William or whoever becomes King...what I am bothered about is that we should still be paying for them when they themselves have and earn enough to sustain "The Firm" and keep it going for many years to come on their own!

By Ali Sichilongo.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:19 PM.

As one person has quite rightly written, If Charley does not want it, it has to pass to his brothers, so these's Andy and Eddie it would get offered too, before any of the kids!!!!!!!!!!!! get shot of the whole thing

By h.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:18 PM.

By h.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:17 PM.

Hi Everyone,

What a fantastic response to this important question.

Working on the personal responses and will post them soonest.

Rob Jobson
Royal Editor
News of the World

By ROBERT JOBSON, ROYAL EDITOR.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:17 PM.

Nobody should become king after Mrs. Windsor's demise (or, preferably, her retirement). It's about time we dragged our nation into the 21st century, and elected our own Head of State. An elected President would cost us a mere fraction of what this family of wastrels and adulterers does. What kind of example do they imagine they are setting? There's only one thing that disgusts me more than their entire way of life and attitude, and that's the sycophancy of our government and the media towards them. Prince William should be on a charge for his unsanctioned use of military aircraft for his own private purposes.

By John Flemming.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:16 PM.

I dont believe that the Queen thinks Charles is capable of running this country, or she would of handed it over long ago, our own government cant handle the many changes that the public want let alone the monarchy. The ideal of a royal family looks good from the outside world but really what do they do? Their offspring are now falling out of clubs, getting hitched then divorces, do we really want this to continue anymore? Do we even want to support another families luxury lifestyle while the rest of us are so poor?

By Jodie.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:10 PM.

I think prince charles should never become king he should have abdicated like his uncle did,when he married camila as i hope she never becomes queen.

By kathleen hall.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:04 PM.

i think primce william deserce to be crowmed now
because as prince charles grows itis good
that he gives chance the young man

By salaaxudiin.. Posted November 9 2008 at 12:04 PM.

I actually think Harry would make one of the best Kings we could ever wish for. He has all the hallmarks of his mother, her kindness, empathy, full of life, all Diana's wisdom and charisma and not to mention tenacity and hard work. I think he would inject this back into the Royal's where Diana sadly left off...The world would be all the more richer with Harry as King.

By Michele.. Posted November 9 2008 at 11:55 AM.

I think under no circumstances should Charles become King. He cannot be expected to behave how he did towards Diana and then proceed to become our Head of Church and King of England. I think the Queen knows that it will be William who will be the next Monarch, and the longer she lives, the greater the chances are of that happening.

By Jenny Davies.. Posted November 9 2008 at 11:52 AM.

None of them! Princess Anne would make a good Queen,but will never get the chance,and she too, is a divorcee. The Royal Family has lost all credibility thanks to the antics of all the Queen's children and grand-children. Dissolve the Monarchy and let us become a proud country again with an elected President!

By Helen Faulkes.. Posted November 9 2008 at 11:44 AM.

1 | 2 | Next

We have to check every comment before we can allow it to be published. But don't worry, we've got a team on it 24/7 - so check back soon! Please note that we cannot publish all comments received. The editor's decision is final. Please note that your email address will not be displayed next to your comment.