The Charities of the Duchess of Cambridge

[Lady Adams]

I'd like to take a step back and make a few observations: I suggested that Kate try different approaches to charities. I just batted some ideas around: a mini-lympics with kids from SportsAid, and online auction of her photographs and children's canvases from Art Room, and taking up a maternity charity or NHS. I used Sophie as an example of someone who turned her personal challenges into something she could take up in a personal way.

I wasn't intending on making this thread detour into who it is appropriate to compare Kate with (though, as is not a surprise, no one can agree on someone for various reasons).

Kate has a low number of patronages, and seems to limit public engagements, and she does command a lot of media attention for whatever organization she chooses. What charity suggestions would you all give to Kate?

[Canuck]

You can subtract the Heathrow departure if you want.  That still leaves 77 events, and would have been 90 this week if not for the HG.  We'll have to wait and see which Invictus events are counted, but as people keep reminding us, those Games were Harry's job with the military (and, of course, sponsored by the Royal Foundation), and his attendance at them may be counted as military work rather than Royal appearances.

And yes, Charles also has hospice charities.  Clearly there are a number of causes that more than one Royal is involved with (though perhaps the intention is to transition Kate into the primary patron of children's hospices specifically, or at least it appears that so far).  But given Sophie's experiences with her own pregnancies, it would not surprise me if that is an area that she is being deliberately given a lead role in.

[Macrobug]

LA.  We are obviously not on the same page.  Compare Kate, if you wish.  But at the same time frames.  It is unfair to take, for example,  Anne now and compare Kate.  Or even Camilla now.  Lets look at where they were at when they were 3 years into royal life, then compare.   

But then again maybe we can't do it because every situation and woman is different.  Maybe it is completely unfair to all of them to do a comparison when they all have different roles.

I'm confused, @Macrobug. I'm happy to agree to disagree, but in this case, I did compare the same timeframe: in Sophie's first three years, she was working full-time (just not for the Firm).



Comparison is bound to happen. We are all compared to our sisters, mothers-in-law and colleagues.

Yep, you did.  Sorry.  I went from your comment into a general comment without clarification. 

As for charity suggestions....I think Sophie has the maternal/child health wrapped up.  So maybe Kate should concentrate on the ones she already has.  I do like the auction idea.  But open it up to auctioning off art done by the kids with a bit of Royal art.  Kate's photography, Charles' painting etc....Bring in some well known people also.

[Lady Adams]

^^ I wonder if she could get Victoria Beckham to donate a sketch from her fashion line!

[wannable]

Didn't Diana complain about the work, at the end she got rid of it too.

Kate is not only in a unique position, but married to a future King, third generation of working royals, first time for the BRF, 3 generations working, plus the multiple official and reliable sources talking about the money issue.

I think you're right that it's hard to compare any two individuals.  Kate, for example, is going to give birth to two children in her first four years as a senior Royal (and is ill for at least a month or two at the beginning of each pregnancy); she's also stepping into the most high-profile "wife" role in the BRF, with Diana (and all of the trouble too many engagements too soon caused there) as her immediate predecessor.  Her first few years are very different than Camilla's (who didn't have the children issue, but did have PR reasons to tread a very careful path) and Sophie's (who worked for the first three, and got caught in a big scandal in relation to that, and who had one ectopic pregnancy and gave birth to one child in that same period).    Camilla and Sophie (and Diana and Fergie) married full-time Royals; Will was in the RAF the first two years of their marriage and is now returning to a public service job.

People can of course have their own views on what Kate should be doing.  But IMO, it's been handled pretty well so far.  I look to 2012 (the only full year on record, since she married in partway through 2011 and was out for a big chunk of 2013 with George's birth and immediately after), when she did about 120 engagements -- that seems like a good number to me when Will is not yet full-time and there are a lot of senior Royals sharing the duties.  She obviously does much less when pregnant or on maternity leave, but giving birth to and raising the next generation of Royals is part of the job as well, and one that I think the BRF is happy to have her concentrate on right now. 

I think she'll spend the next few years at about the 100-120 level, and will increase her duties when HM/DoE have to cut back/Will becomes a full-time Royal/the children are a bit older (which I think is likely to coincide, and is what the family is planning for).  In the meantime, I think she'll continue to be deployed for foreign tours, and will focus on her current patronages and gradually adding new ones at a rate where she can be reasonably involved with each.
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 10:15:43 PM

To add to my prediction on her work numbers:  Kate is currently at 78 engagements for the year, and by my count would have been over 90 by the end of this week had she not had to cancel several scheduled appearances (potentially including the Malta trip) because of her HG.  Without the pregnancy, then, she would certainly have topped 100.  Again, the 100-120 range is what I think we'll see in her non-pregnancy/maternity leave years until Will becomes a full-time Royal, and I think that's a pretty good area for her to be aiming for.

Diana had a work ethic. Kate does not. That is the difference. Work was not the main problem for Diana. For obvious reasons. She enjoyed working and got satisfaction out her work.

Kate gets by on excuses and she does less than part time work.
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 11:47:27 PM

LA.  We are obviously not on the same page.  Compare Kate, if you wish.  But at the same time frames.  It is unfair to take, for example,  Anne now and compare Kate.  Or even Camilla now.  Lets look at where they were at when they were 3 years into royal life, then compare.   

But then again maybe we can't do it because every situation and woman is different.  Maybe it is completely unfair to all of them to do a comparison when they all have different roles. 

I don't see anything really changing for awhile unless Charles' reign begins or his father is incapacitated/deceased and William is called up to the Major Leagues. Until then it is QEII's reign and if she wants the work done by her children/their spouses then so be it.

Even then...Will may put his foot down and want to have another transitional year to find himself. William should be in the Major Leagues now instead of playing at being normal.

[Limabeany]

Whatever generation of royal she is, she is also an adult woman in her thirties being excused from contributing to society because people in their sixties and eighties can still work hard...  :wacko:

[cinrit]

^^ Or it could be that people in their sixties and eighties want to work hard.  William is already on record saying he's suggested the Queen slow down, but she won't.  Article including the interview has been posted at this forum many times.

Cindy

[KaTerina Montague]

Ane yet Willamette Harry and other 3rdgens  still find work to do ev3. If it's not royal duti3s, Kate does not.

[amabel]

^^ Neither has the fact that she has HG, in some quarters.  There are still those who don't believe she has it.  Would her speaking publicly about it convince them?

Cindy

I don't think so....

[Limabeany]

^^ Or it could be that people in their sixties and eighties want to work hard. 

Unlike 30 year olds William and Kate...

[TLLK]

^^ Or it could be that people in their sixties and eighties want to work hard.  William is already on record saying he's suggested the Queen slow down, but she won't.  Article including the interview has been posted at this forum many times.

Cindy

Good point Cindy. The senior royals have earned the right to decide how often and when they work. If they want to make several appearance a week then they should be allowed to do so. Other older monarchs have chosen to abdicate and let the younger generation take charge. Each royal house has its own leaders and IMO they dictate who does what, when, where and how often.

[KaTerina Montague]

Once again, William does work, has been working for years. It may not be the job some want him to do but it is a job. Compared to his wife, mowing lawns once a week would make him admirable.

[Lady Adams]

^I agree William has worked throughout the last decade, but he did just have the equivalent of a gap year.

[sandy]

^^ Or it could be that people in their sixties and eighties want to work hard.  William is already on record saying he's suggested the Queen slow down, but she won't.  Article including the interview has been posted at this forum many times.

Cindy

Good point Cindy. The senior royals have earned the right to decide how often and when they work. If they want to make several appearance a week then they should be allowed to do so. Other older monarchs have chosen to abdicate and let the younger generation take charge. Each royal house has its own leaders and IMO they dictate who does what, when, where and how often.

That's odd because I thought the Queen and Charles have work ethics. I doubt they would ever discourage the younger ones from working. I think Will just gets to do what he wants to.
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 03:01:59 PM

^^ Or it could be that people in their sixties and eighties want to work hard.  William is already on record saying he's suggested the Queen slow down, but she won't.  Article including the interview has been posted at this forum many times.

Cindy

So if the Queen does not want to slow down, how come she's giving more of her jobs to Charles? Will should be doing his part now and help out.
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 03:03:18 PM

Didn't Diana complain about the work, at the end she got rid of it too.

Kate is not only in a unique position, but married to a future King, third generation of working royals, first time for the BRF, 3 generations working, plus the multiple official and reliable sources talking about the money issue.

I think you're right that it's hard to compare any two individuals.  Kate, for example, is going to give birth to two children in her first four years as a senior Royal (and is ill for at least a month or two at the beginning of each pregnancy); she's also stepping into the most high-profile "wife" role in the BRF, with Diana (and all of the trouble too many engagements too soon caused there) as her immediate predecessor.  Her first few years are very different than Camilla's (who didn't have the children issue, but did have PR reasons to tread a very careful path) and Sophie's (who worked for the first three, and got caught in a big scandal in relation to that, and who had one ectopic pregnancy and gave birth to one child in that same period).    Camilla and Sophie (and Diana and Fergie) married full-time Royals; Will was in the RAF the first two years of their marriage and is now returning to a public service job.

People can of course have their own views on what Kate should be doing.  But IMO, it's been handled pretty well so far.  I look to 2012 (the only full year on record, since she married in partway through 2011 and was out for a big chunk of 2013 with George's birth and immediately after), when she did about 120 engagements -- that seems like a good number to me when Will is not yet full-time and there are a lot of senior Royals sharing the duties.  She obviously does much less when pregnant or on maternity leave, but giving birth to and raising the next generation of Royals is part of the job as well, and one that I think the BRF is happy to have her concentrate on right now. 

I think she'll spend the next few years at about the 100-120 level, and will increase her duties when HM/DoE have to cut back/Will becomes a full-time Royal/the children are a bit older (which I think is likely to coincide, and is what the family is planning for).  In the meantime, I think she'll continue to be deployed for foreign tours, and will focus on her current patronages and gradually adding new ones at a rate where she can be reasonably involved with each.
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 10:15:43 PM

To add to my prediction on her work numbers:  Kate is currently at 78 engagements for the year, and by my count would have been over 90 by the end of this week had she not had to cancel several scheduled appearances (potentially including the Malta trip) because of her HG.  Without the pregnancy, then, she would certainly have topped 100.  Again, the 100-120 range is what I think we'll see in her non-pregnancy/maternity leave years until Will becomes a full-time Royal, and I think that's a pretty good area for her to be aiming for.

Diana had a work ethic. Kate does not. That is the difference. Work was not the main problem for Diana. For obvious reasons. She enjoyed working and got satisfaction out her work.

Kate gets by on excuses and she does less than part time work.
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 11:47:27 PM

LA.  We are obviously not on the same page.  Compare Kate, if you wish.  But at the same time frames.  It is unfair to take, for example,  Anne now and compare Kate.  Or even Camilla now.  Lets look at where they were at when they were 3 years into royal life, then compare.   

But then again maybe we can't do it because every situation and woman is different.  Maybe it is completely unfair to all of them to do a comparison when they all have different roles. 

I don't see anything really changing for awhile unless Charles' reign begins or his father is incapacitated/deceased and William is called up to the Major Leagues. Until then it is QEII's reign and if she wants the work done by her children/their spouses then so be it.

Even then...Will may put his foot down and want to have another transitional year to find himself. William should be in the Major Leagues now instead of playing at being normal.

Diana never publicly complained about work. She was regrouping after the divorce and since she died one cannot make projections that she "complained" about work.

I think the money issue is just another excuse. Will could certainly be paying more attention to some non-sports charities.

[Canuck]

I think the money issue is just another excuse. Will could certainly be paying more attention to some non-sports charities.

I took a quick look at the Court Circular since the Aus/NZ trip, and Will has done maybe 10 sports-related appearances, all for high-profile national teams/events (relating to the World Cup in his role as Football Association President, the Tour de France, the Commonwealth Games, and the Invictus Games).  He's done more than twice as many non-sports engagements, including a large number related to the military as well as events for a variety of his patronages, including the Royal Marsden Hospital, Centrepoint, SkillForce, and United for Wildlife. 

I think he's paying plenty of attention to non-sports charities.  I also disagree that sports events are somehow less important.  The Invictus Games was a great example of what can be achieved through sport.  Attending major sporting events hosted by the UK, like the Commonwealth Games and Tour de France, is just as important as attending big county fairs or flower shows, both of which other Royals routinely go to.

[sandy]

Will has not done much so ten is not that small a number in comparison.

He has done little for Centrepoint so far I believe one "surprise" appearance and one other before that.

I am not talking about county fairs or flower shows but charities where he can make a difference by promoting them.

[Canuck]

All of the Royals spend time both on charitable causes and on important national or local events (whether those be the Commonwealth Games or the Chelsea Flower Show).  Will is no exception.

As for his engagements, by my count since Aus/NZ he's done:
-reception for veterans' employment
-2 Invictus Games appearances
-Oxford University China Centre opening
-thank you event for Commonwealth Games volunteers
-at least 4 WWI events in Belgium
-Coach Core session
-2 Commonwealth Games appearances
-Australia House statue unveiling
-Imperial War Museum (as patron)
-war memorial wreath laying
-Fields in Trust event (as patron)
-United for Wildlife cricket match (as patron)
-Sub-Aqua club (as new President, with Charles as former President)
-Queen's Young Leaders program
-2 Tour de France appearances
-visit to West Tanfield village
-Order of the Thistle
-Place2Be conference
-Royal Foundation event (as patron)
-Order of the Garter
-Trooping of the Colour
-Prince's Council meeting
-United for Wildlife program launch (as patron)
-technology sector reception
-at least 2 France WWII events
-SkillForce visit (as patron)
-Centrepoint visit (as patron)
-Royal Charities Forum (as patron)
-2 Football Association events before the World Cup
-Royal Marsden Hospital dinner (as patron)
-Royal Navy event for HMS Alliance (as patron)

That's about 39 engagements since the end of April, of which 12 were arguably sport-related (if you count a reception for the Commonwealth Games volunteers, and a cricket match that was for the benefit of one of his non-sports patronages). 

So as I said in my earlier post -- less than 1/3 of his engagements have been sport-related, and I believe even that number is skewed upward by the confluence of several huge sporting events happening in a row (World Cup, Commonwealth Games, and Invictus).  Over the same period of time last year, for example, he did 11 engagements (because he was still working full-time for the RAF) of which only 2 were sport related.

[cinrit]

So if the Queen does not want to slow down, how come she's giving more of her jobs to Charles? Will should be doing his part now and help out.

She hasn't really given him that many.  And obviously, if she's going to hand over a job, it's going to be handed over to her son and heir.  Charles will hand down jobs to William, as he did when William took over the patronage of the British Sub-Aqua Club, which had previously been held by Charles, and before Charles by Prince Philip.

Cindy

[Macrobug]

She has been handing over to Wills.  He did a number of investitures recently

[sandy]

So if the Queen does not want to slow down, how come she's giving more of her jobs to Charles? Will should be doing his part now and help out.

She hasn't really given him that many.  And obviously, if she's going to hand over a job, it's going to be handed over to her son and heir.  Charles will hand down jobs to William, as he did when William took over the patronage of the British Sub-Aqua Club, which had previously been held by Charles, and before Charles by Prince Philip.

Cindy

Will still needs to be doing more IMO
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 05:25:22 PM

All of the Royals spend time both on charitable causes and on important national or local events (whether those be the Commonwealth Games or the Chelsea Flower Show).  Will is no exception.

As for his engagements, by my count since Aus/NZ he's done:
-reception for veterans' employment
-2 Invictus Games appearances
-Oxford University China Centre opening
-thank you event for Commonwealth Games volunteers
-at least 4 WWI events in Belgium
-Coach Core session
-2 Commonwealth Games appearances
-Australia House statue unveiling
-Imperial War Museum (as patron)
-war memorial wreath laying
-Fields in Trust event (as patron)
-United for Wildlife cricket match (as patron)
-Sub-Aqua club (as new President, with Charles as former President)
-Queen's Young Leaders program
-2 Tour de France appearances
-visit to West Tanfield village
-Order of the Thistle
-Place2Be conference
-Royal Foundation event (as patron)
-Order of the Garter
-Trooping of the Colour
-Prince's Council meeting
-United for Wildlife program launch (as patron)
-technology sector reception
-at least 2 France WWII events
-SkillForce visit (as patron)
-Centrepoint visit (as patron)
-Royal Charities Forum (as patron)
-2 Football Association events before the World Cup
-Royal Marsden Hospital dinner (as patron)
-Royal Navy event for HMS Alliance (as patron)

That's about 39 engagements since the end of April, of which 12 were arguably sport-related (if you count a reception for the Commonwealth Games volunteers, and a cricket match that was for the benefit of one of his non-sports patronages). 

So as I said in my earlier post -- less than 1/3 of his engagements have been sport-related, and I believe even that number is skewed upward by the confluence of several huge sporting events happening in a row (World Cup, Commonwealth Games, and Invictus).  Over the same period of time last year, for example, he did 11 engagements (because he was still working full-time for the RAF) of which only 2 were sport related.

Some of the events listed were royal ceremonies (e.g. Order of the Garter) something he can't get out of.

Harry ran the Invictus games and Will sat and watched.

He still does little compared to other senior royals.

[Canuck]

You're welcome to that opinion, of course, but I was responding specifically to your claim that he's doing too many sports events and nothing for his patronages. 

[TLLK]

Just a reminder that the BRF's annual engagements have their own thread so if members want to check the numbers they can. Thank you Canuck for listing William's engagements since Aus/NZ so we can see the variety that he's participated in. I believe that  having a wide range of charitable and ceremonial engagements like the other BRF members along with adding investiture duties will help to prepare this heir-to-the-heir for his ultimate role. When the senior royals wish to give up appearing as often as they do should be their decision IMO.

[TLLK]

[mod] And now let's get back to the topic at hand...Kate's charities. :thumbsup: :nod:[/mod]

[SophieChloe]

Just a reminder that the BRF's annual engagements have their own thread so if members want to check the numbers they can.

Thanks, TLLK.  Thread can be found here : Annual Engagements for the BRF 2014

[KaTerina Montague]

^I agree William has worked throughout the last decade, but he did just have the equivalent of a gap year.

True but for me that doesn't negate his past work history. I've know people who didn't work for a year or 2 but they are still hard workers imo. Plus even his one college course lasting a minute makes him better than his wife.