Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 358 359 [360] 361 362 ... 382   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Kate - news and photos III  (Read 1170156 times)
0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.
thecrownjewelthief

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 229

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 899





Ignore
« Reply #5385 on: December 04, 2019, 05:49:11 PM »

Wonderful pics and info on @RoyalFamily and KP twitter. Making Christmas decorations, preparing food for the reindeer, posting letters to Santa, picking out trees with the kids, and speaking to parents about Family Action services.

Such a cute event, and I bet a real treat for the kids (though a lot of the preschoolers probably don't really know who she is). A great way to do something sweet and fun, but also bring attention to the patronage.
Logged
LarLa

Small Member
****

Reputation: 116

Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 476





Ignore
« Reply #5386 on: December 04, 2019, 06:18:17 PM »

Looks like a great event. I like events like this more than when they are just standing around. Love the interaction.

Handing down patronages makes more sense to me than taking on additional ones. There are a lot of organizations that will lose their royal patron in the coming years.
Logged
Lady Liebe

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 321

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1847





Ignore
« Reply #5387 on: December 05, 2019, 01:53:26 AM »

https://people.com/royals...-come-everywhere-with-me/

Looks like she had fun.

.
Logged
Aubiette

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 234

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 723





Ignore
« Reply #5388 on: December 05, 2019, 02:43:15 AM »


What a fun day for those kids and their families. Kate too.
Logged
Future Crayon

Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 2599

Offline Offline

Posts: 10826


Sophie Winklestan




Ignore
« Reply #5389 on: December 05, 2019, 10:24:59 AM »

Looks like a great event. I like events like this more than when they are just standing around. Love the interaction.

Handing down patronages makes more sense to me than taking on additional ones. There are a lot of organizations that will lose their royal patron in the coming years.

I don't think the queen has visited Family Action in the last 10 years, so handing over the patronage was long overdue
Logged

faulty DNA
Lemon drizzle

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 64

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 280





Ignore
« Reply #5390 on: December 05, 2019, 10:57:40 AM »

And better to have a younger royal who can get down and do things with the children rather than just looking at them as if they are a strange species in a zoo
Logged
Ellie

Warned
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1600

Online Online

Posts: 5922


in search of ethical emerald tiaras




Ignore
« Reply #5391 on: December 05, 2019, 11:21:07 AM »

The Queen having anything to with patronages involving children was always so awkward.

I hope the kids had a lot of fun and it gave lots of positive press and donations for Family Action!
Logged

writing angry fauxminist letters in the Lesbaru
Eve

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 288

Online Online

Estonia Estonia

Posts: 972





Ignore
« Reply #5392 on: December 05, 2019, 11:55:26 AM »

Good that she got herself a new patronage and promptly visited it. Her outfit was nicely casual, even though not very fond of those skinny jeans (erhm...well...I confess that pure envy talking here because not everyone looks this great in those skinny tight jeans   Blush ). The colors gave her outfit a nice Christmas-vibe. Judging from the pictures she looked engaged and they had lots of fun in preparing for the fastly approching Christmas time  Thumb up
Logged
luvcharles

Warned
Huge Member
********

Reputation: 850

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 2381





Ignore
« Reply #5393 on: December 05, 2019, 12:40:34 PM »

Looks like a great event. I like events like this more than when they are just standing around. Love the interaction.

Handing down patronages makes more sense to me than taking on additional ones. There are a lot of organizations that will lose their royal patron in the coming years.

I don't think the queen has visited Family Action in the last 10 years, so handing over the patronage was long overdue

Doing a search on the British Monarchy website from 1st January, 1997 there have been three visits to Family Action - one by Edward related to DoE in 2015 and the two Catherine has made this year. So three visits in the past virtually 23 years.

Catherine visited in January this year and then again yesterday, as Patron.

The Queen rarely visits any of her charities.

Logged
CyrilSebastian

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 257

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2283





Ignore
« Reply #5394 on: December 05, 2019, 11:14:03 PM »

Three visits in 23 years is not a huge number of visits. How about a visit every so many months?
Logged
thecrownjewelthief

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 229

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 899





Ignore
« Reply #5395 on: December 06, 2019, 12:45:16 AM »

And better to have a younger royal who can get down and do things with the children rather than just looking at them as if they are a strange species in a zoo

 Star Thanks for the laugh!
Logged
luvcharles

Warned
Huge Member
********

Reputation: 850

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 2381





Ignore
« Reply #5396 on: December 06, 2019, 12:52:30 AM »

Three visits in 23 years is not a huge number of visits. How about a visit every so many months?

Given the number of charities the royals support - around 4000 in total a visit ever few months would mean 4 a year and that would mean 16,000 visits along with all the other duties.

It isn't feasible at all.

The Queen hardly ever visited any of her charities and that applies to all of them.

Camilla has 90 charities but she doesn't visit all of them every year. Charles has around 400 charities and again they don't get a visit every year. Edward has around 200 but the vast majority of his engagements are to do with only one - Duke of Edinburgh's Awards.
Logged
cordtx

Warned
Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1400

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 9191





Ignore
« Reply #5397 on: December 06, 2019, 01:11:29 AM »

Thatís a crazy amount, do the charities get much out of having just the royal name?
They should start paring these down from now on.
Logged
Oh_Caroline

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 760

Offline Offline

Posts: 3112





Ignore
« Reply #5398 on: December 06, 2019, 01:16:14 AM »

Three visits in 23 years is not a huge number of visits. How about a visit every so many months?

Given the number of charities the royals support - around 4000 in total a visit ever few months would mean 4 a year and that would mean 16,000 visits along with all the other duties.

It isn't feasible at all.

The Queen hardly ever visited any of her charities and that applies to all of them.

Camilla has 90 charities but she doesn't visit all of them every year. Charles has around 400 charities and again they don't get a visit every year. Edward has around 200 but the vast majority of his engagements are to do with only one - Duke of Edinburgh's Awards.

Wonderful summary.

Personally I take issue with the younger generations claim that they'd have only a handful of charities so they could be "more involved"...whatever that means.  I don't really feel like they're any more involved than the royals that have boat loads of charities...or at least involved on a level that provides solid justification.

If we're honest with ourselves there's almost zero need for 4,000 some odd charities to have a royal patron.  Sticking with a more modest amount (say under 50 plus military stuff) for the average royal would work...visiting once to twice a year or as needed by the charity in question.  Of course for the monarch there's another set of charities that have had the monarch as patron for several monarchs in a row...or the Queen whether regent or consort...that's slightly different.

As royals either retire, die, or are fired it's a good time to evaluate the need and effectiveness of having a royal patron for each affected charity...and which working royal would be a good fit.  It's my opinion that as the BRF reduces it's official working members we will see a dramatic change to the number of patronages...but hopefully with the "more involved" to back up the change.  Non working royals, just like nobles or celebs, are welcome to support however many charities they want with their own time.
Logged
luvcharles

Warned
Huge Member
********

Reputation: 850

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 2381





Ignore
« Reply #5399 on: December 06, 2019, 05:20:24 AM »

Charities do not have to have a royal patron. If they have one, even one who doesn't visit, they must feel that it is worthwhile to have the royal's name connected to their charity. If the charity isn't seeing any benefit they wouldn't keep the royal or ask for a replacement when one dies.

Sometimes they may simply put their name to a fundraising event e.g. write a letter in support. That doesn't get into the CC as an engagement though.

I do think that in 20 years time the working royals will be doing only around 1000 engagements in total per year rather than the nearly 3500+ they do now.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 358 359 [360] 361 362 ... 382   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: