This is long. Apologize. However Miguel Head said the same thing in an interview with the Harvard Gazette.
The bread and butter is SOOO important because you get to meet a diverse group of people. Its no wonder why The Queen and the Late Diana are/were hugely popular. If they do away with that, then whats the point of monarchies?
... re: engagements, it is amazing hearing how a royal visiting a village, a business, a community is a sense of pride, and belonging, for the people. It gives them media attention, especially for rural communities or inner city areas that are hurting. It makes people happy. Ditching those means you are giving the finger to your own people, if you ask me.
Although the younger royals are dismissive of the "bread and butter" engagements that the other royals traditionally take on, visiting all parts of the UK weekly, this is how the average person in the UK can feel connected with the royals - the possibility of them appearing in their town/factory/hospital etc.
...If the future of the monarchy is to dial back the "bread and butter" engagements the public will soon tire of these posh London based royals appealing to the world rather than their people.
This is what Miguel Head said in an interview with the Harvard Gazette:
British newspapers...they’ve become more and more bunkered into London and that makes them more unresponsive to these big changes that are happening in the country. Which, in turn, leads people outside of London to feel they’re not part of the national story anymore, except as crime or sports stories. There are lots of people who didn’t feel they were part of that story — economically, politically, socially, culturally — led by a kind of London elite, and that causes a lot of resentment and anger.
The royal family doesn’t have a formal strategy or job description. It does what it does through a set of values that it holds true to itself. Those values have been set by the queen... and her remarkably successful reign. And one of those that the queen puts a lot of store by is that the royal family are there for what we used to describe as being in “the happiness business.”
We’re [the Royal Family] there to celebrate success and to put a spotlight on people who have done great things. That can be as a caregiver or someone’s who campaigned for a sports hall in their town or it can be a Nobel Prize laureate. It can be anything in between all of those things. The royal family takes great delight and spends a lot of time searching out those things to celebrate them. It’s probably the biggest guide for when we were looking how to fill the program, that was the thing by which we operated.
---So I presume that what RDers have said reflects what Miguel saw and worked on while he was private secretary. The question is do the brothers' secretaries look at this the same way? Are the younger royals going to stick with their 'local' engagements because their children are under 10 yrs old? Are the previous generations of royals expected to do this country-wide work leaving the younger ones to do international engagements to places they want to visit?
IMO I understand why Kate wants to stay local as much as possible with the children. But her position isn't middle-class mum. There are times when her position requires that the children be left in care of trusted people while she accompanies her husband to engagements away from home base. Neither she nor her husband should expect that the life that K had is the model they emulate because the couple must be seen and heard in places away from London to be believed. And they need to do it often enough to be embraced by all the citizens, not just their generation and those younger. He will be king of all the people not just some of the people. In that regard he won't have the freedom that his younger brother does. Does he know that? Does he embrace it?