King Charles’s big military patronage announcement did not go over well

The big news today over in Britain is that Buckingham Palace announced twenty-one new “honorary appointments” for working royals. All of the appointments are to military positions, because there are so many military units left patronless these days. It’s been a problem for years now, but the issue has been exacerbated by the Duke of York’s perversions, the Sussexit, QEII’s death and the chronic laziness of the heir and his wife. Suddenly, the Windsors find themselves without enough working royals to fill all of the military and charity patronages. Which might explain the Telegraph’s rather pointed coverage of the military patronage announcement:

Today’s announcement from Buckingham Palace of 21 new honorary appointments in the Armed Services for “working members” of the Royal family, chiefly concern those regiments, corps and units formerly headed by Elizabeth II. That said, some roles have been passed to other members of the Royal family by their present holder, the King, presumably to maintain tri-service balance.

Clearly, part of the much larger current review and redistribution of the late Queen’s patronages, which numbered at her death in excess of 600 organisations, these armed services patronages, for that is in effect what they are, have been much easier to deal with than those in the charity and other sectors, such as the patronage of Sunningdale Ladies Golf Club and the Royal Caledonian Curling Club.

However, the task cannot have been entirely easy – particularly when trying to make personal royal links to the units – by the absence from the working royal roster of the Sussexes, the Duke of York and his daughters. Add to that the increasing age and infirmity of the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra, who are both notably absent from the list. Indeed, it can’t be long before the Kents’ military roles come up for review and replacement, most notably the Duke’s Colonelcy of the Scots Guards, for which post the Duke of Edinburgh is the most likely candidate.

Some of the new appointments are obvious, others less so. The new Queen, who is not – unlike her late mother-in-law – particularly noted for her religiosity, surprisingly takes on only one new job to add to her existing three colonelcies. She has been made Patron of the Royal Army Chaplains’ Department. This is hardly an onerous task, since chaplains are distributed among the whole of the Army. Unless, of course, she is planning to meet all of them individually.

The Princess Royal’s only new job, Deputy Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, must have been an easy call given her strong links to Scotland and her existing appointments with the regiment’s 1st and 6th Battalions. The same is true of the helicopter pilot, the Prince of Wales, who assumes the role of Colonel-in-Chief of the Army Air Corps, and the Duchess of Gloucester’s appointment as Colonel-in-Chief of the Adjutant General’s Corps, of which she has been Deputy Colonel-in-Chief since 1992.

Less obvious are some of the other jobs. Indeed, the attempt in the Buckingham Palace announcement to make personal links are at times somewhat strained, if not entirely absent. The Prince of Wales is not particularly associated with Mercia but is now Colonel-in-Chief of its eponymous regiment.

… And while on the subject of the newly-created Duke of Edinburgh’s colonelcies, surely the Palace knows that he is Colonel, not Colonel-in-Chief, of the London Guards as stated in the announcement. Still on the subject of accuracy, guardees the length and breadth of the land must be harrumphing over their kippers at seeing the King described as “Colonel-in-Chief of the Household Division”, when no such appointment exists. He is, of course, ex officio Colonel-in-Chief of all the regiments of the Household Division, but that’s not the same thing. Standards are clearly slipping at the big house.

[From The Telegraph]

I guess I’ve developed an ear for the nuances of British bitchery, because I snort-laughed a few times: “The new Queen, who is not – unlike her late mother-in-law – particularly noted for her religiosity” and “He is, of course, ex officio Colonel-in-Chief of all the regiments of the Household Division, but that’s not the same thing. Standards are clearly slipping at the big house.” LMAO. They also seem to be hitting King Charles and Buckingham Palace for not working faster to redistribute all of QEII’s 600-plus patronages, and I agree – it’s been a year, surely they should be further into the process. But the problem is as the Telegraph notes – too few working royals. Please, this is so funny.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.