<\/p>\n
In a recent interview with actor Eugene Levy<\/a>, Prince William stated that \u201cchange is on [the] agenda\u201d when he becomes king. His pivotal role in the decision to remove Prince Andrew\u2019s titles has given a glimpse into what these changes might be.<\/p>\n Announcing that Andrew would no longer use his official titles, Buckingham Palace stated that the Prince of Wales<\/a> had been \u201cconsulted\u201d on the decision. But news reports suggest that it may have been William, rather than Andrew or the king, who was the real driving force<\/a> behind the decision. <\/p>\n William has already made it clear he takes a dim view of his uncle, for example by banning<\/a> him from walking in the Order of the Garter procession. It has been reported<\/a> that as king, William will ban Andrew from public and private royal events, including his coronation.<\/p>\n \n The 19th-century commentator Walter Bagehot, whose 1867 work The English Constitution provides the classic account of constitutional monarchy in the UK, described the monarchy as the \u201cdignified\u201d<\/a> part of the constitution, whose opulence and grandeur inspired \u201cawe\u201d, \u201creverence\u201d and \u201cdeference\u201d from its people. He suggested that the monarchy needed to maintain \u201cmystery and theatre\u201d in order to project this image of dignity. <\/p>\n Bagehot warned against the monarchy playing an \u201cefficient\u201d role in the constitution \u2013 seeking to solve problems that the country might be facing. But, as a poll from 2024 found, people now want the royal family to talk more about the \u201csocial issues and challenges facing the country\u201d<\/a>, rather than simply looking regal on a throne. <\/p>\n Whereas Andrew arguably embodied Bagehot\u2019s outdated, entitled view of monarchy, William represents a more efficient one. He wants to be out in society, playing a hands-on role to help inspire policy shifts<\/a> on key issues. <\/p>\n It is clear that William wants to change how the monarchy lives and works day-to-day. But how much change can one man \u2013 even a king \u2013 make?<\/p>\n As head of state, there are certain constitutional functions and duties which, as king, William must perform. For example, he will have to deliver the king\u2019s speech<\/a> each year during the extravagant state opening of parliament. This grand display of pomp and ceremony seems at odds with any pared-down vision for monarchy. <\/p>\n But William\u2019s future role also gives him the chance to inspire the sorts of changes he wants to see. The monarch enjoys the right to be consulted by, and the rights to encourage and warn, the government of the day. These rights are known as the tripartite convention<\/a>. William has previously stated that he wants to \u201cengage governments\u201d on issues he cares about, and this constitutional convention gives him the vehicle to do so. <\/p>\n This is something we are already seeing William\u2019s father, King Charles, do, using his influence to encourage the government to take action on issues important to him. He encouraged the government<\/a> to launch the Coalition to Tackle Knife Crime. And Keir Starmer explicitly stated that the king\u2019s vision for sustainable, eco-friendly homes had \u201cinspired\u201d<\/a> government policy on housing. <\/p>\n William has chosen to focus much of his work as Prince of Wales on issues with a social purpose<\/a>, such as climate change, homelessness and mental health. This is work which he wants to continue as king, stating that what excites him most about his future role is to create \u201ca world \u2026 that actually does impact people\u2019s lives for the better\u201d.<\/p>\n He has already tried to use his influence to encourage government support for these issues. In 2023, he spent weeks courting support from ministers<\/a> for his anti-homelessness initiative, Homewards.<\/p>\n But in the weekly audiences with the prime minister that he will have as king, he will be able to have direct conversations at the highest level of government.<\/p>\n Of course, he will need to remain politically neutral, another inescapable constitutional obligation. Bagehot warned that \u201cconstitutional royalty under an active king is one of the worst of governments\u201d and described a political king as a \u201cmeddling fool\u201d. <\/p>\n But Charles is already treading the political boundary as king \u2013 and so far seems to be avoiding criticism<\/a>. This is likely because there is largely support in society to see progress on issues like reducing knife crime. To balance his desire to initiate change with his constitutional obligations, William will have to stick to relatively uncontroversial issues on which there is broad shared consensus, like the need to end homelessness.<\/p>\n William can also modernise the monarchy when it comes to cost. Rather than, in his own words, having hundreds of patronages and \u201cloads of causes that you sort of turn up and keep an eye on\u201d, he wants the monarchy to focus on a handful of core projects. This would entail a smaller number of working royals doing fewer engagements, which should mean fewer staff and reduced costs for the taxpayer. <\/p>\n Bagehot suggested that the royal family should \u201cdazzle\u201d people with displays of its \u201cshowy wealth\u201d. But William\u2019s recent decision to move his family into Forest Lodge \u2013 a relatively modest-sized residence by royal standards \u2013 suggests his vision for monarchy is more aligned with that of the European \u201cbicycling monarchies\u201d<\/a>. This informal style of monarchy with fewer working members is popular in countries where people \u2013 including the royals themselves \u2013 often bicycle. And they are just as, if not more popular<\/a>, than the UK\u2019s monarchy.<\/p>\n
\n
\n Read more:
\n Why Prince Andrew is still a prince \u2013 and how his remaining titles could be removed<\/a>
\n <\/strong>
\n <\/em>\n<\/p>\nConstitutional obligations<\/h2>\n
\n Tolga Akmen\/EPA-EFE<\/a><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n