My strong belief is that Prince William, soon after becoming king, will quickly change his story and announce a brand new plan to live in one or several of the main palaces and castles. I still believe that Prince William and Kate’s whole “Forest Lodge is our forever home, we will live here even after Charles dies” story is just a placeholder lie from an office with zero credibility. But it’s been fascinating to watch the British press take the “forever home” story at face value and proceed to freak out. Royal historian/biographer Robert Hardman is the latest to comment about the forever-home Forest Lodge drama, and Hardman brushes up against the sad truth that not even the prime minister could conceivably “order” King William to move into Buckingham Palace.
Later this year, the Prince and Princess of Wales will move into their “forever home” with their young family – Forest Lodge in Windsor Great Park. The future King William could easily commute from Forest Lodge to Buckingham Palace for official work, via the M4 or a faster helicopter, but how often would he realistically do this?
Royal Author Robert Hardman told GB News this week that Prince William residing permanently at Forest Lodge is not “tenable”. Speaking to Jacob Rees-Mogg, he said: “I don’t think that’s tenable. When the late Queen came to the throne in 1952, she and Prince Philip had just done up Clarence House as a sort of family home with their two young children. They loved it, and they didn’t want to move. The Queen Mother, who was resident at Buckingham Palace, didn’t want to move out. And so they presented [their plans] to the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, and it was Churchill who said no, no, no, you’ve got to move in [to Buckingham Palace]. The monarch has to live above the shop.”
Jacob replied: “Churchill’s advice was right, wasn’t it, that the King needs to be the sovereign, needs to be in Buckingham Palace, needs to be present in that central place and that somebody, maybe Keir Starmer, I hope it’s one of his long distance successors, will have to give that advice in due course.”
Mr Hardman conceded: “That will be a difficult conversation for whichever Prime Minister it is because when you had Winston Churchill, the greatest statesman of the age, in an avuncular way, saying to a 25-year-old mother of two who’s very much turning to him for advice. And when Churchill said. ‘I think you belong at Buckingham Palace, would you please go there?’ Then that’s what you did. Of course, [Prince William] will be a harder nut to crack for a future PM, but I think Buckingham Palace depends on having a visceral connection between the monarch and Royal HQ.”
“Maybe Keir Starmer, I hope it’s one of his long distance successors…” I mean, they’re now openly hoping that King Charles lives decades longer so they don’t have to deal with King Willy the Work-Shy. It’s true that Winston Churchill basically ordering a young QEII to move into Buckingham Palace was a much different situation than whatever is happening now. William will be in his 40s or 50s when his father dies, with three kids going to school full-time. Is William still going to say “no, I insist on hiding out in Forest Lodge forever” when all three kids are teenagers? It’s all a huge mess, but when in doubt, just assume that William and his office are lying.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.
