From: David Collins, Scissett.
RECENTLY we had a photo of four generations of the Royal Family showing the succession, barring accidents. This seemed to make it clear who was in and who was not.
Beyond that, we have a “crisis” as the younger royals reach middle age. It is obvious that their roles will change. No more dashing young military men and girlfriends but maturing married men with families to consider. What’s wrong with a review? I’m sure Princess Anne could give many pointers. She appears to be the busiest in the family supporting the Queen.
However, none of the above is the crisis. The crisis is a press corps bloated out of all proportion. Time for a drastic review of Palace media staff. Too many which can only lead to inaccuracy and contradiction.
As for the media, too much opinion and speculation and too many “sources” (which means I am making this up). The scrums of press totally dominating events is stomach-churning and made even worse by moronic royal watchers waving mobile phones in everyone’s face.
Despite all views to the contrary, the Royal Family is not a branch of showbusiness, but part of our democracy. I have a higher opinion of the Queen as head of state compared with the current nonentities in Parliament.
From: Ian Richardson, Railway Street, Beverley.
THE BBC evening news last Thursday ran the non-story on the Sussexes for the first 10 minutes. On Monday, it was seven minutes. How their editors can decide that the squabbles within the Royal Family can be seen as of greater importance than the crises in Iran and Australia beggars belief.
The latter, facing an existential crisis, merited only two minutes’ coverage on Thursday. In my view such grossly wrong priorities reveal a good deal about what is amiss with this country and one of them, a ridiculous obsession with royalty, is fuelled by the sickening inability of the BBC to give emphasis to what really matters, and what frankly does not.
Lord help us, the bulletin could not finish without a live update (nothing had happened) from Sandringham by a typically sycophantic Nicholas Witchell.
From: Peter Hyde, Driffield.
WE have a Queen who has never put a foot wrong, who has been wonderful in every sense of the word and yet has been saddled with a family who have seemingly done their very best to bring shame on the Royal Family.
Apart from the three divorces, she now has a grandson who has allowed his divorcee wife to rule him and brought shame on the name of Windsor and Sussex by totally ignoring the rules and protocols of our Royal Family. His wife then hides away in Canada, leaving her son in the care of others.
Harry was respected and even loved for his involvement in Afghanistan and subsequent Invictus Games, all of which he has thrown away by his current actions. It seems to me that he is acting like a spoiled brat and should be brought into line by his father and brother.
From: Coun Tim Mickleburgh (Lab), Boulevard Avenue, Grimsby.
I WAS pleased to read the letter from former Labour MEP Michael McGowan (The Yorkshire Post, January 14) about the future of the monarchy.
Really the continued existence of a Royal Family is an irrelevance in 2020, a reminder of the undemocratic past when we ruled an Empire and didn’t allow ordinary men and women the right to vote. The Queen could indeed stand down with dignity as your correspondent suggests, and we could plan for a future where acres of newsprint weren’t wasted on those famous for being famous.
From: Henry Cobden, Ilkley.
IF the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are so committed to the fight against climate change, how do they think their additional flights between Britain and North America will contribute to this? Or do they intend to go by boat, as teenage activist Greta Thunberg recently did?
From: Allen Jenkinson, Lipscomb Street, Huddersfield.
WHY should the British taxpayer fund the Sussexes’ privileged lifestyle?