The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below!

 

[Knell]

Gosh, I had to get the popcorn for this discussion haha....sorry it has finished to be honest, very interesting topic....perhaps just intermission??

 

[Margew]

The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

View attachment 36104

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below

 

[Margew]

The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

View attachment 36104

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below!

I am so over this guy its all about making money and he knows the palace are not going to refute anything PITY as some one needs to take him down a peg or two - along with those feeding him this stuff

 

[Haram]

King

Charles and his dragon Camilla living the fine life off mummies fortune time Australia becomes a stand alone Republic and get away from these Leeches remember Australia was the dumping ground for the English undesirable people so why give them millions for nothing when the country could put this money to good use here not there monarchy inbred parasites

 

[Haram]

It’s better to remain with the monarchy than to be a republic. You don’t know what it will be like. It might be worse. it is better to have the devil you know than the devil you don’t.

 

[KatKop]

Well, @SDC Staff , this was a good exercise in determining what gets your readers responding. No more obsessions with KMart junk, please—send us the so-called taboo subjects: sex, politics and religion, all of which are relevant when talking about monarchies.

I haven't had such a good laugh in years...

 

[Rob44]

@ToniaKisliakov, are you aware that Charles has no influence whatsoever on how the country is governed?

Yes;pity. Which Australain PM would you like as President with all the expense and corruption that that would entail?

 

[marni]

Not a new story, everyone knew for years that The Queen didn't think Charles was ready or would ever be King.
He only became King because The Queen Died.
Before marrying Diana he was know as the playboy Prince.
Remember He was having an affair with a still married woman with children, which The Queen knew about and was why she pushed for him to find a young single bride.

The title of King should have gone straight to William

he should have abdicated - the same as his Uncle did when he wanted to marry a divorcee. Camilla should never be refered to as QUEEN.

 

[Suzanne rose]

he should have abdicated - the same as his Uncle did when he wanted to marry a divorcee. Camilla should never be refered to as QUEEN.

I have been saying that exact thing on here for ages . I could never understand that . His uncle decide to marry Wallace Simpson, yes a divorcee but without kids and after she was divorced. Whereas Charles had an affair with a married woman with kids, then after marrying Diana kept having the affair , so became adultery at its highest.
His uncle was an angel compared to Charles .

 

[gamiry]

The Englsh

After all a King is much better than what govt we have here now

at least they are home grown dickheads not parasites from the other side of the world

 

[Jan Purcell]

what a load of bulldust.

 

[Colette 3799]

I wonder what you will do with this because EVERY BIT OF IT IS TRUE. Phillip was a womaniser for good reason. He did NOT want to marry Elizabeth because he was engaged to a specialist doctor's daughter from Abbotsford in Sydney. They tried to put the girl off and, typical Aussie, she told them "if he can't stand on his two feet he can go to hell". When this was learned Phillip was arrested, locked in the brig with my cousin for company (he was part of the crew) until their arrival in England and the wedding was over. They are interbred with the House of Hanover and the Greek Royals). Charles was sent to school in OZ 3 three times in the hope he'd grow up, He was an embarrassment because he only spoke to trees and flowers. Remember the day Lizzie arrived back from a sea trip she hugged her mother and shook hands with her 3 year old son. This was shown on the tv news. It was well known that she spent no more than half an hour each day with her children.. The Queen made it clear that Camilla WAS NOT TO BE A QUEEN. As usual Charlie did his own thing. It didn't even matter to him that he had a huge part in Dianna's behaviour and death. William is no better. That mob has been puting the boot into Harry since he was tiny because he had red hair. I also feel sorry for young George who his father calls "" a king in training". For heaven's sake when will he be allowed to be a child? This isn't the first time this mob has hunted one of their own out of the country.....remember Mrs Wallis Simpson? Lizzie also screwed up her sister's life by not allowing Margaret's marriage to the love of her life (Group Captain Peter Townsend) yet allowed her son to screw someone else's wife and mother. Look at your history books and learn how far the rot goes back.
Sorry folks but I'm 81 and have lived through this stuff. I'm sick of paying for these parasites holidays here and anything else they want. We deserve our own country. They didn't even discover us. The Dutch were here well before the Poms and a plate in a museum in China has a map showing Australia still joined to Tassie and it's from the 1400's. By the way I haven't read Harry's book. I've lived through this stuff.

Interesting. Born and bred in England but I don’t have an interest in the Royals. Only the historical side of things. I hate pomp and ceremony. I certainly would hate to have their lives, living in a goldfish bowl.

 

[Leenie]

I wonder what you will do with this because EVERY BIT OF IT IS TRUE. Phillip was a womaniser for good reason. He did NOT want to marry Elizabeth because he was engaged to a specialist doctor's daughter from Abbotsford in Sydney. They tried to put the girl off and, typical Aussie, she told them "if he can't stand on his two feet he can go to hell". When this was learned Phillip was arrested, locked in the brig with my cousin for company (he was part of the crew) until their arrival in England and the wedding was over. They are interbred with the House of Hanover and the Greek Royals). Charles was sent to school in OZ 3 three times in the hope he'd grow up, He was an embarrassment because he only spoke to trees and flowers. Remember the day Lizzie arrived back from a sea trip she hugged her mother and shook hands with her 3 year old son. This was shown on the tv news. It was well known that she spent no more than half an hour each day with her children.. The Queen made it clear that Camilla WAS NOT TO BE A QUEEN. As usual Charlie did his own thing. It didn't even matter to him that he had a huge part in Dianna's behaviour and death. William is no better. That mob has been puting the boot into Harry since he was tiny because he had red hair. I also feel sorry for young George who his father calls "" a king in training". For heaven's sake when will he be allowed to be a child? This isn't the first time this mob has hunted one of their own out of the country.....remember Mrs Wallis Simpson? Lizzie also screwed up her sister's life by not allowing Margaret's marriage to the love of her life (Group Captain Peter Townsend) yet allowed her son to screw someone else's wife and mother. Look at your history books and learn how far the rot goes back.
Sorry folks but I'm 81 and have lived through this stuff. I'm sick of paying for these parasites holidays here and anything else they want. We deserve our own country. They didn't even discover us. The Dutch were here well before the Poms and a plate in a museum in China has a map showing Australia still joined to Tassie and it's from the 1400's. By the way I haven't read Harry's book. I've lived through this stuff.

Good on you for stating facts , that most of us oldies are aware of , thanks for pulling no punches , I always thought Charlie was a dill, watching their antics over the years ,something has to give. Now watch the knives come out.

 

[Monty]

They are humans after all. However, there could be a great deal of truth in this. He did wait for a long time before becoming King. Maybe he has already become a little addle brained.

Oh, I am not particularly this pedantic, however, spotted a typo error at the beginning. Charles III, not II.

If Megan is behind this story, how can anyone believe one single word in the book!!

 

[Jest]

The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

View attachment 36104

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below!

Please! Do not tell me that the UK would take any notice of a horrible scumbad as this scoobie scoobie doo. It is sensationalism and how about we give the royal family some breathing space from the ginger and whinger.

 

[Isis]

They are humans after all. However, there could be a great deal of truth in this. He did wait for a long time before becoming King. Maybe he has already become a little addle brained.

Oh, I am not particularly this pedantic, however, spotted a typo error at the beginning. Charles III, not II.

I saw it as well, thought we had lost a Charles somewhere. But honestly we are such fragile creatures, the queen was a rare bird. The royals cost a lot but the millions they bring in would make that look like peanuts.
Imagine living with every move you make being scrutinised . One thing re Camilla,b she loved him unconditionally and it seems still does. Just leave the poor sods be.

 

[Isis]

Please! Do not tell me that the UK would take any notice of a horrible scumbad as this scoobie scoobie doo. It is sensationalism and how about we give the royal family some breathing space from the ginger and whinger.

Great description . They made their choice

 

[Hel]

Not a new story, everyone knew for years that The Queen didn't think Charles was ready or would ever be King.
He only became King because The Queen Died.
Before marrying Diana he was know as the playboy Prince.
Remember He was having an affair with a still married woman with children, which The Queen knew about and was why she pushed for him to find a young single bride.

The title of King should have gone straight to William,

Doesn't work that way. He was never really a playboy, it was great reputation for a boring man! He was only ever really into Camilla.

 

[Hel]

I unfortunately have a negative response to King Charles and Camilla. Queen Elizabeth's reign is likely to be the last
Royal to have had a positive impact and affection for all those under her rule.
Charlie's on the other hand has not left a good impression on the Monarchy. Making Camilla, Queen will be the Rock he will perish on. Prince William may not be quite ready to take on the Crown, but with Catherine on his side I think he will do very well. However will he get the chance ? Not in the short term, I hazard to guess.
Our push toward becoming a Republican
Society will no doubt be in the forefront
of our largest proposal to become, what the large proportion of our population are wanting to move into,that less expensive option of having a larger push for this to happen. Coupled with more freedom to expand our own Preferred Government. , and our own point of view, as to where we want our Country to head.
If we can vote in a responsible Government that reflects our concern for the future of Australia we can only go from strength to strength.

.

No such thing as good government. I'm no monarchist, they do bugger all really. Charles has been hung out to dry by the media for decades. I choose not to believe sensationalist rubbish.

 

[Noon]

The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

View attachment 36104

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below!

I think it's about time King Charles removed Prince Harry's title

The people of the Commonwealth have long celebrated Queen Elizabeth's reign, but some say the future of the monarchy is now uncertain as her son King Charles III sits on the throne.

Omid Scobie's latest book, Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy's Fight for Survival, is set to shed light on revelations from insiders about King Charles and the Queen's relationship.

It is understood that those close to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spoke with Scobie for his book, though sources took care to say that the pair had no hand in its creation.

According to Scobie, Queen Elizabeth had little faith in her son's ability to rule as he was enjoying the glamour being raised within the royal family.

View attachment 36104

The new book Endgame is said to reveal some insider claims about the monarch. Image: X / @omidscoobie

In 2001, the Queen supposedly referred to new Lord Chamberlain, Andrew Parker, as her 'new CEO', which some perceive as a pointed reference to her feelings towards her son.

'There was a slight lack of faith in her son,' alleges Scobie in his book. He also states that the Queen was vocal in criticising Charles' 'extravagantly luxurious lifestyle'.

This year, King Charles' coronation cost upwards of $191 million—a stark juxtaposition to his work advocating for those in the UK struggling with living costs.

It was reportedly on his 75th birthday that King Charles visited a food bank in the UK to speak with families who depend on it.

Prince William has also been a leading figure in homelessness campaigns in the country.

Scobie goes on to divulge yet more revelations. 'A source close to the Queen has said that the monarch needed someone who could be trusted to be her eyes and ears,' says Scobie in his book.

'The Queen reportedly did not think Charles was the right man for such a role—and many senior royals share this sentiment today.'

The book also states the views of those with a vested interest in the Monarchy's survival post-Elizabeth are also not in favour of the new King, and that his successors—including the young Prince George—hold the key to ‘mak(ing) the royals great again’.

The biography also paints a picture of a monarchy heading for a 'potentially uneventful era', implying that Charles will never be able to replicate his mother's greatly-loved standing with the public.

Scobie even makes reference to 'tampon-gate', which is a controversial intimate leaked recording wherein the then-Prince stated his sexual desire for his lover.

Just as Scobie released his book, other insiders from Buckingham Palace recently hinted that relations between the King and his youngest son were still icy.

According to recent reports, King Charles feels that Prince Harry has caused him ‘great pain’, particularly over his conduct in Queen Elizabeth’s last years and perceived insults toward Queen Consort Camilla. You can read more about it here.

Key Takeaways

• A new royal book has made claims that Queen Elizabeth lacked faith in King Charles' ability to rule, claiming she thought he was too preoccupied with royal luxuries.
• The book, by Omid Scobie, alleges that the late Queen's lack of confidence in Charles remains a common sentiment among senior royals, and that there is disappointment in his reign.
• The book controversially refers to the infamous 'tampon-gate' controversy, further painting a critical portrayal of King Charles.

What do you think of this story? Let us know in the comments below!

I think it's about time Prince Charles removed all titles from Harry & Meghan. They are disgusting in the way they are behaving & need to learn that everybody hates them. They are vicious & vindictive & should be exiled from the Royal Family once & forever. They are very jealous of William & Catherine & their beautiful family. Anymore rot that comes out of their mouths should be taken along for slander. Let them know that no-one believes their vindictiveness.