Kent as King, that would have been interesting! Of course, tabloids worked very differently then, but still word got out. Makes Charles and Di’s difficulties almost stodgy.
The point is that the Prime Minister - who is basically the person in charge of the UK, despite the reigning monarch being the one who has their likeness on all the money and postage stamps - could suggest informally, during a private meeting or something similar, that perhaps Charles might like to consider the many benefits and advantages that not being King for too long might offer.
No-one would even know the conversation had happened. It’s not like the PM would be going on the Beeb and saying “I had lunch with Charles the other day and told him it was in everyone’s best interests to say “Yeah, Nah” to the whole King thing.”
Charles could potentially, for the purposes of this hypothetical, be King for a while - a few years, perhaps - then decide to abdicate for whatever reasons he felt most appropriate (or at least most public to state publically).
Or, he could equally tell the PM where to stick his quiet suggestion and be King for as long as he jolly well liked, which ideally would be the rest of his hopefully long and productive life, thankyouverymuch.
That was probably why the idea didn’t go very far.
In case any of you are wondering why Kent would not have been suitable. Here is a partial quote from Wikipedia:
I find it hard to believe, given their relative ages and circumstances, the story about Blunt (their paths would hardly have been likely to cross), but I seem to recall reports about Noel Coward’s diaries that suggest they had a thing going in the late 20s.
My opinion (such as it is) is that even if Charles was minded to step aside in favour of William, he would not do so until William’s children were no longer teenagers.
For all his flaws, I think Charles has been free enough to raise a family - I suspect he’d like his sons to do the same without the responsibility of the throne weighing on them.
my 2d worth 