The Royals with Roya and Kate - What are the Royals for?

Episode Date: November 21, 2025

After one of the most turbulent months for the monarchy in generations, Roya and Kate step back from the noise to ask a bigger question; what is the Royal family for? As headlines rage, the Windsors keep going: Catherine returned to public life; William promoted his climate agenda in Brazil; and Princess Anne powered through a demanding schedule in Australia and Singapore. And the Court Circular never missed a beat. They are joined by Michael Binyon, former foreign correspondent for The Times and longtime Leader writer, to explore how the monarchy weathers crises, how it projects British influence abroad and what lies behind the real purpose of the Crown?Presenters: Roya Nikkhah, royal editor for The Sunday Times, and Kate Mansey, royal editor of The TimesContributor: Michael Binyon, Leader writer for The TimesProducer: Robert WallaceEditor: Stephen TitheringtonPhoto: Getty Images Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hello and welcome to the Royals from The Times and the Sunday Times with me, Royneika. And me, Kate Mansy. Every day, since 1827, the Times has published the Court Circular, a simple daily record of what the royal family has been doing. It's not dramatic or emotional, but in a strange way, that little column is the purest expression of what the monarchy is. Whatever else is happening in politics, in the press or inside the family itself, the court circular carries on, quietly charting the day-to-day work of the Crown.

And that contrast has rarely felt darker than this past month. The last few weeks have seen the nuclear fallout of the Andrews saga, Princess Diana's Panorama interview back in the spotlight, and some of the most intense scrutiny the monarchy has faced in a generation, well, certainly since Harry and Megan's departure. The headlines have been relentless. And yet, the royal family's response was to do the thing they've always done, keep calm and carry on. And that's what they did.

This week, the Princess of Wales continued her return to royal duties with her first speech since her cancer diagnosis and a very glamorous appearance at the Royal Variety performance. Other royals have been abroad. William has been in Brazil. Princess Anne has been in the Pacific. The day-to-day life of the monarchy barely missed a beat, all of which raises this week's question, which is, when events spiral beyond the family's control, when the narrative runs away from them, is it the big gestures that matter, or is it the position that the family holds? Is the quiet, almost banal business of duty actually the bedrock that keeps the institution standing? Or can even that be shaken by a storm they can't weather?

Today, we're stepping back from the noise to make sense of what the last month has revealed about the monarchy's resilience, its purpose and what the institution is really for. And to help us do that, we're joined by someone who's observed British and global life and the royal family within it for more than 50 years. Leader writer, columnist and foreign correspondent for the Times since 1972, Michael Binion. Michael, welcome to the Royal Royal. Thank you. Great to have you with us.

Not much to discuss. Been quite a quiet time on the Royal Patch. Oh yes, yes. But you've probably seen it all before, haven't you? I've seen a few ups and downs, that's right, yes. But you've watched the monarchy where there are fair few storms. We want to start with a long view. How does a month like this compare with the turbulence that you've observed

over the past five decades in the job? Well, the last time I could remember such a tremendous interest in and turbulence and worries about the monarchies about the monarchy were the death of Princess Diana in the Paris car crash, and that caused a sensation all around the world. And I got phoned up at all manner of night and day by radio stations from Vancouver to Japan, to Australia, what's going on, what's happened to the royal family. That was quite a long and sad and bitter time. But the royal family weathered it. I mean, the queen came under great pressure, of course, by not returning straight away from

Belmoral and there were great controversies over whether or not she should fly the flag at half mast at Buckingham Palace. But since then, there have been other excitements. I mean, as you all know, as you've been following, you know, the wedding of Prince William and the trouble with Harry, as I might say. And there's been plenty going on. And the world has pretty well watched all of it. Do you think, Michael, someone who's got an amazing reach of 50 years sort of looking back, When we look at the last few weeks and we talk about this extraordinarily turbulent month that it has been, you compare it to the death of down and Princess of Wales in 97. Does this feel bigger?

Does it feel on the same kind of scale in terms of we've had a prince deprinsed in the last few weeks? It hasn't happened for a hundred years. Well, I think it is bigger in that it directly affects the king. I mean, it's his brother and he has had to take these very difficult decisions. It's also a bit of a rocket under the monarchy itself. will it survive this turbulence? Will it survive the scandal that is still there

over the whole Epstein episode? And will the monarchy be able to distance itself sufficiently from Andrew Mountbatten Windsor or, as people say, the former prince, as I'm sure everyone is now still calling him overseas? Will that be enough

to mean that the royal family is now insulated from this incident? Well, it's been a few weeks since the king attempted to put a lid on it. We had that sort of first half-hearted, slight fudge of a move where his titles were put into abeyance. That didn't work. It just sort of gave more oxygen to the story.

The story kind of exploded over the next two weeks. Then a couple of weeks ago, we had him removing all the titles, stopping him being a prince. There have been a fair few times leaders in those over those weeks. I've read them all very closely. Do you think the lid has been put on it temporarily? It feels like maybe not given we've got these Epstein files about to be released? Yes, I think those that are about to be released will be more damaging in the

United States, which is where the interest is. And of course, that's why this has a second dimension, because it refers directly to what was going on in the US. And that's why the Americans are taking particular interest in what's happened to Andrew, what the monarchy's reaction has been and whether the monarchy has taken the right steps. And I think the lid has been put on it temporarily, certainly here for a while. But we'll see how. the move out of Windsor Great Park, you know, the move to the Sandringham by... Being booted out of Royal Lodge. Well, exactly, out of Royal Roj.

Being moved into exile in Sandringham. That's right. I mean... I suppose for people who don't know, the leaders are the kind of opinion pieces that we run every day in the paper and online. And I know people in the palace hold great stock by what we say there and they're well read by people in Parliament and, you know, in the great and good, essentially. So you're in a very powerful position. You know, there was a leader that said the king had done a good job, actually, been quite strong in taking a stance about Andrew,

but also kind of looking ahead to next year when there's going to be a renewal of royal finances, the renew of the discussion around it, how much public money should go into fund the royal household and things like that. So that's all sort of going on, and that's another kind of common theme, isn't it, in the leader? It is indeed, yes. I mean, how the royal family is paid and how much the sovereign grant is topped up or improved. or held back or whatever. The finances have long been an interest to, well, the public in general, because people have the idea that the royals are immensely rich

and that they have all this money to throw around. I mean, I don't think that's quite true. In theory, they own vast estates and they own vast amounts of money, but actually a lot of it is ring-fenced and they can't just spend money as they would like. But that has been obviously political as well as an issue that general public want to know about, and we have commented on it. And of course, the idea that the list is up for renewal, or at least reconsideration

as to how much should be given to the monarchy, comes at a very awkward time when people feel that the monarchy has it earned its keep? And of course, the big question, which I think will also come up, is it may not have earned its keep at home. Does it earn its keep and has it well earned its keep overseas? And I think the question there is undoubtedly yes. So that's interesting. You think it doesn't earn its keep at home.

Expand on that, Michael. Well, I think the trouble is every scandal increases people saying, oh, what's it all for? Do we need all this? And why should we spend so much time? I mean, people are both intrigued by what's going on and at the same time annoyed with themselves for being intrigued. Yeah.

They sort of say, oh, you know, does it matter? I mean, look at how they live. And we're all in trouble. What do they know about it? And that sort of grudging reaction. And yet, of course, they are very interested in what's going on. I mean... We know that from the numbers of people who read the article about the wrong family of comments.

With fascination. And that's, you know, that's why you're in your jobs and doing them very well because people read it. To that point, what's it all for and are they worth it and what should they actually be doing, which we want to talk to you much more about as a sort of someone who's not inside the bubble, but looks at it from the outside. We've had all the scandal around Andrew for the last month or so. We had, you know, Kate and I were talking to Andy Webb last week about his Dannerama book, you know, the Panorama interview 30 years on,

all the unanswered questions from that. But also alongside that in the last few weeks, we've had members of the Royal Family trying to do what, you know, they want to show people what they're for, which is get out there and do what we call the sort of bread and butterfare of the Royal Engagement. So in the last week,

and we'll come on to the overseas tours in a minute. But we've had William going to AFC Mousehole, small football club in Cornwall to reopen a road that he helped fund that had been full of potholes and was, you know, hampering accessibility. we have had him today a very moving engagement with him in Leeds opening the Rob Borough Centre for Motor Neurone Disease

delivering on a pledge that he would go and open that with Rob's family the late rugby player who died of M&D last year and Kate you this week saw the Princess of Wales give her first major speech in two years She was speaking for the first time since her cancer diagnosis wasn't she So she was talking about her early years foundation And then she appeared very glamorous by William's side at the Royal Albert Hall for the Royal Variety performance. These are the sort of, it's interesting because these are a lot of the kind of engagements where, you know,

Prince William has always famously said, I don't want to be a ribbon cutter. But a lot of the public actually want to see, they feel that that's a really important part of the monarchy, is to see these kind of the openings, you know, the speeches, the causes, the on the ground stuff. The Queen today, she did the Commonwealth Essay Prize. I mean, that's not going to make the front pages tomorrow. But all these little things, one by one, they build up the picture of a royal family that's really engaged in issues that people do care about. And I think that's extremely well thought through. And I think they've been very, very assiduous and wise in the choice of what they support and where they go.

Of course, enormously expands the interest and the admiration for whoever is going out to some small place, as you say, in Cornwall or somewhere, or somewhere not a great big huge event. but some small honour for a local person or some enterprises. William fixing potholes, that goes down quite well. Yes, that is because people are worried about that. People are annoyed by that. It shows that the monarchy does understand what most people worry about and what they care about and the people care about potholes and they're angry about it.

Of course, it mustn't be too political. It mustn't be saying, you know, where's the council when it needs to spend the money? You can't get into that. It's got to be quite subtle the way you support things. all that adds up. I mean, I think that is the way to counter the bad news. What do you make of, I mean, it's so interesting hearing you talk about to say that the royal, you know,

those engagements show that the royal family understand what a lot of people worry about, but they can't be too political. They've got to be issues that are sort of across the people across the board back. We've just been in Brazil with William, you know, that was all about the environment, his earth shop prize. Then we saw him in, you know, we went to Bel-M with him, we saw him at COP. That is not unpolitical. That is, it is not uncontroversial.

A lot of people are for protecting the environment. You know, there are a lot of delegations that weren't at COP, America, India and China didn't have major delegations there. You know, you have a climate sceptic president in the White House. What do you make of his absolute determination to stand behind the environmental cause? I think it's tremendous. I think that's absolutely right. I think one doesn't want a member of the royal family who's simply a bland facade and who just mouths government policy. You want somebody who has beliefs, who is passionate about some of those beliefs,

and clearly the environment is something that both he and his father the king have long cared about, and it's important that they show it. And I think it gains admiration. Even from those who are themselves climate skeptics and believe that this is overblown and we're paying too much money for the zero targets and all that, I think even they sort of feel well, at least he believes in it and he's making a good point and I think it's to Britain's credit that he's been able to speak up in that way

and it's interesting you mentioned their role abroad in that respect I would want to turn and ask Roya because you've been with Princess Anne in Singapore very recently I have tell us about that so what's Princess Royal doing over there

how did that all pan out it was an interesting one to go and do because I hadn't done a Princess Royal trip before and she went to Australia to do a weekend of remembrance sort of four days of remembrance and military-related engagements

with one of her regiments which is Colonel and then she went to do two days of proper bread and butter engagements in Singapore going to see the Airbus factory going to see the Rolls Royce headquarters you know standing in front of giant big engines

highlighting the UK Singaporean trade relationship going to a very very very wet everywhere we went was very wet garden party You didn't even get the sunshine No. No. Marking 60 is a diplomatic relations with Singapore, marking the King's birthday, giving speeches. We went to board a ship called HMS Spay, which was a patrol trip that's permanently deployed in the region. It was very, the whole thing. It's fascinating to see her at work, actually. Yeah. She is so, no frills.

A workaholic. Absolutely well-beafed. Known to carry her own bag. places and yes. It was interesting to see her and Vice Admiral's, Tim Lawrence, her husband, just who I did writing the piece actually is the most understated spouse. He apologises for arriving early, which I've never, never seen a member of the royal family's sidekick do that. It's a great line in your piece about how Anne is the antidote to Andrew because it's

sort of, they're two peas from the same pod, brother and sister, but this couldn't be more different. I just watched her over two days and thought, first of all I thought I wasn't going to write anything at all when I was out there because I had been promised an interview, which then was pulled because, you know, they kept saying, she's too busy. And I was like, guys, I'm on, I'm on the trip. I know the program. She's too busy to answer any of your Andrew questions. There is 15 minutes scheduled. It's still, it's still printed in the program. Don't say the A word. It's so painful to see. But obviously it was because they were all just so nervous because all the Andrew stuff

kept brewing. But how could you not ask about that? I know. So I kind of thought, well, I'm going to go anyway and just make a point. So I went and thought, well, I'll be a bit, you know, I I just won't write anything. And then as I just watched her over two days, I just thought to myself, she's a spare. Oh, she's... And the ultimate spare. And just such an antidote to her brother,

Andrew, who's just been creating nothing but sort of negative reverberations for the last few weeks, months, years. Extremely conscientious, a workaholic. I mean, she is the most, probably the most assiduous and the most dynamic of all the royals. And, I mean, she's in her 70s. Seventy-five. Well, there you are.

I mean, she's very, very effective. You have to know what you're talking about. I've had a number of discussions with her at various places on this or that. I remember talking to her about the spread of AIDS in India by truck drivers, and she knew all about it. She's so well briefed. Very well briefed on all sorts of things. And she knew this because of the problem of AIDS spreading to families in India. It was when she was engaged in trying to, I think, the Save the Children Fund.

That was her longest running patronage. Yes, yes. I mean, very, very well briefed. And of course, the irony is what she is now doing in Singapore, as you mentioned, is exactly what her brother, the former Prince Andrew, was meant to do when he was representative of British industry and enterprise. Special envoy. Special envoy going out and was meant to be looking at the areas where Britain had export offers or where they were trying to break into markets. And he didn't make the impact. I don't think that she is. Well, he also had to give up that role in 2010 over his. his links to Geoffrey Epstein, didn't he?

And you could argue that she's been a much more effective special envoy, a lot less scandal. I mean... He made an impact, but just on the way that the wrong... I know a couple of the wrongs quite well because I was at university... You're not friends with the Gloucesters, aren't you? Yes, the Duke of Gloucester. And he's very much, as he says, very modestly,

he's a very modest and very decent man. He says, I'm the B-team. I'm not, you know, I'm not the Princess Anne. I'm not Prince William. But there's still a job to be done by people who feel that are... of royal encouragement and patronage would be helpful and useful. And boy, if you just read the court circular, every day he's out with some group either here, sometimes overseas, but some small youth club or something like that, where a bit of royal patronage

helps. And that's what they do. I think the king also, you mentioned that he says he's the B team. I think the king and the queen have been very, in the last couple of years, the Gloucesters have definitely been sort of in royal boxes much more alongside the king and queen. at the big sort of set-piece events. And I think Charles and Cumberland had been very keen to sort of show the nation

that they really appreciate. The Duchess was there by the Queen's side when the King was away from the mum. Well, I've known her since Cambridge and, I mean, she's always been pretty conscientious and knows what she's doing.

And she's been a great help to Prince Richard, or as he was, Duke of Gloucester now. They do a lot of good. And it's, as you say, it's sort of quietly getting on with things. That's the way that you counter scandal. You just do the job, keep quiet and carry on, as you said at the beginning.

That's the answer. Well, speaking of that, I mean, we saw that, didn't we play out with the cenotaph at Remembrance Sunday where we had them all lined up. Obviously, Princess Anne was doing her thing in Australia with her own remembrance out there. And then we had the royal family standing there, representing the country, in a way that no politician or public figure really can. But then we had eight former prime ministers lined up varying degrees of public. popularity, but then you have at the front representing the country the royal family. That's right.

And there was a huge cheer for Charles. I was standing there watching it. You know, the leaves were falling. It was an emotive kind of scene. If you're looking for a figure of stability, I mean, a person who succeeded a monarch who was 70 years there, and he himself has been already

three, is it, three years, he's now been king? Well, we've had that many prime ministers in three years. Well, no, look at Liz Tross standing there, and if she lives to be a decent she's going to have spent more days at the cenotaph every year than in office. Indeed. Which is extraordinary. No, I think it's important.

I mean, the monarchy is the figure of stability. I mean, I had to write the editorial comment on the death of the queen. Gosh. No pressure, Michael. No, well, no pressure, no. But I've also, I did the coronation as well. And the point is, this is a time when you reflect on what does the monarchy mean for the country. And it's the idea of embodying the values and the principles

on which this country's democracy is based. And that's important. And it's also the question of stability. Now, stability doesn't mean standing still. It means being there and dependable, but gradually changing as demand and times and ideas change. I mean, the Queen changed enormously, but nobody ever actually noticed that she was changing.

She did things. She was never changed under pressure. It was never because of said, come on, ma'am, do this, do that. Me-jerk, are they? No. Not at all. No. But they take into account what the mood of the country is and what they're advised,

and they have their own ideas about how change should happen. And unless you change, you will be fossilised, and that doesn't work at all. So all of that brings us to the wider picture, because while the domestic headlines were dominated by the Andrews scandal, something else was happening. Outside the UK, the global machine of the monarchy was, if anything, accelerating. It feels like we've had a lot of tours altogether. So we've had William and Brazil, which Kate and I were on.

Then we've had Anne in Singapore, quick succession straight afterwards, Australian Singapore. At the same time we had the Duchess of Edinburgh in Guatemala and Peru and Southern America. And just as she came back, we had notification from the palace that the Duke of Edinburgh, her husband, Prince Edward, was going to be in Nigeria and Ghana. A lot of activity overseas within the space of a few weeks. do you think that feels like a deliberate move to sort of position the royal family and sort of remind... Obviously these things are planned months in advance

but very often we get very little notification about these trips and sometimes Prince Edward will go away and the palace will barely tell us but there's been much more focus on these foreign manoeuvres in the last few weeks. Yes, well it probably is deliberate to highlight the fact that they are still working for Britain overseas

and being very successful. I mean some of the visits that have been been particularly quasi-political but played a very important role. For example, Prince William going to Estonia, where he actually went to look at NATO troops there. Now, that sends a message that Britain is backing the Estonians in their determination to remain free from Russian aggression or interference or, you know, on watch for what's happening. It was a very deliberate trip. I mean, Kays and I went on that. We went to the Tap of Base camp and we had William, you know, talking to the troops.

we heard him saying how important it was the job they were doing on the eastern flank, direct message to Russia. Well, it was almost as political as you can get, but that does have echoes and resonance. And I think the various visits that are planned are very often timed and aimed at sending a particular message to a particular audience. Now, in Africa, I think it's important that Britain makes it clear that we are still engaged in the Commonwealth. We do value African institutions. We value what's going on in, well, all over the place, but particularly those Commonwealth countries. Nigeria has been through all sorts of ups and downs.

It seems to be fairly stable, although they still have problems with civil war up in the north, well, terrorist actions of some kind. And I think a reassurance that Britain is there for the Nigerians, with the Nigerians, you know, as partners, as it were, in the Commonwealth. And that carries on the work of the Queen, doesn't it? Yes, it does. I remember those pictures of the Queen going to a leper colony in Nigeria. Well, that's marvellous. I mean, I don't know how much it actually plays in the country concerned.

I think it probably does get quite a lot of local publicity. And it doesn't make headlines here necessarily. But steadily, it reinforces the image of this is something worth doing and something where Britain has a particular advantage. Why do you think Prince Edward in Nigerian Ghana does not make headlines here? Well, there's too much else going on. I'm afraid newspapers tend to focus on the sensational. It's not in any way sensational. It's much more sensational that is Andrew, or is he not going to give testimony to Congress or to the courts looking at the whole Epstein affair?

All of which is still bringing this week while his siblings are. And I mean, there's only so much room. You know, the press, it has the court circular, but it isn't a daily record of the royal family's doings. There are other things happening as well. Because it would take up the whole paper probably, wouldn't it? Well, that's the thing you talk about Epstein in America and the fallout from the Andrews saga is essentially emboldened US lawmakers, hasn't it?

Who are now demanding that he give his side of the story. Oh, yes. Well, the thing is, now as a private citizen, he's no more compelled to do it than anybody else. I mean, he doesn't have to go there. It might be thought to be, you know, clear his conscience or whatever. On the other hand, he might just feel that it could do him nothing but harm. I mean, he thought a big television interview

about what had happened would clear his name and the exact opposite happened so he might be advised you don't need to do it and don't. Well, it was interesting us discussing earlier whether or not the King's finally decisive action to strip all the titles and everything

away from him has put the lid on it because actually it feels like in America across the pond it's emboldened a lot of American politicians to be even more outspoken about it. And this week there was a very striking quote from the Republican Congressman Thomas Massey

and he said there has been a reckoning in Britain that needs to happen in the United States a prince lost his title the ambassador to the United States lost his job of course a reference to Peter Mandelson we need to see those same kinds of consequences here so if anything the volume

button is slightly being turned up in America it is it is and I've seen a lot of redactions haven't we? President Trump's not too happy about all that because it's creeping closer to his own association or his own knowledge and form a friendship with Epstein. Having said that, he's done an about turn. He has. He is now saying that the Epstein files should be released.

We know that they will be released, or we're told they will in the next 30 days. But how do we read that? Does this show the monarchy's handling of Andrew has had ripple effects abroad, do you think? In what way are we reacting to the news there and what way are we shaping it, do you think? It's a bit of both.

I mean, it's action and reaction. And people see, what are they doing? Oh, maybe we should do the same. and then they step up their own activities or their own, they get emboldened to do a bit more. And probably the monarchy here then looks across at America and says, well, what are they now doing? And have we done the right thing?

It's very hard to judge a political fallout of things like this. Yeah. Michael, I mean, it's such an interesting conversation with you because getting your sort of reflections on it, after we have had a month like this, and we're talking about sort of the bigger picture and whether or not the monarchy can weather the storm, What does resilience look like for the monarchy in 2025 and beyond?

Well, resilience looks like carrying on and broadening the scope of their activities. I mean, I think this whole question about should they be totally above politics, that's a very difficult one, because more and more what you do is seen in a political context. I mean, as you pointed out, the environment is not completely politics-free. In fact, it's an extremely political issue. And I think things like homelessness, you know, people say, well, doesn't that reflect on the government and what it should be doing? But I think it's right that various members of the royal family should express opinions on something and not simply bland opinions, not something that, frankly, really doesn't matter here or there. And I think that will continue.

And I think we will see people talking about things that actually ordinary people care about and worry about, where they will then feel that to some extent the monarchy, or various members of the monarchy, have become spokesman or spokespeople for their own concerns. And that would be, I think, to the good. I think the traditional duties will continue, attending big functions, opening things that are of state importance, being present at the big ceremonies, opening of parliament, all those traditional things. And also state visits. State visits are quite a big undertaking. You know, you go to a country for three days, you're there in the spotlight, or you entertain people here.

And I think a classic example of a state visit that went better than anyone thought it could was President Trump. The Trump. A Trump visit. I mean, it was just extraordinary because everyone thought this would be a disaster. And it turned out he was utterly beguiled and they played it just right. So if we see that. It's just sort of doing, carrying on. Carrying on, doing the right stuff.

making sure that awkwardnesses didn't arise. In other words, not exposing him to any public engagement where people could shout or scream or boo or fly balloons every him or anything like that and just giving him the full ceremonial treatment which they knew he would rather enjoy. And he did. And when you look at everything that's happened, Michael,

do you see a monarchy that's been weakened by the events of this month or strengthened? And what lessons do you think we would talk about the lessons that they learned from Princess Diana and the death and how that was handled by the Queen and the family in general. What lessons are there to take away from the Andrews Saga? Well, I think it's definitely been hurt by the whole scandal,

but I think it's been strengthened by the fact that the King was seen to take decisive action. And I think that is very important. The feeling that there would be just sort of drift or that they would just retreat behind the palace walls, I mean, that would have been the most damaging and that it would just continue, you know, gnawing at the reputation. I think the decisions to do what he did, which must have been painful, tis after all his own brother, and, you know, an estrangement.

I mean, he's already got an estrangement with his son, which one wonders or hopes might be over at some stage, but that is a rift. And I mean, in that he's probably quite typical of many families in the country. He's representative of what goes on in ordinary life. But I think it's the scandal has damaged the monarchy's certain. But the way they've reacted to it, I think, has possibly repaired a lot of the damage. I mean, the last time we had a scandal on this scale, probably was the abdication of Edward the 8th, where all the world was saying, what on earth is going on? And particularly in those days, you know, the king giving up his throne, how could he?

How could you do this? And the way that the government wasn't quite sure at first how to handle it, nor were the other members of the royal family. But in the end, they took decisions and said, right, that's it. That's what we're going to do. And they recovered from it very well. Well, they will hope that they continue recovering, keeping calm and carrying on. Thanks so much, Michael Binion, for joining us this week.

It's been a fascinating period for the royal family. And stepping back from the headlines, we're reminded that the monarchy represents so much more than the noise around it. And as we've seen over the last few weeks, sometimes those quieter, steadier moments offer a chance for the chance for the moment. the crown to show its resilience amid some turbulent times. But we'd really love to know if you agree. And you can email us, as always, at theroyalsatthetimes.com.com.

And let us know what you think. And as always, thank you for joining us on The Royals. We'll see you next week. Bye, Kate. Bye, bye, bye, Mike. Bye, bye.