DID they not tell anyone he was coming?
That would be one explanation for the complete absence of any Union flag-waving crowds of royalists during Prince William’s visit to Aberdeen on Tuesday.
The number of journalists was far bigger than the number of people excited to see the noble Duke of Rothesay do some of the royals’ trademark walking about and nodding at stuff.
In fact, two of those leaning on the fence – apparently put there to keep the baying mob away from his highness – seemed to be there by accident more than anything else.
A “heya” and a nod was all William got from one of them.
One woman who seems to have been out walking her dog got a quick video, and that was about it.
Prince William arrives in Tillydrone, Aberdeen as part of his tour of the UK discussing his Homewards campaign.
— Alan Zycinski (@AlanJZycinski) June 27, 2023
This is one of six locations chosen for the project hoping to ‘demonstrate it is possible to end homelessness’.@LBC | @LBCNews pic.twitter.com/bPNzw5vIdw
Isn’t Aberdeen meant to be one of the more pro-royal areas of Scotland?
William had been visiting as part of a tour he’s put together as part of his bid to end homelessness.
The Tillydrone Community Campus, where he was visiting, has been chosen to benefit from the Homewards project graciously launched by the “Royal Foundation of the Prince and Princess of Wales”.
Responding to clip of the missing crowds of adoring royalists, Bella Caledonia wrote: “Mass disinterest in Tillydrone as feudal relic masks their uselessness with performative social justice stunt …”
READ MORE: Protest planned after refusal to re-route Orange Order march from Catholic church
National columnist Gerry Hassan wrote: “Royal fever not exactly breaking out in Tillydrone, Aberdeen.
“If this was Harry and Meghan the right-wing press would be drooling about this on their front pages.”
“I have no problem with the Prince of Wales taking homelessness as his cause … but either the PR department at the palace didn't get the info out, or the crowd barriers were a teensy bit optimistic …” Peter Arnott added.
Another quipped: “Apathy reigns.”
Unfortunately not. It’s still the Windsors.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel