'Workshy' Prince William Blasted for Allegedly Prioritising His 'Bulging Bank Account' Over Royal Duties

Prince William is facing fresh criticism in the UK after veteran royal author Norman Baker claimed the Prince of Wales is not working enough, accusing him of being 'workshy' and more focused on his 'bulging bank account' than royal duties.

Baker compared the number of engagements carried out by William with those of King Charles and Princess Anne, arguing that the heir to the throne is falling short of what the role demands.

The news came after Baker looked at the official record of engagements between 1 January and 15 June this year. According to his figures, King Charles attended 76 events in that period, while Princess Anne notched up 100.

Prince William, by contrast, carried out 57 engagements, despite being next in line to the throne and, in theory at least, preparing for a lifetime of public service as monarch.

Norman Baker's 'Workshy' Prince William Claims

Baker, who has long been a sharp critic of royal spending and transparency, said that William's apparent reluctance to undertake more engagements is not new. Citing figures for 2024, he said Princess Anne completed 474 public duties during the year, with King Charles on 372. Prince William, he claimed, undertook just 166, which works out at fewer than one engagement every two days.

Those numbers, drawn from published royal engagement logs, sit at the centre of Baker's charge that the Prince of Wales is not pulling his weight. He described William as 'a complete family man,' but insisted that when it comes to the day job he is 'workshy,' and that this pattern has persisted for years.

Baker also highlighted what he called 'noticeable' absences by William from key royal occasions. He pointed in particular to the traditional Easter Sunday service at St George's Chapel in Windsor in 2025, noting that both Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales, did not attend.

According to Baker, this was part of a broader trend of the couple stepping back from some high-profile ceremonial appearances, even as public scrutiny of the monarchy intensifies.

'William has stated firmly that his family must come first,' Baker argued. 'While that is laudable in some ways, is it really possible for the heir to the throne to absent himself from royal duties as he does?'

Prince William, Royal Duties And A 'Bulging Bank Account'

In case you missed it, Baker's criticism does not stop at engagement tallies. He has also accused the Prince of Wales of putting income generation ahead of public duty, suggesting that William is selective about what he works hard at.

'Workshy William? Yes, when it comes to undertaking royal duties,' Baker is quoted as saying. 'But no, when it comes to adding to his already bulging bank account.'

It is a loaded line, and one designed to sting. Baker's broader argument, as presented, is that William has access to significant private wealth and Duchy income, yet is not matching that privilege with the same level of public graft as other senior royals. Put crudely, in his view, the future king is not giving taxpayers sufficient value for money.

There is, of course, a counter-argument that the modern royal role is not just about turning up to plaque unveilings or garden parties, and that raw engagement counts do not capture behind-the-scenes work, private briefings, or long-term projects. Kensington Palace has not publicly responded to Baker's remarks.

Still, the numbers Baker cites do chime with a long-running perception that Princess Anne in particular is the family's workhorse, often leading the annual engagement league table by some distance. His comparison also lands in a sensitive moment for the monarchy, which has been trying to present a 'slimmed down' front line while juggling illness, age and public expectations.

King Charles Praised As Prince William Faces Scrutiny

For starters, Baker's comments come at a time when King Charles has been widely praised for continuing with public duties despite health challenges. The royal author made a point of 'lavishing praise' on the King, arguing that Charles has demonstrated strong commitment to his role even as he faces what Buckingham Palace has described elsewhere as a period of treatment and recovery.

Against that backdrop, Baker's criticism of Prince William lands harder. In his framing, an older monarch with frail health is still outpacing his younger, physically fit son on the public duty front, which he clearly finds difficult to square with William's status as heir.

What is missing from Baker's analysis, at least as reported, is any acknowledgment of how William and Catherine have tried to recast their public roles around causes they see as long-term priorities, such as mental health and early childhood.

Supporters of the couple would argue that meaningful projects sometimes involve fewer but more substantive engagements, not just a mad dash to stack up appearances. Detractors would say, and do say online, that this is convenient spin for doing less of the old-fashioned stuff.

For now, the only thing that is clear is that engagement counts are being weaponised in the argument. Whether the Palace chooses to shrug that off or quietly shift William's schedule upwards will be a story to watch, because if there is one thing the monarchy struggles with, it is the perception that its most privileged members are not really turning up.