The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997)

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 01-23-2009, 08:56 AM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
Its ridiculous that Diana is being blamed for how William and Harry are acting now as adults.. The Princess has been dead for almost 12 years and the boys were 15 and 12 at the time.
The Windsors have had the boys almost eleven more years to shape them into royalty. Diana, Princess of Wales really did give them each over to school at seven. I think Prince Charles had a say about what school they would go to he hated the one he went to.

But to blame only Diana like the above article says is ridiculous. I agree with you sirhon.
__________________

__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 01-23-2009, 09:33 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Sounds like a republican writer who was rather pissed that Diana didn't take the groundswell of public affection and use it to topple over the monarchy. I always suspected that some of the media that seemed so supportive of Diana were not so supportive of Diana herself but were rather using her popularity to try and weaken the monarchy.

So Harry and William are acting like a lot of the guys that graduate from Eton; is that so unnormal? And Charles and Diana both agreed on the boys' schooling. Charles hated Gordonstoun which was considered quite novel and unlike a normal uppercrust education when Charles went there. Eton was historically the most prestigious school for the uppercrust.

In fact I remember reading that the conditions at Gordonstoun were quite spartan and harsh and the students there were not pampered.

But the writer does makes a small valid point; Diana was a product of the aristocratic class; she may have wanted to be more 'of the people' but she never in her short life had to worry about where her next meal was coming from or whether she would have a roof over her head, she never had the anxiety of having too many bills to pay at the end of the month and not enough in her account to cover them. These aren't just the concerns of the dirt poor; the working middle class has to worry about them when the economy goes back or they lose their jobs.

There was a limit to how 'of the people' she could become. She had believed in the institution of royalty when she married which meant that she had accepted even without realizing it at least some of the norms of the society.
__________________

__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 02-10-2009, 07:10 PM
iowabelle's Avatar
Royal Highness
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,405
I think it is hardly fair to blame Diana for Harry's misbehavior. Both the Windsors and Spencers have managed to produce "twits" in recent generations, and it seems to me that it's been the Windsors mostly in control of these young men for the last dozen years.

But I still think Harry is maturing and will become a credit to his country. Let's be honest, young people tend to be shallow and selfish. Hopefully they will grow out of it, although some of us never "grow up." I'm still growing at mid-life!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 02-19-2009, 05:24 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Private letters between Princess Diana and the British Government will remain secret after a ruling by the UK's Information Commissioner.

Princess Diana letters to government ministers must remain a secret - Telegraph

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 02-19-2009, 06:38 AM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
There is a part of the coastal road near where I live in Portugal that was given, at about the time of her death, the name of "Diana, Princess of Wales" I have often wondered why, does anyone know if she ever visited Portugal and if so what the occasion was?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 02-19-2009, 07:31 AM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
Private letters between Princess Diana and the British Government will remain secret after a ruling by the UK's Information Commissioner.

Princess Diana letters to government ministers must remain a secret - Telegraph

Can't see why it's such a big deal to keep these letters secret but okay.
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 02-19-2009, 11:51 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Guimarães, Portugal
Posts: 742
In reply to Menarue question: "...does anyone know is she ever visited Portugal?":

Yes, Princess Diana was once at an official visit to Portugal. And i remeber the news on papers related saying that it was on their visit to our contry that the problems on their marriage started to show.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 02-19-2009, 12:01 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
Can't see why it's such a big deal to keep these letters secret but okay.
I suppose it depends what is in them, whatever it is, it can not be as bad as some might now imagine.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 02-19-2009, 12:55 PM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
Thanks Antonieta, I was wondering if it was just in the aftermath of all that hysteria following her death, in fact it still might be but it is a nice name for a very small part of the road. .
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 02-19-2009, 05:15 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,281
The Prince and Princess of Wales visited Portugal in February 1987. The occasion was to celebrate the few-hundred-years alliance between Portugal and England. I know that they were in Lisbon, but I don't remember whether they visited anywhere else in the country.

Diana wore an above-the-knee skirt on one of her first occasions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menarue View Post
There is a part of the coastal road near where I live in Portugal that was given, at about the time of her death, the name of "Diana, Princess of Wales" I have often wondered why, does anyone know if she ever visited Portugal and if so what the occasion was?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 02-19-2009, 05:17 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,281
My understanding is that Royal correspondence is kept secret for an extended period of time in any case. Diana was still to be considered a member of the Royal Family even after her divorce, and so my question is, "Why did people ever expect these to be made public so soon?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
Can't see why it's such a big deal to keep these letters secret but okay.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 02-21-2009, 06:56 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
My understanding is that Royal correspondence is kept secret for an extended period of time in any case. Diana was still to be considered a member of the Royal Family even after her divorce, and so my question is, "Why did people ever expect these to be made public so soon?"
As she wasn't exactly a royal at the time of her death (no HRH), under the Freedom of Information Act, I expect they wanted to know what had been 'going on' between Diana and various Prime Ministers. Did Diana try to influence a change in the monarchy etc, etc???????
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 02-21-2009, 07:15 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
As she wasn't exactly a royal at the time of her death (no HRH), under the Freedom of Information Act, I expect they wanted to know what had been 'going on' between Diana and various Prime Ministers. Did Diana try to influence a change in the monarchy etc, etc???????

She mightn't have had the HRH but the Queen did make it clear at the time of the divorce that she was still regarded as a member of the RF and would be treated as such. See the Press Release issued on behalf of The Queen at the time of the divorce.

DIVORCE: STATUS AND ROLE OF THE PRINCESS OF WALES

This is the opening statement:

The Princess of Wales, as the mother of Prince William, will be regarded by The Queen and The Prince of Wales as being a member of the Royal Family.


and there are a number of occasions within this statement where it is made clear that The Queen, POW and government regarded her as a member of the RF after the divorce so these letters are being treated as per the law regarding the RF.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 02-21-2009, 07:27 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
As she wasn't exactly a royal at the time of her death (no HRH), under the Freedom of Information Act, I expect they wanted to know what had been 'going on' between Diana and various Prime Ministers. Did Diana try to influence a change in the monarchy etc, etc???????
And for that very reason alone the fact that she was the mother of the 2nd in line to the throne and as such "royal", any and all correspondence probably got an extra 10 - 20 years "D" notice slapped on them.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 02-21-2009, 08:19 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
She mightn't have had the HRH but the Queen did make it clear at the time of the divorce that she was still regarded as a member of the RF and would be treated as such. See the Press Release issued on behalf of The Queen at the time of the divorce.
I am fully aware of the Queens decision and the various press releases, but legally she was not a member of the royal family and this was, IMO, why the application was considered under the FoIA. The application was turned down, not because Diana was a former member of the royal family but because they 'were deemed too private to be published under the Freedom of Information Act'.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 02-21-2009, 06:44 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
I am fully aware of the Queens decision and the various press releases, but legally she was not a member of the royal family and this was, IMO, why the application was considered under the FoIA. The application was turned down, not because Diana was a former member of the royal family but because they 'were deemed too private to be published under the Freedom of Information Act'.

Had you quoted the next paragraph you would see that the decision reflects her position as a member of the Royal Family.

"Members of the Royal Family are exempt from the Freedom of Information legislation but individual cases can be challenged on public interest grounds. The Office of the Information Commissioner said the letters were of a "personal nature" and not related to government policy."


This paragraph follows the section you quoted in which it clearly says that 'individual cases can be challenged on public interest grounds'. These grounds were not found to exist in this case and the request was denied.

So even though the Royal Family is exempt from Freedom of Information legislation that can be challenged and even upheld, presumably. In this case there was no public interest and so the correspondence was treated as other correspondence relating to the Royal Family.

The final paragraph further explains why the decision was turned down.

"An internal review later upheld the decision, and stated that the public interest in keeping them secret "outweighed" the interest in making them public. In a statement the ICO said: "It is important to draw a clear distinction between matters of public interest and matters about which the public may be merely curious."

These letters were deemed no of 'public interest' and therefore like other correspondence from the Royal Family exempt under the FOI.

This article, along with the Press Release, make it clear that Diana was The Queen, The Prince of Wales and The Government.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 02-21-2009, 07:00 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
that Diana was The Queen, The Prince of Wales and The Government.
I don't think so! As the article states, the letters were deemed too private to be published under the Freedom of Information Act, that was the official reason given. There is no mention of the following
Quote:
These letters were deemed no of 'public interest' and therefore like other correspondence from the Royal Family exempt under the FOI
Just your interpretation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 02-21-2009, 08:00 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon


Originally Posted by Iluvbertie
that Diana was The Queen, The Prince of Wales and The Government.

I don't think so! As the article states, the letters were deemed too private to be published under the Freedom of Information Act, that was the official reason given. There is no mention of the following Quote:
These letters were deemed no of 'public interest' and therefore like other correspondence from the Royal Family exempt under the FOI
Just your interpretation.

Yes that is my interpretation of the following quotes from the original article:

"Members of the Royal Family are exempt from the Freedom of Information legislation but individual cases can be challenged on public interest grounds. The Office of the Information Commissioner said the letters were of a "personal nature" and not related to government policy."

and

"An internal review later upheld the decision, and stated that the public interest in keeping them secret "outweighed" the interest in making them public. In a statement the ICO said: "It is important to draw a clear distinction between matters of public interest and matters about which the public may be merely curious."

As these two sections are also directly from the article that I have read I made an interpretation based on the entire article.

My interpretation based on the Queen's Press Release from 1996 that Diana was still a member of the Royal Family and that the Prince of Wales also regarded her that way and that a government agency has refused a request for correspondence to be made public under Freedom of Information because, like other members of the Royal Family they are exempt unless their is a public interest reason rather than a merely curious public desire to know reason for these to be make public.

The phrases in italics after 'my interpretation' are from the statement of the Commissioner who made the decision by the way.

It is based on these phrases and the rest of the wording of the article and especially the Commissioners quoted words that I said:

"These letters were deemed no of 'public interest' and therefore like other correspondence from the Royal Family exempt under the FOI."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 02-22-2009, 06:49 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Yes that is my interpretation ---snipped----
A letter from HM or Charles would not have been considered let alone gone to review, they are automatically exempt being members of the Royal family, which ever way, you choose to interpret the article.
------------------
Whoever made the original application probably thought that Diana was no longer a royal and should no longer be covered and they had good reason other than curiosity to pursue this matter and human nature being what it is, the decision has raised the question of what is being hidden now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 02-22-2009, 08:07 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
A letter from HM or Charles would not have been considered let alone gone to review, they are automatically exempt being members of the Royal family, which ever way, you choose to interpret the article.
------------------
Whoever made the original application probably thought that Diana was no longer a royal and should no longer be covered and they had good reason other than curiosity to pursue this matter and human nature being what it is, the decision has raised the question of what is being hidden now.

I assume that you have actually read this part of the article:

"Members of the Royal Family are exempt from the Freedom of Information legislation but individual cases can be challenged on public interest grounds. The Office of the Information Commissioner said the letters were of a "personal nature" and not related to government policy."


This clearly says that even members of the Royal Family's correspondence can be challenged. Therefore I make the interpretation that they are usually exempt but if it is in the public interest then a challenge to the ruling that they are exempt may be successful.

How else can I interpret that statement please?

It is on the basis of the comments in the original article such as this one that has lead to my interpretation.

Please tell me how the statement above can be interpreted to mean the the RF are always exempt when that statement does indicate that that can be challenged.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Late Diana, Princess of Wales, News Thread 7: October 2007-June 2008 Warren Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 237 06-15-2008 06:18 AM
The Late Princess Diana news thread 6: June-September 2007 Avalon Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 358 10-01-2007 03:16 AM
The Late Princess Diana news thread 5: April - June 2007 sirhon11234 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 210 06-06-2007 02:03 AM
News thread for the late Princess Diana, part 3 Elspeth Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 200 09-03-2006 05:25 AM
News Thread for the Late Princess Diana, part 2 Martine Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 200 09-11-2005 07:51 PM




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:20 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]