Prince Charles Being Political?

[Iluvbertie]

The reason why Charles, Philip and Andrew are no longer listed as members of the House of Lords in the 1999 House of Lords Reform Act. That act removed the automatic right to be a member of the Lords to inherited peers although the first peer of a new creation could remain and all three are actually the first creation of the current peerage (even though the titles themselves are older they were all created anew by LPs for each of them - Charles new creation is Earl of Chester). However all three declined to continue to take their seats. Edward never had the opportunity as the change was happening at the same time as he was being created Earl of Wessex and the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent weren't eligible as they had inherited their titles from their fathers.

Philip took his seat in 1947/8 with The Queen in the gallery to watch him and Charles had both his father and great-uncle there. I am not sure who was there for Andrew but imagine his father and older brother and wife.


Whether Charles ever actually spoke in the Lords I don't know but I do know that a predecessor - the future Edward VII - did attend the Lords regularly and sat on committees and argued that he should be allowed to speak on matters from those committees to get the changes past - he was advised not to speak but he did still make his views known by signing the committees' reports.

 

[AdmirerUS]

The reason why Charles, Philip and Andrew are no longer listed as members of the House of Lords in the 1999 House of Lords Reform Act. That act removed the automatic right to be a member of the Lords to inherited peers although the first peer of a new creation could remain and all three are actually the first creation of the current peerage (even though the titles themselves are older they were all created anew by LPs for each of them - Charles new creation is Earl of Chester). However all three declined to continue to take their seats. Edward never had the opportunity as the change was happening at the same time as he was being created Earl of Wessex and the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent weren't eligible as they had inherited their titles from their fathers.

Philip took his seat in 1947/8 with The Queen in the gallery to watch him and Charles had both his father and great-uncle there. I am not sure who was there for Andrew but imagine his father and older brother and wife.


Whether Charles ever actually spoke in the Lords I don't know but I do know that a predecessor - the future Edward VII - did attend the Lords regularly and sat on committees and argued that he should be allowed to speak on matters from those committees to get the changes past - he was advised not to speak but he did still make his views known by signing the committees' reports.

Thanks for this. So future creations will also have the right to sit in the House of Lords - though this will be discouraged. Does that mean William technically can/has refused? This seems to be a loophole the 1999 Reform Act did not close.
I just think of a third or fourth son or daughter with a passion for the Law - what a shame they would not follow their dream. I do generally feel for the non-core royals who lack certain freedoms but get few of the privileges that go along with being royal.

 

[scooter]

I L B, Perhaps now as POW, but absolutely not as monarch. The Monarch cannot be involved in specific political issues. QEII understands this and has remained above the fray which is one of the reasons for her enduring popularity. Charles is a very stubborn fellow with strong opinions and a complete conviction that his opinion is the correct one. I am not sure he has the self control to bite his tongue, so to speak.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Thanks for this. So future creations will also have the right to sit in the House of Lords - though this will be discouraged. Does that mean William technically can/has refused? This seems to be a loophole the 1999 Reform Act did not close.
I just think of a third or fourth son or daughter with a passion for the Law - what a shame they would not follow their dream. I do generally feel for the non-core royals who lack certain freedoms but get few of the privileges that go along with being royal.

Don't forget that they can now be elected to the Lords so if that is their passion/interest they can still follow it.

No doubt further reform will come and the Lords will be fully elected and peers of the realm will be able to seek election to either house.

 

[AdmirerUS]

No doubt further reform will come and the Lords will be fully elected and peers of the realm will be able to seek election to either house.

Iuvbertie - I agree and that further reform will likely be during Charles reign?

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Prince Charles held private meetings with ministers - Telegraph

I don't understand why the Palace released the dates of meetings, knowing what was discussed at the meetings is private and therefore not released.
It makes it appear like the Prince of Wales is up to no good when in fact he has every right to meet with certain ministers in the government

 

[cepe]

Senio members have many meetings with politicians, business leaders etc which are listed in the court circular and the minutes are never released. This is not unusual and is just mischief making in my view.

I think it's entirely appropriate for the future monarch to talk to such people as part of 1. His charities and 2. Understanding of these people's agendas. It is a 2way street.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

What I don't understand about all this 'Is Charles being political?' stuff , if he is allowed to meet with ministers and discuss certain matters, then what's the issue and if he isn't allowed to meet with ministers, why does the government give him access?

I'm missing why certain people complain about this

 

[padams2359]

If he meets with ministers, he is being political, when in reality, the Queen does not want him to be as unprepared as she was in the beginning. If he doesn't, he is not preparing for his future role, or the Queen does not trust or believe in his ability. Either way, he cannot win in his current position. It is their institution, everyone should just let them run it. I has been going on for a while you know. Lol

 

[cepe]

It's politics.

What I find interesting is the assumption that Charles is influencing policy. That is a labour MP saying that implying that the Tory ministers cannot withstand Charles wishes. Using Prince Charles for political gain is not acceptable.

 

[NGalitzine]

^^^^^
Gee, he met with Labour PMs and ministers when they were in power too. Were they able to withstand the power of his wishes? What about other individuals and groups that meet regularly with the PM and members of the cabinet? Should no one ever be able to meet with government members?

 

[AdmirerUS]

If he meets with ministers, he is being political, when in reality, the Queen does not want him to be as unprepared as she was in the beginning. If he doesn't, he is not preparing for his future role, or the Queen does not trust or believe in his ability. Either way, he cannot win in his current position. It is their institution, everyone should just let them run it. I has been going on for a while you know. Lol

Maybe - he just got a brief on current topics - we have no idea what was discussed. Some of it may have been classified for all we know.

How would he get more "up to speed" on issues without meeting with people? I agree that the Queen may be concerned that Charles starts on a better prepared foot than she was afforded.

Of course, she and he could start going through the daily boxes together (or both going through them but apart). I do think he is far more verbal and will, by nature have more follow up questions for ministers than his mother has had. I do think he will ask more questions of ministers - and that can be a great advantage - opening POVs that were not being considered.
Part of that is because she was a woman ruling when there were no role models (other than Queen Victoria - and honestly, had Elizabeth modeled her reign on Victoria, it might have worked less well - given the changed times for the Commonwealth).
It is an interesting question. Given custom and laws - how does one best prepare oneself for rule? Would GB really want a king who got his preparatory info from reading the Daily Mail, et al?
While Charles needs to take care to not DIRECT others, as the recent trip to see the gold reserves by the Queen and DOE showed - a few pointed questions can do a world of good.

 

[Dman]

Fresh 'meddling' fears as it emerges Prince Charles has held private talks with eight ministers in the past year:
'Meddling' fears as it emerges Prince Charles has held private talks with eight ministers in the past year | Mail Online

 

[Roslyn]

I do think he is far more verbal and will, by nature have more follow up questions for ministers than his mother has had. I do think he will ask more questions of ministers - and that can be a great advantage - opening POVs that were not being considered.

I agree. I am quite sure Charles will express his opinions very clearly and passionately, but I am also sure that he knows the limits of what the monarch can do, and will not try to exercise more power than he has, or act improperly.

Just because he doesn't do things the way his mother does/did, doesn't mean he's wrong. He is going to have the problem all people have when they step into a job which has been done competently by another person for a long time, especially when that person was highly regarded. It will take some time to give effect to the changes I am sure he has in mind, and some people will resent him for it and be free with criticism. He will have to make his mark quickly, too, for his reign will not be a long one compared with his mother's.

 

[AristoCat]

I believe that Charles is untrained for this sort of interference.

He isn't schooled heavily in diplomacy and economics and such and as far as I know, he only has viewpoints based on his appearances and his concerns about his Duchy business. I don't think he has a practical viewpoint of things, such as organic farming.

Great idea to farm organically, but realistically, to get solid crops reliably and get as much to feed millions, chemicals have to be used and pesticides are important. Charles has done that, grown organically, but he had early crop losses. In the real world, a single crop loss can result in millions missing out on getting fed.

Second, eh isn't educated the way that politicians should be. He has a degree in art, but that isn't realistically useful. He's really no different than an actor with an opinion. Nothing more.

I don't think he spends too much time at his desk really reading and studying things other than his charity reports and his apparent PR to get Camilla accepted. Realistically, he is still non-pragmatic about a lot of things.

 

[HRHHermione]

I believe that Charles is untrained for this sort of interference.

He isn't schooled heavily in diplomacy and economics and such and as far as I know, he only has viewpoints based on his appearances and his concerns about his Duchy business. I don't think he has a practical viewpoint of things, such as organic farming.

Great idea to farm organically, but realistically, to get solid crops reliably and get as much to feed millions, chemicals have to be used and pesticides are important. Charles has done that, grown organically, but he had early crop losses. In the real world, a single crop loss can result in millions missing out on getting fed.

Second, eh isn't educated the way that politicians should be. He has a degree in art, but that isn't realistically useful. He's really no different than an actor with an opinion. Nothing more.

I don't think he spends too much time at his desk really reading and studying things other than his charity reports and his apparent PR to get Camilla accepted. Realistically, he is still non-pragmatic about a lot of things.

When Prince Charles first started talking about organic farming and the environment, he got treated like a crackpot old fool. In retrospect, a lot of what he was advocating looks visionary. I actually think it's amazing that he spends so much time and energy advocating for things like a clean environment and a healthy food supply.

I'm inclined to trust his judgment at this point.

 

[cepe]

Aristocat - I really disagree. And you are not correct in your facts about Charles education. He does have a Bachelor of Arts degree but a BA does not mean he studies just the Arts. The Prince studied (at Cambridge) anthropolgy, archeology and history. Knowledge and understanding does not come only from formal education but from life experiences and contacts and personal research.

So he is not untrained - far from it he has been talking to ministers, leaders in business, the military, the arts, economics, environment forover 40 years. When this suddenly hits the headlines it is usually for "other reasons". This story originated in the Daily Mail the day/or 2 after they were in trouble over breaking their agreement over W&C privacy. I dont think thats a coincidence. The Telegraph have now picked it up. I think he is doing the right thing now in asking questions. He knows and accepts he can't do it when he is king.

Example
Practical view point - so picture the scene:- PoW wants to understand what the government's view is on wind farms and solar energy plus what it is doing (if anything) to promote these alternative means of energy. He is entitled to ask (as we all are) as a property and land owner.

His office speaks to the Dept of Environment(DoE). Concern emerges. So, the Head of DEpt (a senior civil servant) tells the minister and at the same time prepares an answer. If you or I had asked as a private citizen, the minister wouldn't have known about it but the PoW is SomeOne. The answer is prepared.

Now the DoE has a number of choices - send a basic written reply (which is what you or I would have received); send someone to talk to the Prince's office; send an officer to meet with the PRince; send a junior minister to meet with the prince; the minister speaks with the prince.

Now do you really think that the minister would let anyone else speak with the PoW???? I think that's a no.

So did Charles ask to speak with the minister(s) or is it that the minister(s) didn't want anyone else to speak to the Heir to the Throne?

Prince Charles knows exactly what he is doing and if you think for one moment that the Queen disapproves - forget it. What he is doing is approved by the Queen - but probably informally so she is not compromised.

(I know how central government works as I have personal experience of certain ministeries.)

 

[Dman]

I have thought about this for some time now and I think Charles will bring his own unique qualities to the throne and just be an engaging Monarch.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Charles is ONE heart beat away from being a Head of State and has been in that position for over 60 years. Since he was 18, some 46 years ago, he has been expected to take over as Head of State instantly his mother died. Fortunately for him he has not yet been called upon to take on the position of Head of State.

Should the person who is ONE heart beat away from being Head of State of any country be denied the right to know what is happening in his/her country or what is happening in the world that affects his/her country - not from the papers but at the highest levels?

Does anyone believe that the Vice-President of the US isn't informed or isn't able to discuss his/her concerns with leading ministers or member of Congress? Of course not - and Charles is in the same position in many ways.

Charles has meet 8 ministers in 12 months - 1 minister every 6 weeks.

He does see many of the state papers as well - The Queen sends them to him every day (I was told that when I visited BP one day and a small carriage returned to The Mews and those of us there at the time who asked what it was doing were told that it had just returned from taking the boxes to Charles that The Queen had decided The Prince of Wales should see that day. We were also told that there were already plans in place for William to start to get these papers as well within a few more years - this was back in 2005 when it was expected that William would be a full-time working royal in 2008 but as we know he changed his plans to transfer to the RAF).

Charles has been educated all his life to be King and his mother has left nothing to chance. Just as she was allowed to see documents, talk to ministers etc with her father present The Queen has done that but also has allowed her son, who is of course a lot older now than what she was when she became The Queen, to meet with the ministers privately.

These meetings are recorded in the CC by the way as are meetings with other foreign leaders for himself and his siblings.

I remember reading years ago now how upset Edward VII was as Prince of Wales that he couldn't hold his own in discussions with people because he wasn't able to talk to ministers to find out what was going on so established an almost back-door approach by making friends in both political parties and entertaining lavishly as well as choosing staff who could find out for him. Since his days every monarch has taken the view that the heir should be able to speak directly to ministers and to read documents etc so that they are as prepared as possible to take over the instant the monarch dies.

Hardly meddling but more being as prepared as possible to represent Britain and do his best for his country.

 

[Roslyn]

I believe that Charles is untrained for this sort of interference.

He isn't schooled heavily in diplomacy and economics and such and as far as I know (snip)

Second, eh isn't educated the way that politicians should be.

Charles has been trained for this sort of interference since the day he was born.

As far as formal education is concerned, consider the Queen's formal education, or, rather, lack of it. As for economics, I also cite the example of one of our former Prime Ministers: Paul Keating. You know, the one who committed the horrendous breach of protocol by putting his hand on HM's back. "The Lizard of Oz", I think he was called because of it. Which I found hugely amusing and have used to refer to him many times since, but not because he touched HM. I dislike for other reasons, such as calling my country "the arse-end of the earth", but I digress. Though I dislike him, I am mightily impressed with his mind, and his knowledge of economics and some say he was a great treasurer and Prime Minister. He left school at the age of 15 and, as far as I know, has no formal academic qualifications. Lack of formal education on a particular subject does not, of itself, mean that a person cannot become an expert on that subject.

 

[Iluvbertie]

True - he left school at 15 and has no additional educational qualifications after completing his Intermediate Certificate (after 3 years of high school) but has been Treasurer and Prime Minister - formal education isn't everything - having life experience is way more important and Keating was trained through the Unions while Charles has been trained by The Queen and the various governments for his future.

 

[MARG]

I believe that Charles is untrained for this sort of interference.

He isn't schooled heavily in diplomacy and economics and such and as far as I know, he only has viewpoints based on his appearances and his concerns about his Duchy business. I don't think he has a practical viewpoint of things, such as organic farming.

Of course he doesn't . . . . he's spent decades talking to heads of state, statesmen, Presidents, Prime Minister, Economists and Philosophers . . . all of whom couldn't get away from him fast enough because they knew absolutely nothing about how to talk to cabbages!

Great idea to farm organically, but realistically, to get solid crops reliably and get as much to feed millions, chemicals have to be used and pesticides are important. Charles has done that, grown organically, but he had early crop losses. In the real world, a single crop loss can result in millions missing out on getting fed.

Oh I think the Duchy coffers are totting along just fine . . . so many people following his trend . . . almost an embarrassment of riches in fact.

Second, eh isn't educated the way that politicians should be. He has a degree in art, but that isn't realistically useful.

Oh I couldn't agree more! All those years of sitting at his mother's side, working tirelessly to promote the UK and the Commonwealth, visiting countries on behalf of HM, giving the wool trade a well earned high profile by sporting clothing in the wool from those countries . . . all quite accidental . . . He's slept through the last six decades.

He's really no different than an actor with an opinion. Nothing more.

No! You think?

I don't think he spends too much time at his desk really reading and studying things other than his charity reports and his apparent PR to get Camilla accepted. Realistically, he is still non-pragmatic about a lot of things.

And you got all of this incredibly accurate, in-depth information from which tabloid?

Ah . . . there's nothing like a good dose of sheer unmitigated arrogance and ignorance to get a really good kick out of life. Laughter really is the best medicine.

 

[Troll]

He's not. He's just a prince. A mere prince while I am king... Lulz

 

[AnnEliza]

I believe that Charles is untrained for this sort of interference.

He isn't schooled heavily in diplomacy and economics and such and as far as I know, he only has viewpoints based on his appearances and his concerns about his Duchy business. I don't think he has a practical viewpoint of things, such as organic farming.

Great idea to farm organically, but realistically, to get solid crops reliably and get as much to feed millions, chemicals have to be used and pesticides are important. Charles has done that, grown organically, but he had early crop losses. In the real world, a single crop loss can result in millions missing out on getting fed.

Second, eh isn't educated the way that politicians should be. He has a degree in art, but that isn't realistically useful. He's really no different than an actor with an opinion. Nothing more.

I don't think he spends too much time at his desk really reading and studying things other than his charity reports and his apparent PR to get Camilla accepted. Realistically, he is still non-pragmatic about a lot of things.

Wow! I live way out here in Seattle, and even I know Charkes does far more than that! Oh, wait, you're an American too, right?
And I must disagree and digress a bit -- chemically based monoculture is a limited, inefficient and short-sighted way to feed the world. Well managed mixed farming is entirely capable of feeding the world, and without everyone living on corn and soybeans. Prince Charles is on the right track.

 

[Dman]

Prince Charles: Speaking Up, In Secrecy:
Members of the public are still no closer to seeing how the heir to the throne tries to influence governments they have elected-
Prince Charles: speaking up, in secrecy | Editorial | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

[redtulip]

I am very disappointed with Charles. There is no excuse for his behaviour. It is very wrong of him, and his letters should be made public.

 

[monarchist-us]

It's probably nothing, but The Guardian seems determined to make this an issue.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is nothing wrong in any person writing to an MP on any issue. Charles has the same right as any other citizen.

Remember that until 1999 he had the right to vote in the House of Lords - didn't do so - but had that right.

 

[redtulip]

It would appear that Charles does not have the same right as any other citizen, and he definitely does not have the same responsibilities as any other citizen:
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandGovernment/Queenandvoting.aspx

 

[Iluvbertie]

I didn't see anything in that link that disagrees with what I said - he has the right to vote but, along with the rest of the family doesn't exercise that right.

The Queen is slightly more limited in what she can do - and if for one moment anyoong thinks she doesn't 'meddle' and get her points of views across they are living in cloud cuckoo-land. What do you think she and the PM discuss every week in their meetings about which NO minutes or other records are kept at all - so we will never know how much she interferred or 'meddled' whereas Charles' letters will be in the archives at some point for historians to read.

Charles does have the right to express his views and to ask questions and to be informed - which he does.