Prince Charles Being Political?

[Rudolph]

Clarence House and the Prime Minister expressed disappointment today after the UK's highest court refused to overturn a ruling which paved the way for publication of letters written by the Prince of Wales to government ministers.

Supreme Court justices in London rejected a challenge by the Attorney General, the Government's principal legal adviser, against a decision by Court of Appeal judges that he had unlawfully prevented the public seeing the royal correspondence.

A spokeswoman for the Prince said after the Supreme Court decision: "This is a matter for the Government. Clarence House is disappointed the principle of privacy has not been upheld."

Prime Minister David Cameron said: "This is a disappointing judgment and we will now consider how to release these letters.

"This is about the principle that senior members of the Royal Family are able to express their views to government confidentially. I think most people would agree this is fair enough.

More: Charles letters challenge rejected - BT

 

[Osipi]

I'm thinking perhaps this issue of the release of Charles' letters is maybe making a mountain out or a mole hill.

As Prince of Wales, he does have the right as does every other citizen to write and express his views and his concerns to his government. No where has it ever been stated that members of Parliament or governmental panels were required to even read these letters let alone act on them. If these letters perhaps brought about a change of mind of the politicians Charles wrote to because of who Charles is, are these the politicians that can be bought off or easily swayed?

I do get that the issue really is with privacy. It would be interesting to know how the contents of the letters may have changed should Charles have known that they could be released into the public domain.

 

[Al_bina]

It is unclear what the Clarence House is moaning about. Prince Charles is not going to be affected in any significant way.

 

[Rudolph]

The government can always pass legislation to prevent the release of the letters even with this court ruling.

The letters should remain private in my opinion

 

[Al_bina]

Such legislation may backfire and draw more than needed attention to Prince Charles' writings.

 

[Rudolph]

If this happened today the letters wouldn't be released because the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are now exempt from FOI requests.

The legislation should be amended to prevent the letters from being published

 

[Lumutqueen]

Ha! Of course Clarence House is disappointed! They're used to getting their own way and don't like it when it doesn't happen.

Now where are those letters........

Frankly I'd be disappointed if a supreme court ruled that my private letters were to become public knowledge. Charles can write all the letters he wants but that doesn't mean whoever he's writing them to is going to take on board what he's going to say. Also, I don't think I've ever heard Charles say or suggest anything in regards to how things should be done that was completely outlandish and uncalled for. Charles isn't stupid, these letters are hardly going to say something like "pass a motion so I can overthrow my mother"!

Government have 30 days to publish the letters unless they alter any legislation. Considering parliament "closes" today before the GE. I don't see them changing anything.

 

[Nico]

I'm glad these letters are going to be released. If Charles is, as I suspect, an incorrigible meddler who believes that he has a perfect right to interfere in legislation and lobby for changes in the law, (especially with regard to his hobby horses) all will become clear in the fullness of time.

I've always worried about this aspect of Charles's persona. He is in very many ways a superb Prince of Wales. However, if any attempted influencing of ministers comes to light as a result of these letters then his reputation will suffer, perhaps irreparably. Charles is not elected and he should leave the framing of laws to Parliament. That's what it's there for.

Oh Dear, here we are.
Charles 's "hobby horses" are youth unemployment, cultural heritage, global warming ... not really easy topics and,surprisingly enough for a part of the public who wants to reduce the Prince of Wales as a demanding eccentric philander talking to his plants, he really cares about it. As a Bristish citizen, he had perfectly the right to raise his voice and concerns about the current, and future, well being of the population. Maybe if he had campaigned for the anti landmines campaign, his attitude would have been for you more "courageous" and not "meddling" isn't it ?
Let's face it, we all pretty know that these letters are just a pretext to judge Charles, not on his role as the Prince of Wales, but on his very own personnalty and of course his private life. Stop the hypocrisy : some people can't wait to see Charles declared unfit to be king.

 

[Al_bina]

Who exactly is on the offensive to declare Prince Charles unfit to be king? I hope you are not suggesting that there are secret diehard loyalists of Prince Charles' first spouse in the upper circles.

 

[royalistbert]

I am doing a course at the moment and one of subjects was contract law and technically the letters are the property of the receiver. I don't know why they didn't bring contract law into it.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Such legislation may backfire and draw more than needed attention to Prince Charles' writings.

I agree that legislation would backfire and the letters should just be released, but passing legislation that allows everyone in Britain can keep their communications confidential. Prince Charles is a citizen and a taxpayer, so he should have the same right to try and influence legislation as everyone else.

 

[Curryong]

Oh Dear, here we are.
Charles 's "hobby horses" are youth unemployment, cultural heritage, global warming ... not really easy topics and,surprisingly enough for a part of the public who wants to reduce the Prince of Wales as a demanding eccentric philander talking to his plants, he really cares about it. As a Bristish citizen, he had perfectly the right to raise his voice and concerns about the current, and future, well being of the population. Maybe if he had campaigned for the anti landmines campaign, his attitude would have been for you more "courageous" and not "meddling" isn't it ?
Let's face it, we all pretty know that these letters are just a pretext to judge Charles, not on his role as the Prince of Wales, but on his very own personnalty and of course his private life. Stop the hypocrisy : some people can't wait to see Charles declared unfit to be king.

I have never said that I consider Charles unfit to be King. Of course republicans and their mouthpieces like the Guardian are going to rejoice over this victory.

I regret that Charles has left himself open to this attack. The point is that while every British citizen is certainly allowed to have their say over issues of concern to them, you know, I know, and so does everyone else, including government ministers, Charles is not Mr and Mrs Average of Surbiton communicating with their local MP.

He is a man of extraordinary influence as we've seen in other matters in which he's interfered, such as architecture. Is he going to perform when he is king in the same manner? We hope not, but we don't know, do we? And therein lies the worry as far as Charles and political neutrality is concerned.

 

[Rudolph]

The Supreme Court have reached an "unconstitutional decision" by allowing letters written by the Prince of Wales to government ministers to be published, Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has said.

The MP for North East Somerset said the ruling would make it very difficult for Prince Charles to do his job.

"It is the job of the Prince of Wales to interest himself in what his majesty's government is doing that's his role, that's his job", he said.

More: Rees-Mogg: Charles letters decision 'unconstitutional' - ITV News

 

[Curryong]

Is Mr Rees-Mogg a constitutional lawyer?

Or merely an MP who was reported for not declaring his financial interests when taking part in debates in the House of Commons.

Somewhat ironical, that!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...mogg-failed-to-declare-interests-9923362.html

 

[Rudolph]

Come now Curryong, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Hudson, decided that no wrongdoing had been committed and so no investigation took place.

Anyway he is an elected MP and has every right to speak up for Charles

 

[Cris M]

So, the Supreme Court has ruled that there's no such a thing as privacy. That's ridiculous. So, from now on, a I think every letter sent by a citizen to a minister should be published.

 

[Osipi]

So, the Supreme Court has ruled that there's no such a thing as privacy. That's ridiculous. So, from now on, a I think every letter sent by a citizen to a minister should be published.

There we go! Excellent idea. Big BIG volumes of correspondence between citizens and the government. I can see the advantages now. Kid gets in trouble in school and for punishment, he needs to read each and every letter and write a book report. The possibilities are endless.

 

[Dman]

Video:
The Supreme court has overturned a ruling that prevented the public from seeing letters written by the Prince of Wales to government ministers. Royal Commentator Ingrid Seward has reacted to the news-
Home - ITNSource News

 

[Polly]

The Monarch, of course, must do what his/her Ministers advise. However, we know that the Monarch has the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn.

Whereas none of us knows Her Majesty's personal political opinion on any subject, her ministers and in particular, her Prime Minister would, and they're never revealed.

I therefore have difficulty in distinguishing between the differences pertaining to the Queen and her immediate heir. I cannot appreciate the fact that his concerning himself with matters of state by expressing an opinion is not allowable when it's obvious that his letters would fall into one of the above categories. Apart from the formal situation, in practical terms he draws closer to the throne with every passing day and to my mind, it's petty and churlish to pursue the PoW in this unseemly manner, prompted, I'm quite confident, only from a desire to embarrass him.

 

[cepe]

Er.... we dont actually know what he wrote. Too many opinions/assumptionsd based on personal opinions of PoW, rather than fact.

It will be interesting to see the outcome

 

[MARG]

I'm glad these letters are going to be released. If Charles is, as I suspect, an incorrigible meddler who believes that he has a perfect right to interfere in legislation and lobby for changes in the law, (especially with regard to his hobby horses) all will become clear in the fullness of time.

I've always worried about this aspect of Charles's persona. He is in very many ways a superb Prince of Wales. However, if any attempted influencing of ministers comes to light as a result of these letters then his reputation will suffer, perhaps irreparably. Charles is not elected and he should leave the framing of laws to Parliament. That's what it's there for.

Nothing is or can be, called meddling from the release of these letters. Unless all letters to MP's on the given subject are released we have no way of knowing what, if anything, came of those letters.

 

[Curryong]

If Charles's letters are released and it is shown that he has lobbied successfully for any changes in the law which would benefit him or the administration of the Duchy of Cornwall, that will be tremendously damaging to his reputation, imo, when the Press examine the particulars.

It isn't much good, imho, pointing out that Joe Stubbs of Greater Wallop wrote a hundred letters on the same subject or that a hundred Alice Turnips wrote on the question.

We know, everybody knows, that letters from the Prince of Wales get greater attention from the minister concerned. No-one in the public arena is concerned with Alice and Joe's views on anything.

However, if the Prince of Wales is seen to be acting behind the scenes that brings into question his political neutrality when he becomes King, and that's something in a Parliamentary democracy everybody should be concerned about.

 

[royal rob]

There we go! Excellent idea. Big BIG volumes of correspondence between citizens and the government. I can see the advantages now. Kid gets in trouble in school and for punishment, he needs to read each and every letter and write a book report. The possibilities are endless.

But he is the future king of England very different to Mr Smith
No ones cares what Mr Smith writes but most people would be very interested in what Charles is writing about

 

[Dman]

Er.... we dont actually know what he wrote. Too many opinions/assumptionsd based on personal opinions of PoW, rather than fact.

It will be interesting to see the outcome

I agree, but I'm wondering if Charles wrote anything leading up to his engagement and wedding to Camilla.

 

[Osipi]

But he is the future king of England very different to Mr Smith
No ones cares what Mr Smith writes but most people would be very interested in what Charles is writing about

He may be the future king of England but do we absolutely know that ministers see the letters and give them top priority? For all we know, they could roll their eyes and groan "another spider letter" and file it away in the Spider Man file unopened.

It would be very hard to prove that ministers acted on something just because Charles wrote to them.

 

[muriel]

Er.... we dont actually know what he wrote. Too many opinions/assumptionsd based on personal opinions of PoW, rather than fact.

It will be interesting to see the outcome

I have to agree with you on this one. There are far too many assumptions being flung around, based on specific individual's view of the PoW!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Osipi - that is a very good point.


Unless it is possible to prove that the ministers actually read and then changed their minds as a direct result of Charles' letters there is really no point to publishing the letters.


They also need to publish the minister's response to the letters and any comments in the ministers notes on the day/s following the receipt of the letters as well as the minutes of cabinet etc where the minister may have raised the content of the letters.


The letters themselves don't prove Charles has any influence etc.


What the publication of these letters does do is show that there is a concerted campaign being waged in the UK to bring down Charles and probably destroy the entire monarchy which is after all an aim of a republican newspaper like The Guardian that started this process in the first place.

 

[Rudolph]

There is no 'concerted effort' to bring down the monarchy. The letters will be published and the usual suspects will cry and moan over the contents and then life goes on.

 

[Curryong]

Charles is very persistent where his hobby horses are concerned, as we saw in the thread about his architecture views. The ministers concerned may well roll their eyes but they aren't likely to ignore the Prince's letters, both because otherwise the government wouldn't have fought so hard to keep these letters quiet if they had been ignored, also there would have been follow-up letters and perhaps a visit if they weren't answered. Plus, there is always a chance of meeting the Prince at some official function.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is no 'concerted effort' to bring down the monarchy. The letters will be published and the usual suspects will cry and moan over the contents and then life goes on.

The Guardian newspaper, which is the one that has fought for the publication of these letters, is most certainly waging a campaign to end the monarchy - it is a paper that supports the republican cause.

It may not succeed in the short term but it still has it on its agenda and will continue its concerted campaign to end the monarchy - might take them a couple of hundred years or maybe only a dozen or so but they have an aim and that is to end the monarchy in Britain so that the country can be truly democratic.

Charles is despised by many people in the UK and elsewhere - particularly by those who support Diana - and there are many people (not necessarily a majority but still a sizeable portion of the country) who would be happy to see Charles passed over for William (of course that can't happen under the existing laws but laws of succession can be changed by the parliament of the day - as we have seen this week with the Succession to the Crown Act finally being in place).

If these letters have anything controversial in them it could very well see the calls for Charles to step down or for him to be forced out grow again. They could be very benign of course but we will have to wait and see.

To say there is no 'concerted campaign' is to ignore the ideals of The Guardian and men like Murdoch who control much of the UK's press. Murdoch is a republican to his bootstraps and would love to see the end of the monarchy and uses his media resources for that end whenever possible.


I can actually see a situation where Britain becomes a republic but Canada is still a monarchy as the Canadian seem more attached to the royals than many Brits are.