Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles News 1: October 2002-October 2003
This was from Factiva newspapers article search. I thought it was interesting and funny. Here it is : :D
Loose lips and black spiders.
1 October 2002
New Zealand Herald
(c) 2002 The New Zealand Herald
THE Bentley purrs gently along the gravelled drive. A muffled bell rings, alerting staff that their employer is home. A maid who has been plumping cushions in the drawing room slips swiftly below stairs.
Stepping from his car after 12 hours of public engagements, the Prince of Wales smiles wearily, pleased as always to return to his beloved country haven, Highgrove. He tells his equerry: "I shall be in my study."
Members of the royal family unwind in different ways after a day in front of the public. Princess Diana used to sing. Princess Margaret always poured herself a stiff drink. The Queen has a TV dinner.
For 20 years, post-public engagement therapy for Prince Charles has been writing to ministers, often late into the evening. He rarely dictates the letters, preferring to handwrite them with much underlining and many exclamation marks. If drafts are later typed up, they are often annotated with more postscripts, sometimes in red and curving around, and sometimes over, the page.
Whatever the style, the content of those letters - known by some weary New Labour recipients as "Black Spiders" - has stayed private. Till now.
Some veteran courtiers are fearing that five years' effort devoted to remodelling a man once lampooned as a plant-chatting adulterer may be unravelling after his outspoken views emerged in public through leaked letters.
But just how did the Prince's views - not only about rural pursuits, but about the strength of door-closers in the fire exits of old people's homes too - end up so embarrassingly in the public domain?
He first resolved to write to Prime Minister Tony Blair about hunting almost six months ago. He had - one of the few facts reported entirely accurately - been asked by a Cumbrian farmer if blacks and gays would ever be treated as "badly" as farmers.
The Prince is himself one of the richest rural landowners in the country. However, also highly influential on his views of the "awfulness" of rural life under New Labour has been his assistant private secretary, Elizabeth Buchanan, whose parents are farmers.
A first draft of the Prince's letter was penned late at night while he was staying at Birkhall, the Queen Mother's home in Scotland, in the weeks after his grandmother's funeral in April.
It was later circulated to senior staff. Three of them - including Colleen Harris, his highly regarded press secretary who is black herself, and even Buchanan - advised against the sentiments expressed and the reference to "black, ethnic and other minorities". Mark Bolland, the media adviser credited with helping to transform the Prince's reputation, also counselled against sending it.
"The language was just wrong, wrong, wrong," said a courtier. "It was inappropriate."
Subsequently, many of the Prince's staff thought the protest had been quietly shelved - until his press office received a call from the Mail on Sunday. The paper, clearly briefed by someone who had spoken to Charles, intended to publish his views as part of its campaign backing the pro-hunting Countryside Alliance's march through London.
The next day, Godric Smith, the Prime Minister's official spokesman, was called by Mail on Sunday political editor Simon Walters. Would Downing St care to comment on the letter? Smith immediately called Alastair Campbell, the Government's director of strategic communications.
It was the first inkling Campbell had that the letter, which had been received almost two months earlier, had gone into the public domain.
He was well aware that the recent "Black Rod affair" - the furore over a claim that Blair tried to muscle in on the Queen Mother's funeral - had set the Palace against the Government. The last thing he wanted was another row. He urged caution. Clearly any connection between the leak and the Government had to be denied.
When the Mail on Sunday article appeared 10 days ago, it also attributed to the Prince the view that "if the Labour Government ever gets round to banning foxhunting, I might as well leave this country and spend the rest of my life skiing".
"That was one of the most damaging things," said one Buckingham Palace official. "It confirmed exactly the unfair caricature of the monarchy which its detractors like people to have. However, the words certainly have the ring of truth about them, even if they might have been spoken after a couple of brandies."
At Buckingham Palace, aghast staff started to ask who had been responsible for the leak.
"We knew it wouldn't have been Elizabeth Buchanan," said the official. "She's devoted to hunting, but is also utterly devoted to the Prince. She goes gooey when he's around. Knowing the fallout from something like this, she just wouldn't risk it. She's too shrewd."
Even the Queen, an astute student of the newspapers when it suits her, was alarmed. Her political views have remained resolutely opaque during the 50 years of her reign. Still on holiday at Balmoral in Scotland, she discussed the story with Charles when he visited her there the day after it was published.
The Guardian - perhaps predictably - followed up with a piece inquiring exactly how many hundreds of millions of pounds in public subsidy the black and gay communities received, in stark contrast to the "downtrodden" farmers. And it published a gleeful letter from left-wing Labour MP Dennis Skinner announcing that the Prince's promise to leave the country gave him one more reason for backing the abolition of hunting.
But other papers were mixing it in their own ways, too.
"We became well aware very early on that the press, particularly the Daily Mail, were itching for us to come out all guns blazing, saying it was nothing to do with us," said a Downing St official close to the week's events. "They would then have said we were blaming the leak on people connected to the royal family, and that would have been another row."
Walters himself had been careful not to reveal his source. But Mail colleagues were less reticent.
"To many, it will sound suspiciously like a crude piece of Labour news management," the paper said on the Wednesday, at the same time as it revealed two more letters from Prince Charles, this time to Lord Chancellor Derry Irvine. The paper insisted that they had come from a "left-wing political source" and were planted to discredit Charles.
Jonathan Dimbleby, a longtime Charles ally, also started doing a round of interviews, backing the Prince to the hilt.
"All the Prince's allies were turning the spotlight on us," complained one Downing St official.
The argument was simple enough. Labour wanted to focus attention on the "toff element" of the countryside march. It also wanted to stem the flow of letters from Charles which arrive on various ministers' desks about once a fortnight.
The two latest letters were lengthy expositions - the less kind might say rambles - about human rights laws, the "compensation culture" and political correctness. Those who have seen other letters penned by the Prince agree that they are typical.
A former Cabinet minister said: "The awful thing about so many of Charles' letters is simply that they are so meretricious. It's upmarket saloon bar stuff. He appears to take the view that he's the only person who ever meets the public. I'd love to see him deal with a twice-weekly surgery where he had to help sort out people's problems rather than just agree things ain't what they used to be."
Even an old friend of the Prince says: "He is charming company, but we always try to entertain him with eight or 10 people present or the whole evening turns into a fiesta of whingeing. The media, the traffic and the cost of everything nowadays are his favourite gripes. One of the Prince's less agreeable attributes is that he's used to sounding off without anyone answering back."
But the most curious reaction, according to some close observers of the royal family, came from St James's Palace itself. Prince Charles' new private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, authorised the issue of a statement on Wednesday afternoon defending the Prince's right to correspond with ministers. This duly ensured that, rather than being damped down, the story ended up on Thursday's front pages.
But not all of the Prince's staff are relaxed about the publicity.
"There's a view that all this makes him look like the common man and people will be glad to know these are his thoughts," said one senior courtier. "However, that's a high-risk strategy."
And the courtier suggested, most controversially of all, that the "conduit" for the Prince's views about hunting was not a Downing St insider at all, but "might well be" Edward Heathcoat-Amory, a Daily Mail columnist who has recently joined the small circle of traditionalist figures who advise the Prince.
They include Melanie Phillips, another Daily Mail commentator, former chief inspector of schools Chris Woodhead and author William Shawcross.
Charles has dined more than once with Heathcoat-Amory, brother of former Tory minister David. And he is known to particularly admire the journalist's wife, Daily Telegraph associate editor Alice Thomson, who is said to remind him of a young Camilla Parker Bowles.
"There's no doubt," said the courtier, "that anyone who repeated the Prince's comments or passed on details of draft correspondence they might have received would have been doing it with the very best motives. They may not have had the foresight to see where it would all lead."
Heathcoat-Amory could not be contacted at the weekend. If he was the source of the Mail story, it explains only too starkly why a spokeswoman for St James's Palace was adamant yesterday that there is "no leak inquiry under way".
The row may die down, overshadowed by the Labour Party's annual conference, plans for war with Iraq and news of former Conservative minister Edwina Currie's affair with former Conservative Prime Minister John Major.
But its implications will be felt for years. Charles feels that, as he is not monarch, he is free to speak out. It is a stark contrast to his counterparts abroad, such as Crown Prince Felipe of Spain, who operate with a tiny staff and stay out of politics altogether.
However, even Charles' public utterances in the past have either been restrained - witness his two anodyne speeches to the House of Lords as a young man - or upon subjects which are not overtly party political, such as architecture. Hunting, human rights legislation and fair treatment for black and gay people are current, contentious issues.
The Prince also values his hitherto good relations with Blair, whose support he will need if he is to one day negotiate the constitutional minefield of remarriage. Blair insists publicly that the Prince is welcome to air his views. But Downing St officials now say privately that Charles is viewed as too much of a loose cannon, firing off salvos on any subject that takes his fancy.
"A period of silence would be welcome," said one well-placed source close to the Prime Minister.
"There's no real appetite for republicanism either in Downing St or in the country," a former adviser to Blair said. "However, there's a persuasive argument that you just let things wither gently, cutting down the size of the active royal family, curtailing some of the excesses of influence and expenditure and reminding the public from time to time that a number of the Windsors are one canape short of a banquet.
"Charles is turning out to be rather good at making that case himself." - GUARDIAN.
Article link : https://www.factiva.com :D
Apparently , Prince Charles is said to be ticked off over the extraordinary allegations in the Burrell case , after the butler sold his incredible story to the tabloids . What a coincedence , for the Forum to be stalled during the close of this sensational trial . The U.K newspapers are all full of the unbelieveable allegations by Burrell ,about the Queen and Princess Diana in particular .
Greets Katie . :D :D :D :D
How are you? This is an old article from New Idea which I was hoping to type, but kept on forgetting. But here it is. November 30th 2002.
Titled "Pampered Prince"
The Tantrums :
Prince Charles has lashed out at his staff :
* If a picture is not straight on the wall, the offending staff memmber will receive a stern typed memo of reprimand.
*He takes blown light bulbs as a persoanl affront. The Prince will take it upon himself to discover whoever is in charge of that section of the household.
*Once a footman arranged a buffet lunch in Charles' bachelor apartments on several card tables, covered with a cloth. When the Prince saw it, he became very agitated. "Too many tables" he kept saying. "Too many tables".
*The footman had to take all the tables down and rearranged the food. And quickly - everything has to be done immediately, without error or delay.
A day in the life of Prince Charles
While Charles sleeps, his aide drapes a towel over a chair near the bath so that when His majesty climbs over out of the bath he can sit and wrap the towel around him without too much effort.
His aide folds Charles' socks 'just so' so the Prince needs to do is slip his feet into them.
The heir to the throne has a specil silver machine to roll up his toothpaste, inscribe with his chest. His aide squeezes it onto his toothbrush.
Charles changes his clothes up to five times a day. It is the aide's job to pick up discarded clothing and ensure that it is washed, pressed and returned to one of the wardrobes, each item in its correct color coded location.
Lunch is served, but the Prince is a stickler for routine. The table must always be set in exactly the same way or he throws a tantrum.
Yet another outfit change, this time for the opera. His Majesty flings his clothes onto the floor. He demands it be spotless by the time he retires.
In the private dining room behind the Royal box at the opera, Charles supper, silver and linen has already been delivered. Its served as the second interval begins.
And so to bed - with sweet dreams of more fluffy towels and socks folded just for tomorrow.
From the moment he wakes to the moment he sleeps Prince Charles, who turns 54 this month, has his every whim catered for. It has been that way since he was born. As a baby he had many minders, including a footman who polished his pram. As a child he was spoilt terribly by Royal staff and as an adult he has come to expect the same treatment. :x
Yet it is still seemed extraordinary when it was revealed, in the continual fallout from the Paul Burrell case, that to this day the Prince's aide Micheal Fawcett even squeezes his toothpaste on to the brush for him. And Paul Burrell furore has revealed another detail of Charles' pampered life. When Prince Charles had to provide a urine sample for his doctors, his aide assist him in what most would regard as a humiliating tasks. This is hardly a lifestyle for a 21st century Prince, the future head of a slimmed down, up-to-date socially attuned Constitutional Monarchy. :rolleyes: :o
But this is what Charles expects as he is trying to make up to the cold shower, early morning runs and long nights in draughty dormitories with snow blowing in the winds at Gordonstoun, his spartan school in the North of Scotland. The contrast between then and now could not be more stark. At school if he was slow in getting up a prefect would tear back his covers and turn over his bed. Today the Prince is woken by his aide, who gently pulls back the curtains and hands him a cup of tea. He then picks up the clothes thrown on the floor the night before and draws the Prince a deep scented oil bath.
While Charles is in the bathroom the aide will layout the Prince's clothes for his first appointment of the day on a chair in the dressing room. Ties will be matched to the handmade shirts. The silken handerchief he alawsy wears in the breast pocket of his $6,000 suits made especially for him by Anderson and Shepaprd in exclusive Savile Row will be color coordinated.
A footman would have spent at least an hour polishing whicheevr pair of handmade shoes he decides to wear, each shoe costing $5,000 each. Charles sometimes changes his clothes five times a day - this process is repeated on each and very occassion. That leaves a lot of linen strewn across the floor because the Prince, secure in the knowledge that there is always someone on hand to pick them up lets his clothes lie where they fall. It is his aides job to pick up the clothes
and ensure that they're carefully washed, ironed and pressed and placed in their rightful places in one of Cahrles mahogany wardrobes each color coded.
No one is allowed in Charles dressing room with the exception of Micheal Fawcett. Once his then Private secretary, Richard Ayland came unannounced, Micheal told him tomake an appointment the next time he wanted to speak to the Prince. This did not go down well with the Prince's most important and senior Courtier.
The Prince of Wales is very fussy about his homes as he is about his attire. If a light bulb blows out, he starts writing memo to Staff. On one occassion he even asked for the gravel outside the front door to be carefully swept so that he it won't come onto the mat. But luxury has always been a must for charles and this can be traced back to his bachelor days. his aide Stephen Barry would make so much fuss over him that the Castle staff would think that charles was more important then the Queen.
And one weekend at Windsor castle, when the Prince was entertaining
friends at a supper in the old nursery, the footman decided that as the table was made out of mahogany, he would take the table clothes off and lay it with mats and silver candlesticks. He knew this is how the Queen would have liked it. But not Charles as he found out :
"Prince Charles nearly had a seizure when he saw the table setting" the footman recalls. and he yelled "In the nursery you always have a tablecloth". To break the pattern sent him into a frenzy. He kept on saying that he wanted a tablecloth over and over again. "He got so worked up you would have thought that it was the end of the world".
At present the Prince employs more than 80 full-time staff that costs him more than 8 million in wages a year. But service costs money and Prince Charles likes to be served. That is especially true when he entertains at Sandringham and anyone who hasd been fortunate enough to be invited over for dinner and enjoy a weekend of opulence will tell you that it hasn't been so great since his great grandfather Edward VII was on the throne. It seems that the Prince wants his guest to be as pampered as him.
When people arrive their cars are taken away and washed. Their luggage is borne upstairs by footman and maides then carefully unpack them and the clothes pressed. The food is the finest quality -
he brings his own organically grown vegeatbles from Highgrove's farm. And in case the cellar is not up to his standard Charles brings in his own wines. Ecah dinner has a different theme, and Micheal Fawcett does all the table arrangements. It is his reponsibility to create a exotic setting for every meal. Sometimes huge fans are brought in from Covent garden to create a Edwardian atmosphere. Charles dresses for the occassion in oriental robes and slippers.
When he was recently looking at the sumptous array, the Prince remarked that his mother wouldn't approve. He was right. The Queen, famously frugal, turns off the lights and uses old envelopes to write her memos on. She is mystified by her son's love of extravagance, which she finds "almost obscene" many would agree with her. :)
I hope that isn't completely true. I am sure parts are true. I mean he lives in a different universe than most. It's just a world i think most people can't even imagine....extravagant and bizarre.
I can't fathom the woman that would choose to live with a person like that. I highly doubt Diana had a clue what she was marrying into. Camilla must be nuts. Unless he is a completely different person when she is around. Let's hope, for her sake and his.
Apologies..i forgot to thank you Lorissa for typing out that article....it is fascinating. Great work as always!!
Hey Kelly B,
How are you? Thanks for being so sweet. I think that it could be true as Charles has always been a little different and most of the reports we get here in Australia has been amusing. I wonder if it is over-exaggerated or could it be possibly true. :) He has been well known as being a little extravagent at times. If it is true I feel so sorry for
hardworking British Taxpayers and I would vote to become a Republican. ;)
I don't quite understand why people get worked up about him needing to change 5 times a day. I'm certain that if he does several visits or something, plays a game of polo or such, that each might require different clothes. Visiting a Children's hospital might just possibly call for different attire than dinner out on the town, or a visit to steelworkers. :-)
Also, about the clothes on the floor, this is, again unremarkable. The only difference between myself and the Prince in this regard, is that when I throw my clothes on the floor, they tend to stay there. At least HRH doesn't have to rate his clothing on a scale of <Clean--Clean Enough--Dirty--Too Dirty to Wear again>
He doesn't play polo everyday. The man might need to change 3 times a day at most. A regular suit for daytime duties. A tuxedo/dinner jacket in the early evening. Windsor dress for a state dinner. If he changes 5 times day, he's beyond spoilt.
Thanks for the articles Lorissa! :)
I can't really contribute much to this discussion as I change about three times a day myself depending on where I am going. Of course, I don't have anyone laying out my clothing out for me or sending it off to be cleaned.
I found this post on the Belgian Board (of all places) and it is beyond bizarre.
Check it out!! Weird allegations. I have no idea where this person got this kind of information (imagination or reliable source??)
Did Palace aides block honour for Charles's spin doctor?
By Caroline Davies
The Prince of Wales's former spin doctor, Mark Bolland, who has resigned as his PR consultant, departs without a gong in recognition of his six years in royal service.
Despite having served as the Prince's deputy private secretary, his name was absent from the New Year's Honours List.
Reports yesterday that Prince Charles had recommended him for a CVO, Commander of the Victorian Order and one rank below a knighthood, appear unfounded.
But someone of Mr Bolland's senior position might have hoped to be made an LVO (Lieutenant of the Victorian Order), a lesser honour but, like all those of the Royal Victorian Order, in the Queen's gift.
Not so far, in his case, although there is always the Birthday Honours list in June.
Mr Bolland's PR tactics were not always appreciated by some at Buckingham Palace who believed he often enhanced his master's public image at the expense of other members of the Royal Family, notably Prince Philip and the Earl and Countess of Wessex.
And such honours, although the gift of the Queen, are first passed by the Royal Victorian Order committee at Buckingham Palace - a panel comprising the private secretaries to members of the Royal Family and other senior aides. "That would have been the kiss of death for Mr Bolland," said one source.
So while Sir Stephen Lamport, the Prince's former private secretary, collected his knighthood, Mr Bolland, 36, who has set up his own company, appears to have been left empty-handed.
"I am surprised he wasn't given anything," said a source. "but at the end of the day the RVO is over at Buckingham Palace. QED."
Meanwhile an unflattering portrait of Prince Charles has emerged in the wake of Mr Bolland's departure. It is of a Prince alleged to be so steeped in melancholy that he hurled crockery at a recent dinner party in a temper tantrum provoked by exasperation and deep gloom, according to one tabloid.
Yesterday his senior aides at St James's Palace denied the Prince was in deep depression. "We haven't picked up any negativity from the boss," said one. "He's fine, good humoured. He's been through a lot recently, and I dare say there have been some down days, but the general tenor is upbeat and positive."
The Prince has certainly experienced some dispiriting days of late. While reportedly glum about Mr Bolland's departure, he is also alleged to be irked at the results of the Radio 4 Today programme's poll of who listeners wished to boot out of Britain, where he came fourth.
According to observers, the New Year never finds the Prince in the best of spirits. He hates the short days and long dark night, and has been known to get particularly philosophical. He used to blow away the cobwebs on the ski slopes with his sons.
The old year had not ended on an upbeat note. Sir Michael Peat, his new private secretary, was forced to launch an internal inquiry at St James's Palace after the trials of Paul Burrell and Harold Brown, two former royal butlers acquitted of stealing from the apartment of Diana, Princess of Wales.
"We all have difficult times," said a St James's Palace official. "There are always moments when you go, 'Oh dear, it's all going wrong'. That doesn't mean you're in a black mood forever."
Gloomy Charles's tantrum
FRIENDS of Prince Charles fear for his wellbeing, saying he is "gloomy and depressed" after a series of setbacks.
Charles hurled a piece of crockery to the floor in frustration during a recent private dinner party.
The news came as Charles parted company with Mark Bolland, the PR man who rebuilt his reputation after Princess Diana's death and helped win acceptance of his relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles.
It is the latest in a string of setbacks that have undermined the Prince's confidence. Charles has been stung by accusations of hypocrisy over his "buy British" campaign.
And BBC radio listeners voted him fourth on a list of people they want to kick out of Britain.
Charles was already deeply troubled by the fallout from the collapsed trials of former royal butlers Paul Burrell and Harold Brown.
Friends say he has been upset at suggestions that St James's was involved in a cover-up of the "rape tape" allegations said to centre on an assault by a male member of his staff.
January 07, 2003
The public cannot love and respect a man who behaves like the Prince of Wails
Perhaps the Prince of Wales’s Greek heritage is coming to the fore. But if plate smashing is to be a regular feature of Highgrove dinner parties, guests might appreciate some warning so that they do not look too startled when the heir to the throne begins to trash the crockery. A little gentle bouzouki music and a pudding of baklava would prepare the way.
Without such scene-setting, the risk is that witnesses to the Prince’s antics could conclude that they are watching a childish tantrum rather than an exercise in post-prandial culture. Since the perpetrator is in his mid-fifties rather than the terrible twos, this would do little to enhance his image.
The public tends not to warm to adults who behave like petulant spoilt brats, particularly when they have ambitions of being the next head of state. If Prince Charles is hurt that he was voted fourth on the list of people who should be lined up for deportation, he would do better to ponder why so many feel this way rather than vent his feelings on the china.
He might then realise that exhorting the rest of us to “buy British”, while negotiating a deal to buy not one, but four, German cars, is just the sort of behaviour guaranteed to win bonus points in an unpopularity contest. It matters not that his plea was on behalf of British farmers rather than motor manufacturers: the charge of hypocrisy was an inevitable result. Since his own business is in farming rather than automobiles, the charge is even more pointed.
But the Prince would not see it that way. He seems to believe that the public attitude towards his behaviour will be as indulgent as his lifestyle. Yet while the amazing extravagances of the Beckhams, for instance, are smiled on, the continuing revelations of life at Highgrove elicit only derision. When Posh and Becks decided to celebrate their wedding breakfast seated on elaborate thrones, we could all enjoy the joke. From real royalty, we expect better.
Prince Charles will not receive the credit he undoubtedly deserves for the remarkable achievements of The Prince’s Trust until he stops behaving like a minor potentate in Ruritania. The trust has helped hundreds of young people to find lucrative employment and the Prince has been genuinely involved in its work. But in popular perception now, he is seen only as a pampered prig, out of touch with the real world.
He may choose to believe that an Englishman’s home is his castle, and in his case this is undeniably true, but what goes on behind the drawbridge does not remain secret. It should not concern us that he demands six different kinds of honey at breakfast, as his former chef has related to the television cameras: breakfast foibles are commonplace. A plate-smashing tantrum at dinner, however, is evidence of someone who has no concern about the embarrassment his action may cause others.
An existence surrounded by bowing and scraping courtiers must foster such arrogance. It has the same effect in business, where kings of the boardroom can sometimes be so fawned upon that they forget that those who work for them deserve to be treated with courtesy and, preferably, kindness. I have never forgotten the identity of the FTSE company chairman who, as I was waiting to interview him, bawled at his underlings as if they were incompetent servants. It somewhat undermined his efforts, as he went “on the record”, to portray himself as a caring employer.
It was equally depressing to be introduced by a top accountant to the secretary he proudly boasted had worked for him for more than 30 years. Only when he had left the room did she confide that it was her birthday but in three decades her boss had never even noted that there might be such an occasion.
Temperamental showbusiness stars become used to having their every whim catered for, with dressing rooms provided with the current food fad of choice and limousines waiting at the stage door. But there are limits beyond which even a chat-show host should not tread and expect to be indulged. Michael Moore, the US star who recently brought his one-man show to London, appears to have over-stepped the mark. At odds with the theatre management, Moore apparently railed at the stage workers and everyone who crossed his path, such that the following night they had to be pacified before they would open the theatre.
An apology worked on that occasion but it is hard to imagine the Prince of Wales saying sorry to his staff or his public. He is too used to having his own way to understand why he should moderate his behaviour if he wishes to win the favour of the British public.
How can someone who is used to having his toothpaste squeezed on to his toothbrush for him learn that he is too old to throw tantrums?
Prince Charles' PR Expert Resigns
Sun Jan 5, 2:13 PM ET
LONDON - The public relations expert who helped Britons warm to Prince Charles and his companion Camilla Parker Bowles has resigned.
Mark Bolland announced late Saturday that he was stepping down as a freelance adviser to the prince to concentrate on other clients. The prince's St. James's Palace office said Charles was sad to see him go.
Toronto-born Bolland, 36, was Charles' deputy private secretary from 1997 until last year, when he set up a public relations business with Charles and his sons Prince William and Prince Harry as clients.
He is credited with helping transform Parker Bowles from a public hate figure for her perceived role in ending Charles' marriage to the late Princess Diana to an accepted member of the royal circle who regularly appears in public with the prince.
In 2001 he was named "PR Professional of the Year" by PR Week magazine for overseeing "a massive sea change in the relationship between Charles and the press."
Bolland also helped organize the outdoor concerts at Buckingham Palace staged last June to celebrate Queen Elizabeth II (news - web sites)'s Golden Jubilee.
"My time with the Prince of Wales and Mrs. Parker Bowles has been one of huge excitement and challenge — as well as one marked by moments of great sadness," Bolland said.
"It has been a privilege to serve both of them, and Princes William and Harry. I shall always look back on my time there with great affection."
New Remarriage Plans Could Hinder Charles' Nuptial Plans
10 FEBRUARY 2003
Church of England bishops have presented new guidelines for remarriage that may put a damper on any plans the Prince of Wales has to marry his longtime companion, Camilla Parker-Bowles.
The new ruling, which spells out seven conditions for remarriage, tells clergy to determine: "Was the relationship between the applicants – so far as you can tell from the information made available to you – a direct cause of the breakdown of the former marriage?". In Charles' case, his former wife, the late Princess Diana, publicly claimed the Prince's relationship with Camilla helped lead to the end of their marriage – a declaration that some say could now hinder any future wedding between the two.
A second question – "Would the new marriage be likely to be a cause of hostile public comment or scandal? – may also be an issue, as polls have shown the British public strongly divided on the issue of Camilla and Charles' relationship.
Though the high-profile couple now seems to be facing more obstacles amid growing talk of a trip to the altar, hellomagazine.com readers don't think a wedding is on the cards for 2003. In our recent survey, more than 70 per cent of on-line voters believe Charles won't pop the question this year.
Meanwhile, the Prince has been quietly aiding World War II hero Nancy Wake, the inspiration of the Cate Blanchett film Charlotte Gray. The Daily Mirror reports the 90-year-old Australian, who saved hundreds of British soldiers through her work with the French resistance, had sold her medals to support herself at a London hotel. Charles stepped in, helping to foot the £220-a-day bill. "I hope no-one thinks that I'm leaning on anyone," says Nancy, adding: "I think (Prince Charles) is wonderful."
Article From: Hello Magazine
Thanks for the article, Jacqueline. Do you think that Charles and Camilla should be allowed to marry and Charles retain his title, etc...?
Hi Julia! Very good question!
I have to admit that I don't see why either wants to marry when considering that they have both basically had the benefits of marriage without any of the legalities for such a long period of time. However, I guess that when Charles is to be King it would cause a entirely different issue in the media for him to continue to have a long-term girlfriend (well maybe). The media is so fickle sometimes. I think that now it is a rather moot point because he has yet to become King and no one really cares about it all that much. But, it's all a bit crazy, because this one issue may hinder them from ever marrying, so Camilla may simply have to become accustomed to being the King's girl whether certain members of the public like it or not.
If they don't get married, will Camilla act as his hostess only at private functions, while the Princess Royal acts as his official hostess?
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:46 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020