"He is also alleged to have remarked that if hunting was banned, he might as well leave the country and spend the rest of his life skiing, according to the Guardian."
Charlie despises modernist architecture so that makes him ok in my book. I love the fact that he crapped all over Richard Rogers' vile designs for Chelsea! lol
Why am I not surprised? I doubt he likes any contemporary music either.
Actually, I love to hate Charles. Being a committed Republican, I think he is doing our job for us. I may not be a Monarchist, but I do respect the Queen. If we have to have a non-elected hereditary head of state, then I wish them to keep their opinions to themselves, smile and wave when appropriate, and ask people if they have come far, or what they do for a living.
Charles' is the complete opposite. His opinion is no more valid than mine, but we know what it is on virtually everything - and I disagree with him on virtually everything. I detest his views on architecture - his Poundbury theme park is the most hideous carbuncle I've ever seen.
The man is a complete and total arse. The Monarchy's popularity will sink when he finally gets his chance, which will be the most positive contribution he'll ever have made. Absolutely should his letters be published. If it compromises his future position then tough. He should have thought of that before trying to stick his unelected nose into the democratic process.
"He is also alleged to have remarked that if hunting was banned, he might as well leave the country and spend the rest of his life skiing, according to the Guardian."
I believe in democracy and full transparency in the process of implementing it,so I believe knowing about anyone in a position of power trying to influence policy is in the public interest. However if the letters are about private matters such as how he enjoyed dinner with the PM or how he is enjoying his marriage to Camilla then of course they should remain private!
The idea is that they're supposed to be politically neutral. So by publishing these letters aren't we setting a precedent now that this can no longer be the case for the royal family, and they're allowed an opinion now?
I think the concern is that by publishing them, we'll all know (as opposed to merely suspecting) that he's a meddling loon and this will damage what little credibility the monarchy has left.
Well to be quite honest what he wrote is very true in so many cases, so for all we know it was true of her .
Personally I don't see a problem with anyone writing to a Minister or MP, we are all entitled and to voice an opinion on a particular scheme does not to my mind have to mean you are not politically neutral, for instance an opinion on the Chelsea Barracks scheme was very much in line with what most people thought, it was a local and visual environment issue about a development , that's hardly the same as political interference.
Perhaps we should publish ALL letters to ministers after a year, it'll probably be hilarious reading letters from some of the nutters in this country which will probably include asking for badgers to get the vote etc.
Well to be quite honest what he wrote is very true in so many cases, so for all we know it was true of her .
Personally I don't see a problem with anyone writing to a Minister or MP, we are all entitled and to voice an opinion on a particular scheme does not to my mind have to mean you are not politically neutral, for instance an opinion on the Chelsea Barracks scheme was very much in line with what most people thought, it was a local and visual environment issue about a development , that's hardly the same as political interference.
No, he pressured the mayor, the council and the business's owners by using personal connections. He interfered in and attempted to subvert the planning process. It was absolutely political interference. A head of state is supposed to be politically neutral. As trevgo says, he might be a boon to republicanism.
Well to be quite honest what he wrote is very true in so many cases, so for all we know it was true of her .
Personally I don't see a problem with anyone writing to a Minister or MP, we are all entitled and to voice an opinion on a particular scheme does not to my mind have to mean you are not politically neutral, for instance an opinion on the Chelsea Barracks scheme was very much in line with what most people thought, it was a local and visual environment issue about a development , that's hardly the same as political interference.
It might well be true of her - the point is it's definitely true of him. He occupies his position because he was born. If he's so keen on people achieving things on merit perhaps he'd like to step down, give his enormous wealth away to charity and test himself in the real world. If not, he should have enough self-awareness to zip it on subjects that expose him to ridicule. What next, advice on how to live on a tight budget or a lecture on the importance of sexual fidelity?
Comments
Linky
What's this I hear? They work so hard? Devoted to their duties? If the quote is true, it's nice to see Chazza himself putting that one to bed.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/13/royals-public-scrutiny-prince-charles-letters?CMP=twt_gu
Why am I not surprised? I doubt he likes any contemporary music either.
Actually, I love to hate Charles. Being a committed Republican, I think he is doing our job for us. I may not be a Monarchist, but I do respect the Queen. If we have to have a non-elected hereditary head of state, then I wish them to keep their opinions to themselves, smile and wave when appropriate, and ask people if they have come far, or what they do for a living.
Charles' is the complete opposite. His opinion is no more valid than mine, but we know what it is on virtually everything - and I disagree with him on virtually everything. I detest his views on architecture - his Poundbury theme park is the most hideous carbuncle I've ever seen.
The man is a complete and total arse. The Monarchy's popularity will sink when he finally gets his chance, which will be the most positive contribution he'll ever have made. Absolutely should his letters be published. If it compromises his future position then tough. He should have thought of that before trying to stick his unelected nose into the democratic process.
But then we'd have Fred West's corpse as our head of state and the tourists would stop coming.
Spot on.
Alleged being the key word in that sentence.
I think the concern is that by publishing them, we'll all know (as opposed to merely suspecting) that he's a meddling loon and this will damage what little credibility the monarchy has left.
Well to be quite honest what he wrote is very true in so many cases, so for all we know it was true of her .
Personally I don't see a problem with anyone writing to a Minister or MP, we are all entitled and to voice an opinion on a particular scheme does not to my mind have to mean you are not politically neutral, for instance an opinion on the Chelsea Barracks scheme was very much in line with what most people thought, it was a local and visual environment issue about a development , that's hardly the same as political interference.
No, he pressured the mayor, the council and the business's owners by using personal connections. He interfered in and attempted to subvert the planning process. It was absolutely political interference. A head of state is supposed to be politically neutral. As trevgo says, he might be a boon to republicanism.
I totally don't care. There are far more important things to be watching politically right now and even those things have me yawning.
I think Charles and Putin should meet up and share their tips on self-importance.
That's right. That's why I said 'if the quote is true'.
It might well be true of her - the point is it's definitely true of him. He occupies his position because he was born. If he's so keen on people achieving things on merit perhaps he'd like to step down, give his enormous wealth away to charity and test himself in the real world. If not, he should have enough self-awareness to zip it on subjects that expose him to ridicule. What next, advice on how to live on a tight budget or a lecture on the importance of sexual fidelity?