Archives for posts with tag: Prince Charles

Surely not indeed, would friends or associates of Prince Charles do any of this. Surely they would not get pleasure from seeing animals being attacked and torn apart by other animals.

Just as Prince Charles and his family members would not just shoot and kill wild animals for pleasure and trophies.

Surely not.

Pride's Purge

Fox hunters are not the well-dressed, refined people some think they are.

The real fox hunters are basically little more than thugs; trespassing on and destroying people’s property, torturing their own hounds and and clubbing puppies to death, riding roughshod over ancient protected areas and punching pensioners in the face:

Not to mention enjoying watching beautiful animals being torn apart while still alive for ‘pleasure’.

In a latest example of their thuggish barbarity, a man out walking his dogs was attacked by hunters and hounds from the Mendip Farmers Hunt, resulting in horrific injuries to both of his dogs:

But according to the local police, the thuggish attack will not even be investigated.

Could the reluctance from local police to react to this crime be connected in any way to the fact that a leading member of the hunt is Alastair Martin, the Secretary of the Duchy…

View original post 23 more words

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series, concluding today. (Click on these links for Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4 and Part 5). Just a visitor to Australia? Interpretations of the events of 11 November, forty…

Source: King Charles III (part 6) – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series. (Click on these links for Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4). Charles of Arabia Prince Charles entered the Royal Air Force College Cranwell, a thriving R.A.F. Station in…

Source: King Charles III (part 5) – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series. (Click on these links for Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3). Prince Charles, ‘the dove’ and ‘the peace’ For the past fifty years, at least, the United Kingdom has been…

Source: King Charles III (part 4) – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series. (You can read Part 1 and Part 2 here). A real ‘Charlie’ For too long the Prince of Wales has shown himself too vain to accept the limits of constitutional monarchy, perhaps…

Source: King Charles III (part 3) – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series. (You can read Part 1 here). The local scene Everything was going so well, but a new poll released by the Australian Republican Movement carries a blunt message from Australian voters:…

Source: King Charles III (part 2) – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Charles will one day be our king. But is he fit for the role? Dr George Venturini explores this question in this six-part series. Last November, Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, arrived in Australia to be feted again by crowds while sampling the fine local wines, cheeses and seafood at South…

Source: King Charles III – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Original post from The Guardian

‘…………..By  and

Publication of 27 letters after 10-year legal battle shows heir to the throne petitioning ministers on subjects from the Iraq war to alternative therapies

Prince Charles’s 27 memos to ministers show his attempts to influence government policy. Photograph: AFP/Getty/Guardian

Prince Charles’s 27 memos to ministers show his attempts to influence government policy. Photograph: AFP/Getty/Guardian

A cache of secret memos between Prince Charles and senior government ministers has been released after a 10-year legal battle, offering the clearest picture yet of the breadth and depth of the heir to the throne’s lobbying at the highest level of politics.

The 27 memos, sent in 2004 and 2005 and released only after the Guardian won its long freedom of information fight with the government, show the Prince of Wales making direct and persistent policy demands to the then prime minister Tony Blair and several key figures in his Labour government.

From Blair, Charles demanded everything from urgent action to improve equipment for troops fighting in Iraq to the availability of alternative herbal medicines in the UK, a pet cause of the prince.

In a single letter in February 2005, he urged a badger cull to prevent the spread of bovine tuberculosis – damning its opponents as “intellectually dishonest”; lobbied for his preferred person to be appointed to crack down on the mistreatment of farmers by supermarkets; proposed his own aide to brief Downing Street on the design of new hospitals; and urged Blair to tackle a European Union directive limiting the use of herbal alternative medicines use in the UK.

The government has spent more than £400,000 on legal costs in its ultimately failed attempt to block the original 2005 freedom of information request by the Guardian journalist Rob Evans. The case was eventually decided at the supreme court and the decade-long saga involved in total 16 different judges.

David Cameron’s last government attempted to veto the release. In 2012 the then attorney general, Dominic Grieve, warned they “would be seriously damaging to his role as future monarch because, if he forfeits his position of political neutrality as heir to the throne, he cannot easily recover it when he is king”.

But following the release of the “black spider” memos – so-called because of the prince’s scrawled handwriting – there were questions on Wednesday about whether it was worth the money to try to keep secret details of his lobbying, some of which reflects Charles’s very narrow personal interests.

For example, in October 2004 he told the environment minister Elliot Morley he hoped “illegal fishing of the Patagonian toothfish will be high up on your list of priorities because until that trade is stopped, there is little hope for the poor old albatross”.

But they also cover more controversial subjects. In one memo, Charles explicitly lobbied Tony Blair when he was prime minister to replace Lynx military helicopters.

Charles complained that delays in their replacement was “one more example where our Armed forces are being asked to do an extremely challenging job (particularly in Iraq) without the necessary resources”. Blair responded that replacement would be a priority for spending.

He directly urged the health secretary, John Reid, to accelerate redevelopment at a hospital site in Sunderland in which his own architecture charity was involved, warning bluntly that “chickens will come home to roost” in Reid’s government department if action was not taken.

The letters revealed not only that ministers often responded actively to his suggestions but they appeared to hold his interventions in high regard.

Blair replied to him in one letter: “I always value and look forward to your views – but perhaps particularly on agricultural topics.”

After Charles Clarke, then education secretary, responded to Charles’ complaint about the nutritional content of school meals, he signed off: “I have the honour to be, Sir, Your Royal Highness’s most humble and obedient servant.”

The memos also reveal how dogged Charles can be in demanding actions from ministers as it emerged that his engagement with key political players has not abated. Since the beginning of 2010, the prince held 87 meetings with ministers, opposition party leaders and top government officials, new figures release by the campaign group Republic showed. This year he has held meetings with, among others, David Cameron, the Scottish National party leader, Nicola Sturgeon, the education secretary, Nicky Morgan, and Alistair Carmichael, then Scotland secretary.

The letters emerged amid growing signs that Prince Charles is planning to rule in a far more outspoken way than the taciturn Queen. Allies told the Guardian last year he planned “heartfelt interventions” in national life, while in 2013 his friend and biographer Jonathan Dimbleby said: “A quiet constitutional revolution is afoot.”

But this is likely to be the only glimpse the British public gets of Charles’ correspondence with ministers. Since the original Guardian request to see the letters the government has tightened up the Freedom of Information Act to provide an “absolute exemption” on all requests relating to the Queen and the heir to the throne.

Paul Flynn, a Labour MP and member of the political and constitutional reform committee, said the letters lifted the lid on the activity of the “the lobbyist supreme in the land”.

“They show he is putting forward a whole variety of views – including many bad science views and others that should have no more weight than the man down the pub,” he said. “We can see his views were given a seriousness and priority they did not deserve.”

Prince Charles was said to be “disappointed” the principle of confidentiality had not been maintained, and his spokeswoman said publication “can only inhibit his ability to express the concerns and suggestions which have been put to him in the course of his travels and meetings”.

But aides argue the letters do not show the prince engaging in matters of party political contention, implying they do not breach the principle of political neutrality.

“The letters published by the government show the Prince of Wales expressing concern about issues that he has raised in public,” his spokeswoman said. “In all these cases, the Prince of Wales is raising issues of public concern, and trying to find practical ways to address the issues.”

But the Guardian’s editor-in-chief, Alan Rusbridger, said: “We fought this case because we believed – and the most senior judges in the country agreed – that the royal family should operate to the same degrees of transparency as anyone else trying to make their influence felt in public life. The attorney general, in trying to block the letters, said their contents could ‘seriously damage’ perceptions of the prince’s political neutrality.

“Whatever the rights and wrongs of that assessment, it is shocking that the government wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money trying to prevent their publication. Now, after 10 years, we are pleased to be able to share the contents of his correspondence and let people draw their own conclusions.”

Graham Smith, chief executive of Republic, which campaigns for an elected head of state, said: “These letters are only a small indication of widespread lobbying that’s been going on for years. We now need full disclosure and an assessment of his impact on government policy.”

Maurice Frankel, director of the UK Campaign for Freedom of Information, said: “The release of the Charles memos represents a major victory for the freedom of information process, showing that ministers cannot block disclosure simply because they don’t like the result.”

Michael Meacher, a former Labour environment secretary who received private letters from Charles about policy, called for a new system of transparency around his correspondence with ministers when he becomes king to “remove public suspicion from the process”.

“A brief statement would be made when the king has written to a minister and the subject would be obvious,” he said. “At least we would know he has been giving his opinions and, some would say, lobbying ministers.”

Original post from Daily Mail


  • Majority of British public doesn’t want to Camilla to be Queen, poll reveals 
  • Nation is completely split on whether Prince Charles should become king 
  • Princes William and Harry are the most popular members of royal family 
  • Prince Andrew languishes at the bottom of the popularity table

A majority of the public does not want Camilla to become queen if Prince Charles succeeds to the throne, a poll for the Daily Mail reveals today.

And the nation is completely split on whether Charles should become king at all.

Only 43 per cent believe he should ascend to the throne compared with an almost identical number saying he should stand aside in favour of his elder son Prince William.

William and Prince Harry are the most popular members of the Royal Family, closely followed by the Queen and the Duchess of Cambridge.

Scroll down for video 

Four out of ten people think Prince Charles should give up his right to be king so the crown passes straight to William (pictured with his wife, the Duchess of Cambridge)

Prince Andrew languishes at the bottom of the popularity table, with his brother Edward not far ahead. Camilla and Andrew are the only two royals who are more disliked than liked, according to the poll.

Despite courtiers’ efforts to have Camilla accepted into the nation’s hearts, 55 per cent are against the Duchess of Cornwall becoming queen when her husband becomes king.

This is down from 73 per cent opposition at the time of her wedding to Charles in April 2005, but shows she has yet to win over most of the country.

However, she is no longer regarded as the main culprit for the break-up of Charles’s marriage to Princess Diana. The prince himself is held most to blame by 39 per cent, followed by Diana on 13 per cent and Camilla on 12 per cent.

There is still great affection for Diana, who died in a Paris car crash 18 years ago, with a substantial majority saying she would have made a better queen than Camilla.

Intriguingly, the younger generation is most attached to her even though many of them were not old enough to remember her when she was alive. Among 18 to 24-year-olds, two out of three would have preferred Diana to be queen, while only 3 per cent backed Camilla.

Charles’s wedding to Camilla divided the country at the time, and ten years on people remain uncertain about its wider significance for the Royal Family. Fifteen per cent said the marriage had strengthened the monarchy but 24 per cent believed it had weakened it; just over half felt it had no impact.

Camilla, 67, was once reviled as the woman whose love affair with Charles, 66, destroyed his relationship with Diana, who was 36 when she died in 1997.


Prince William and his son George

Four out of ten people say Prince Charles should give up his right to be king so the crown passes straight to William.

Britain is evenly split on the question of whether Charles should succeed to the throne when the Queen dies, the poll reveals.

William has the female vote, with 43 per cent of women saying he should be the next monarch compared to 37 per cent of men.

Young people are also much more likely to favour the Duke of Cambridge as king, with 53 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds urging his father to step aside.

But 43 per cent of the public back Charles to take over from his mother, with a clear majority of over-55s wanting him as Britain’s next monarch.

The findings suggest that support for the Prince of Wales to wear the crown may actually have dipped slightly in the past decade.

In 2005 a survey found that 53 per cent of people thought he should be king despite his marriage to Camilla, and 43 per cent said he should not.

The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall outside St George's Chapel, Windsor after their civil wedding in 2004

Senior officials at Clarence House have nurtured the duchess’s image with carefully chosen public appearances. She has won widespread praise for her charity work, dedication to attending royal functions around the country and emergence as a style icon for older women.

The Duchess of Cornwall is patron or president of 85 charities, and has undertaken nearly 1,700 royal engagements in Britain and more than 600 abroad since 2005.

Yet the survey reveals how Camilla’s past continues to affect how she is perceived. Just over a third said they had grown to like her more over the past decade, and nearly two-thirds thought Charles was happier with her than he ever was with Diana.

Prince Andew languishes at the bottom of the popularity table

But only a quarter felt the Duchess of Cornwall had been a good influence on the Royal Family, and a similar proportion argued that her marriage to the prince had ‘stained’ the royals’ reputation.

Four in ten say Charles should give up his right to be king so the crown passes straight to William. Among those aged 18 to 24, that figure rises to 53 per cent.

But overall 43 per cent of the public back Charles to take over from his mother, with a clear majority of over-55s wanting him as the next monarch.

Support for the monarchy itself remains very high, with the 88-year-old Queen and the younger royals – William, Harry and Kate – hugely popular.

By contrast, Prince Andrew was least popular, with only 30 per cent liking him. Charles, Prince Philip and Princess Anne were ranked in the middle.

Only 19 per cent would back turning Britain into a republic, although the figure rises to 36 per cent in Scotland, perhaps a by-product of the SNP’s unsuccessful independence campaign last year. Charles, who is said to favour a ‘slimmed down’ monarchy, will be buoyed by the finding that 56 per believe that the royals should be reduced to the Queen’s immediate family only.

By law Camilla will automatically become Queen Consort when Charles is king, but privately officials continue to debate whether she should use a lesser title to avoid controversy.

The official position has been that she intends to be known as Princess Consort, but in recent years Camilla and Charles have dropped a number of hints that they would like her to be queen.

Asked in 2010 whether his wife would take the title, Charles replied: ‘We’ll see, won’t we? That could be.’

The duchess herself says ‘You never know’ when she faces questions about whether she will become queen.

Nearly two-thirds of people thought Charles was happier with Camilla than he ever was with Diana (pictured)


Princes William and Harry are the most popular members of the royal family, the survey found.

Nearly eight out of ten people said they ‘liked’ the princes, with the Duchess of Cambridge and the Queen receiving similarly high ratings.

Women were significantly more likely to approve of the younger royals – 84 per cent said they were fans of Prince Harry compared to 75 per cent of men.

By contrast, Prince Andrew was the least popular of the royals, with only 30 per cent of respondents saying they liked him.

Prince Charles, his father Prince Philip and his sister Princess Anne were ranked in the middle.

Camilla divided opinions most sharply. Thirty-four per cent of people said they liked her, but 38 per cent disliked her.

The survey did not ask people what they thought of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s son Prince George, who is now nearly two.

Princes William and Harry are the most popular members of the royal family



Gin & Lemonade

...with a twist.

Free to express

thoughts, experiences, travel, feelings, stories, diaries and many more...

Brainwashing in ISLAM

Brainwashing in Islam ​ - মগজ ধোলাই ​


This is a Kiracracy

Perfectly Peter

A family's journey through autism

Midtown Psychiatry and TMS Center

Midtown Psychiatry and TMS Center provides an integrative treatment experience for those with mental illness. We look at both medication and non-medication choices in creating the most effective treatment plan available. Call us at 713-426-3100 or visit

The Shameful Sheep

shit storms, shame, and stories that make you cringe

Borderline Bella

Exploring Borderline Personality Disorder

Mind the care training

Straightforward social care training


The new home of DWPexamination...


I refuse to be fat forever

Disability Eye

Life, Stories, News and Challenges of living in the UK with a disability.


HNC/HND Health and Social Care level 4

Black Leadership Analysis

This is an unofficial Spiral Dynamics blog. It is not endorsed by D. Beck PhD.

%d bloggers like this: