This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/17/prince-pen-democracy
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| The prince, his pen and democracy | The prince, his pen and democracy |
| (10 days later) | |
| The attorney general's feeble attempt to justify his decision to block the disclosure of Prince Charles's confidential letters to ministers is couched in the view that "disclosure of the correspondence could damage the Prince of Wales's ability to perform his duties when he becomes king" and that "it is a matter of the highest importance within our constitutional framework that the monarch is a politically neutral figure able to engage in confidence with the government of the day, whatever its political colour" (Report, 17 October). This allows the conclusion that the substance of the letters and the monarch's political neutrality have not been reconciled, at least on this occasion. Either the letters have not breached the monarch's political neutrality – in which case they must be released – or they have, and this incident makes yet again a powerful case for the establishment of a republic. Charles and the coalition government cannot have their cake and eat it. Dr Dionyssis Dimitrakopoulos Department of politics, Birkbeck College, University of London | The attorney general's feeble attempt to justify his decision to block the disclosure of Prince Charles's confidential letters to ministers is couched in the view that "disclosure of the correspondence could damage the Prince of Wales's ability to perform his duties when he becomes king" and that "it is a matter of the highest importance within our constitutional framework that the monarch is a politically neutral figure able to engage in confidence with the government of the day, whatever its political colour" (Report, 17 October). This allows the conclusion that the substance of the letters and the monarch's political neutrality have not been reconciled, at least on this occasion. Either the letters have not breached the monarch's political neutrality – in which case they must be released – or they have, and this incident makes yet again a powerful case for the establishment of a republic. Charles and the coalition government cannot have their cake and eat it. Dr Dionyssis Dimitrakopoulos Department of politics, Birkbeck College, University of London |
| • It seems that Charles is in effect serving a (very long) apprenticeship for his future role. Would it not be more productive if he first discussed these matters with his mother, who could guide him with the benefit of her long experience? This might lead to fewer of his letters being sent to ministers. In turn this should lead to less time being wasted by the various ministers and their staff dealing with his inquiries. Roy McGregor Whitley Bay, Tyne and Wear | • It seems that Charles is in effect serving a (very long) apprenticeship for his future role. Would it not be more productive if he first discussed these matters with his mother, who could guide him with the benefit of her long experience? This might lead to fewer of his letters being sent to ministers. In turn this should lead to less time being wasted by the various ministers and their staff dealing with his inquiries. Roy McGregor Whitley Bay, Tyne and Wear |
| • Isn't the attorney general simply allowing Charles to indulge in what social psychologists term "illusory superiority"? Many of us are probably guilty of this unbalanced view of ourselves and of our "fantastic" importance to the world, but few of us have access to and/or influence on the highest levels of government. Charles's best friend really needs to talk to him, sooner rather than later. Bruce Ross-Smith Oxford | • Isn't the attorney general simply allowing Charles to indulge in what social psychologists term "illusory superiority"? Many of us are probably guilty of this unbalanced view of ourselves and of our "fantastic" importance to the world, but few of us have access to and/or influence on the highest levels of government. Charles's best friend really needs to talk to him, sooner rather than later. Bruce Ross-Smith Oxford |
| • Your editorial reflects that Prince Charles's letters to government ministers are "self-interested and often reactionary" (A right royal cover-up, 17 October). But how do we know the tenor and tone of the letters when the attorney general refuses to release them for public perusal? | • Your editorial reflects that Prince Charles's letters to government ministers are "self-interested and often reactionary" (A right royal cover-up, 17 October). But how do we know the tenor and tone of the letters when the attorney general refuses to release them for public perusal? |
| Whether Charles should be writing to ministers expressing his personal views on political matters is a fair question. But we can't have it both ways. The monarchy has shown every sign of responding to the public's call to modernise and be more like the rest of us. We should therefore expect and welcome the prince's interventions as a true sign of healthy public engagement and his concern for issues that concern all citizens. A mature democracy is surely able to cope with the well-meaning rants of the heir to the throne. And when it comes to the environment, Charles is frequently right. Nick Reeves Executive director, Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management | Whether Charles should be writing to ministers expressing his personal views on political matters is a fair question. But we can't have it both ways. The monarchy has shown every sign of responding to the public's call to modernise and be more like the rest of us. We should therefore expect and welcome the prince's interventions as a true sign of healthy public engagement and his concern for issues that concern all citizens. A mature democracy is surely able to cope with the well-meaning rants of the heir to the throne. And when it comes to the environment, Charles is frequently right. Nick Reeves Executive director, Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management |
| • It is not the letters' publication that, in Dominic Grieve's words "would potentially undermine [Charles's] position of political neutrality", but the actions of Charles himself. His reportedly inappropriate, self-serving meddling is a world away from the disinterested and mature advice of a monarch to a prime minister, and to suggest that these letters are a legitimate part of Charles's "preparation for kingship" is to misrepresent the monarch's constitutional role. | • It is not the letters' publication that, in Dominic Grieve's words "would potentially undermine [Charles's] position of political neutrality", but the actions of Charles himself. His reportedly inappropriate, self-serving meddling is a world away from the disinterested and mature advice of a monarch to a prime minister, and to suggest that these letters are a legitimate part of Charles's "preparation for kingship" is to misrepresent the monarch's constitutional role. |
| Publication of the letters might bring home to his future "subjects" how ill-prepared the heir is for accession and stimulate some corrective action. No other European monarchy would expect or receive the deference implicit in the attorney general's decision, and it is high time the medieval cobwebs obscuring ours were swept aside. Robin Gill Oxford | Publication of the letters might bring home to his future "subjects" how ill-prepared the heir is for accession and stimulate some corrective action. No other European monarchy would expect or receive the deference implicit in the attorney general's decision, and it is high time the medieval cobwebs obscuring ours were swept aside. Robin Gill Oxford |
| • There's something very British about leaving it to our imaginations to guess what the letters were like. The reality would surely be as banal as Camillagate. Zander Wedderburn Edinburgh | • There's something very British about leaving it to our imaginations to guess what the letters were like. The reality would surely be as banal as Camillagate. Zander Wedderburn Edinburgh |
| • An admirable editorial. But should we now address letters to the Guardian, c/o the Tower of London? Brian Clayden Bradwell-on-Sea, Essex | • An admirable editorial. But should we now address letters to the Guardian, c/o the Tower of London? Brian Clayden Bradwell-on-Sea, Essex |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |