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/commentisfree/2013/may/10/prince-charles-danger-democracy

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Prince Charles is a danger to democracy – even when I agree with him Prince Charles is a danger to democracy – even when I agree with him
(5 months later)
It is sometimes tempting, even for a republican like me, to applaud Prince Charles. Talking about climate change at a conference in London this week, he mocked "the Incorporated Society of Syndicated Sceptics and the International Association of Corporate Lobbyists", and urged politicians "to face down a storm of opposition from all sides". The risk was too great to wait for more scientific tests, he argued; like doctors treating a fever, politicians should "act on what is there". Well said, sir!It is sometimes tempting, even for a republican like me, to applaud Prince Charles. Talking about climate change at a conference in London this week, he mocked "the Incorporated Society of Syndicated Sceptics and the International Association of Corporate Lobbyists", and urged politicians "to face down a storm of opposition from all sides". The risk was too great to wait for more scientific tests, he argued; like doctors treating a fever, politicians should "act on what is there". Well said, sir!
But no matter how much you and I agree, the prince should have remained silent. True, global warming is accepted as a fact by every party in the Commons, and nearly all climate scientists think it no more controversial than the roundness of the planet. Charles, however, strays into areas of political dispute over what should be done. He is not even helping the green cause: he feeds the sceptics' paranoid belief that "warmists" have infiltrated the establishment, rather as Kim Philby and Anthony Blunt (the spy who became surveyor of the Queen's pictures) once did on behalf of Moscow.But no matter how much you and I agree, the prince should have remained silent. True, global warming is accepted as a fact by every party in the Commons, and nearly all climate scientists think it no more controversial than the roundness of the planet. Charles, however, strays into areas of political dispute over what should be done. He is not even helping the green cause: he feeds the sceptics' paranoid belief that "warmists" have infiltrated the establishment, rather as Kim Philby and Anthony Blunt (the spy who became surveyor of the Queen's pictures) once did on behalf of Moscow.
Charles's lack of judgment may explain why, though he will take over duties such as attending Commonwealth heads of government conferences, the Queen will not agree to either abdication or a regency. Twenty years of Charles on the throne would probably destroy the monarchy. Its justification is to provide a head of state above politics, as a symbol and focus of national unity. The Queen's views on almost everything are unknown. No doubt she sometimes expresses opinions to prime ministers, notably on the Commonwealth, of which she is head, and on widening social divisions, which could leave her without a national unity to symbolise. Crucially, however, a prime minister can be confident she will not repeat them publicly. Nor will she lobby or correspond with ministers.Charles's lack of judgment may explain why, though he will take over duties such as attending Commonwealth heads of government conferences, the Queen will not agree to either abdication or a regency. Twenty years of Charles on the throne would probably destroy the monarchy. Its justification is to provide a head of state above politics, as a symbol and focus of national unity. The Queen's views on almost everything are unknown. No doubt she sometimes expresses opinions to prime ministers, notably on the Commonwealth, of which she is head, and on widening social divisions, which could leave her without a national unity to symbolise. Crucially, however, a prime minister can be confident she will not repeat them publicly. Nor will she lobby or correspond with ministers.
With rare exceptions, the views of three of her children and all her grandchildren are also unknown, though Prince William once remarked that homelessness is a bad thing (causing a minor flurry in Mail and Telegraph columns), and was accused of lobbying David Cameron against privatisation of the RAF's search-and-rescue operation. Prince Philip seems to carry around a bundle of golf club-style prejudices, some bordering on racism. But he isn't in line of succession to the throne. Only Charles treats us to extended homilies on a range of contentious subjects.With rare exceptions, the views of three of her children and all her grandchildren are also unknown, though Prince William once remarked that homelessness is a bad thing (causing a minor flurry in Mail and Telegraph columns), and was accused of lobbying David Cameron against privatisation of the RAF's search-and-rescue operation. Prince Philip seems to carry around a bundle of golf club-style prejudices, some bordering on racism. But he isn't in line of succession to the throne. Only Charles treats us to extended homilies on a range of contentious subjects.
His support for alternative medicine has allegedly influenced its limited availability in the NHS and relaxation of regulations on labelling of herbal medicines. His views on building design led distinguished architects, including Richard Rogers and Norman Foster, to denounce his interventions as subverting the "open and democratic planning process" and a high court judge to call them "unexpected and unwelcome". His traditionalist views on education led him to set up the Prince's Teaching Institute which promotes "the importance of in-depth subject knowledge". The Daily Mail hails it as "a fightback against trendy teaching methods".His support for alternative medicine has allegedly influenced its limited availability in the NHS and relaxation of regulations on labelling of herbal medicines. His views on building design led distinguished architects, including Richard Rogers and Norman Foster, to denounce his interventions as subverting the "open and democratic planning process" and a high court judge to call them "unexpected and unwelcome". His traditionalist views on education led him to set up the Prince's Teaching Institute which promotes "the importance of in-depth subject knowledge". The Daily Mail hails it as "a fightback against trendy teaching methods".
One cannot pick and choose the prince's interventions, applaud ing him on climate change while denouncing his "improper" influence on architecture or schooling. He is clearly not neutral on several controversial subjects and will not be seen as neutral if and when he becomes head of state. Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, admitted as much when, in a ruling now being challenged in the high court, he vetoed a Guardian application to see letters the prince wrote to ministers. It would, Grieve said, damage Charles's ability to perform his duties as king. Charles is a dangerously divisive figure – not because he may destroy the monarchy (which I would welcome), but because he threatens an already fragile public confidence in democracy.One cannot pick and choose the prince's interventions, applaud ing him on climate change while denouncing his "improper" influence on architecture or schooling. He is clearly not neutral on several controversial subjects and will not be seen as neutral if and when he becomes head of state. Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, admitted as much when, in a ruling now being challenged in the high court, he vetoed a Guardian application to see letters the prince wrote to ministers. It would, Grieve said, damage Charles's ability to perform his duties as king. Charles is a dangerously divisive figure – not because he may destroy the monarchy (which I would welcome), but because he threatens an already fragile public confidence in democracy.
No mother wishes to outlive her child. It would be wrong therefore to suggest the Queen hopes Charles will die before he inherits the throne. But she may calculate that, if she hangs on, he will have reached an age where he can be regarded as a harmless irrelevance and his reign, like that of Edward VII after Queen Victoria, as a mere interlude.No mother wishes to outlive her child. It would be wrong therefore to suggest the Queen hopes Charles will die before he inherits the throne. But she may calculate that, if she hangs on, he will have reached an age where he can be regarded as a harmless irrelevance and his reign, like that of Edward VII after Queen Victoria, as a mere interlude.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.