"Shutting down" discussion

when

In the Mail Online Charles is reported as being "furious" that the documentary was pulled last night. It's said that archive material had been withheld and therefore the programme couldn't go ahead. Since it is also said that the programme makers were consulting with royal advisers throughout, it is surprising that the issue of archive material was not ironed out during that process. Anyway the matter has naturally proved quite controversial and Charles is washing his hands of any involvement.

Now that it has been realised that obstructing the airing of the programme has probably caused a good deal more damage to the image of the royal family than just letting it go ahead, I wouldn't be surprised if one or more advisers' "heads roll".

How amazing to find out about the thread being deleted. Andrew has always been a bit of a dubious creature hanging out with unsavory types and involved with shady businessmen. After the debacle of Diana from which they have finally recovered, the Royals must be terrified about this blowing into something big. Given the investigation into child abuse by senior politicians which looks like it is being frantically buried, you have to wonder about all these people in power.

I recently read Claire Balding's autobiog and there is a telling anecdote in there about the way Princess Anne behaved when Claire beat her in a race fair and square. Nasty pieces of work all the older set, whether the younger royals are any different remains to be seen though I think Diana did as good a job as possible under the circs.

What is really worrying is that CW apparently "interferes" in government by writing letters to various ministers. Now that I find concerning. This is a democratic country with a constitutional monarchy, largely underwritten in 1689. I am not aware of any change since then that suggests that the monarchy must express political opinions if it thinks they are of of "value" or benefit to Britain. This will never be a neutral position.

The monarchy MUST be neutral if they value their position.

To be seen to suppress freedom of speech is another issue on which the monarchy should never be involved, even where it may arguably be said it shows them in a poor light. Suppressing speech will do them far more harm, and will not be forgotten by the British public.

The more the Palace puts out about this the more I wonder what went on....... Me thinks thou dost protest too much ( or something like that!)

What a load of rubbish anniezzz that's not how it read at all.....Claire Balding rode so badly she nearly brought down Princess Anne's horse (fair and square?) and I think there was simply an exchange of words in the changing rooms afterwards. Stick to facts.

The issue regarding the suppression of 27 letters (the "black spider" memos) written by Charles to 7 different government departments has been rumbling on for several years.

In 2010, a Guardian journalist made an application under British Freedom of Information legislation to see these letters. The application was refused.

At a subsequent Freedom of Information Appeal Tribunal hearing in September 2010, a government adviser said that Charles regularly corresponded with ministers and these letters went "to the top of the pile". The hearing was adjourned for reasons that the panel "could not go into".

In September 2012 the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Upper Tribunal unanimously ruled that the letters should be published for reasons of public interest.

That decision was subsequently vetoed in October 2012 by the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, on the grounds that the letters would threaten Charles's politically neutral status.

In March 2014 the three judges of the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal ruled against the Attorney General's 2012 decision to block the publication of the letters, stating it was unlawful.

The Attorney General announced his decision to appeal that ruling and the Supreme Court heard the case on 24 and 25 November 2014.

The judgment of the Court is awaited. In effect, they will be deciding whether the Attorney General's argument that it is better to pretend Charles is impartial than to prove he is not should be upheld. What sort of madness is that! It will be interesting to see if the establishment (and that includes senior figures in all mainstream parties) has, yet again, been able to override the "public interest" in order to protect the royal family.

Not good is it? We shall see the outcome. However he has yet to ascend and once he does than he would be very unwise to carry on with his letters, we cannot tolerate a monarchy that overrides the democratic process.

well anya maybe we read what we want to. As I remember it, Claire Balding rode a perfectly good race, and in racing there are often bumps and scrapes and Princess A was furious and thought that Claire should have pulled back and let her have the race. If there is a problem, horse racing has stewards who will instantly investigate and make a judgement which will include awarding the race to someone else if they think there has been an unfairness. In this case, they didn't do this.

You are in no more charge of the 'facts' than I, so you don't need to be rude.

Having read the bit from Clare Balding's autobiography re the riding incident between her and Anne, it would seem to me that if Clare Balding's conduct had been considered dangerous or against the rules she would have been disqualified, but she was not.

The royals have a reputation for being haughty, rude and self-important - I suppose hardly surprising as they are constantly surrounded by fawning people who treat them like demi-gods. An elderly friend of mine, now deceased, who was awarded an MBE (I think) in the mid-70's was shocked at the way a prominent member of the royal family behaved during the lunch - lighting up between courses, blowing smoke everywhere and scattering ash over the tablecloth.

Whatever!

I'm with you Anya I think Anne was just reacting like any highly competitive sportsman and at the same time proving that she is the most normal of the lot of them. After all if she was really pulling rank I'm sure she could have got Clare disqualified

As far as Andrew is concerned A legal expert in the I today was saying that if they want to investigate, the Americans will not be browbeaten by the Palace.

Exactly Deedaa