23 February, 2006 | Leave a Comment
Prince Charles has really stepped in it – again. And this is even worse than the audio tape where he wished he was Camilla’s tampon.
Charles is currently in the middle of a court battle with The Mail on Sunday newspaper. The paper is in possession of a 3,000-word diary, written by Charles during a 14-hour flight from Hong Kong to London after the handover to the Chinese in 1997. Charles wants to keep the diary private, obviously, but his tactic of taking the paper to court has really backfired. Yesterday the High Court judge released the document to the press. Oops.
On the bright side, now we all get to read it. Yippee!
Charles titled his document The Handover of Hong Kong or the Great Chinese Takeaway. (Takeaway is Britspeak for restaurant take-out.) CHEEKY! On the whole, Charles doesn’t show himself to be much of a writer or thinker. He is good at whining and feeling sorry for himself though. He insults Tony and Cherie Blair and refers to the Chinese leadership as “old waxworks.”
One of the highlights involves Charles’s realization that airplane seats – aside from those in First Class – are not comfy. The British delegation flew to Hong Kong on a chartered British Airways 747. Charles was seated on the top deck of the plane, in what is Club Class, not First Class. And his royal ass was not pleased: “It took me some time to realise that this was not first class(!) although it puzzled me as to why the seat seemed so uncomfortable.” Charles then ranted that many other officials were seated downstairs in First Class. He wrote: “Such is the end of Empire, I sighed to myself.”
During this ongoing scandal, it has been revealed that Charles regularly tries to intervene in governmental matters, which he is apparently not allowed to do. Tony Blair and company have been humouring him while at the same time ignoring him. According to Peter Riddell of the Times, “They have been infuriated by the Prince’s activities which they have regarded as an abuse of his privileged position, as well as using up a lot of their time.” Charles’s “highly controversial interventions” are worrying members of the Establishment, who fear what might happen when he becomes King.
From the Times: “The danger is that, as King, the Prince will stumble into partisan disputes, becoming identified with one side or another. That could be fatal to the monarchy as an institution. The official hope is that there is still time to wean the Prince off controversy and towards the more discreet role performed by the Queen for 54 years.”
As a result of all of this, a few politicians have really ripped into Charles. A few select quotes from the Times:
Stephen Pound, Labour MP: “If he wants to be a political Head of State, fine — he can stand for election. But if he wants all the benefits of the divine right of kingship then he should not get involved in politics. We have a constitutional settlement in this country. We pay for him to have someone to squeeze his toothpaste on to his brush in the morning and he stays out of politics — that’s the deal.”
Dr. Ian Gibson, Labour MP: “What does he know about life. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he has become a man who takes advice from his focus group of scientific advisers who advise him about grey goo. The public know more than he does.”
Paul Flynn, Labour MP: His actions are suicidal. The only reason why the monarchy and the Queen are successful is that she has kept out of all political decisions and the only way it can continue to survive as an institution is if the monarchy is seen to be above politics.
“If he is going to find it irresistible to interfere in politics — sometimes on the side of sense, sometimes on the side of nonsense — then the monarchy would be in grave peril with him as head of state. It would collapse.”
Anglofille said @ 2:01 pm | london & uk, news & politics |
- Comments RSS | TrackBack URI
-
yeah - I just find it hysterical that he has the cheek to call them waxworks
-
You’ve opened up another angle on this for me. I hadn’t really followed the story other than to think “a private diary is private” but actually all this hullaballo could work in my (our?) favour.
If Charlie-boy carries on carrying on and gets himself (and in turn, the monarchy) into such a pickle as suggested by those MPs, then the whole process of doing away with the monarchy may be nicely expedited.
In his attempts to show himself in the funky-groovy light that he clearly sees himself, he could inadvertantly bring everything crashing down around his knees.
The whole concept of monarchy is one I find utterly repugnant…
-
Anglofille Says:
February 24th, 2006 at 1:04 pmI didn’t realize that MPs spoke out so harshly against the royal family. That was surprising!
Before I came to London for school, I thought the royal family was mildly amusing. But since I’ve been here, the whole concept of having a queen or king just seems ridiculous. As an American, I guess it’s really none of my business…
-
Surprising in a nice way though, eh?
Oddly enough, as an American it probably is your business. Without the apparent American thirst for British Royalty, I reckon the argument about their ‘value’ to the nation would be a lot weaker. There’s a school of thought that says we shouldn’t begrudge them as they do so much globally for the profile of the British nation and so when all’s said and done they only cost the British Tax-payer pennies over the course of a year. Although anyone with half a brain can see the redundancy of that one.
It’s absurd that some of my money (how much is neither here nor there) is used to enable Prince bloody Charlie to actually notice, let alone decry the difference between business and first class. I’ve never been in either.
-
Anglofille Says:
February 24th, 2006 at 5:58 pmI have heard the same justification about the royals, and how they are essential to British tourism and image abroad. Americans are fascinated by the royals, but since Diana’s death, the fever has died down significantly.
I don’t think anyone in the States even cared when Charles and Camilla visited recently. Actually, I think many Americans are shocked at how the British public has accepted Camilla, who is a real villain to many in America. Conspiracy theories surrounding Diana’s “accident” are quite popular and prevelant in the US. So maybe the American disinterest in the royals will help your cause.
