baldysblog.co.uk

An odd thing today, two drippy people trying to attack the Prince of Wales over his quite determined lobbying of Government Ministers on his pet interests by writing letters to them, frankly neither is worth reading, both write disconnected drivel but if you will, links as follows:

One Paul Richards,a professional Labour Lobbyist and very lightweight indeed: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6960833.ece

Andreas Whittam Smith who writes for the Independent, fuller in content by why did he write it ? http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/andreas-whittam-smith/andreas-whittam-smith-prince-charles-and-the-looming-constitutional-crisis-1844147.html

What Crisis ?

As the Prince of Wales has no direct power to exercise and as King would have no ability to speak out in public, what Constitutional Crisis ? What lies at the heart of this problem are two things that unite the vast majority of politicians and the Media, regardless of their political affiliations.

Most politicians resent the Monarchy because their (the Monarchy) position is inherited and they (the politicians) can’t have their titles and positions as a consequence. As the majority of politicians are ego centric asses, which is why all political careers end in failure, this is a cause of deep resentment for them, Thatcher was no better than the rest, apparently her and the Queen did not gel at all. As far as most politicians are concerned, like Victorian children, the Royal Family should be seen but not heard.

Although I don’t agree with all of the Prince’s views, given the lack lustre slack and totally self serving Government we have endured for these past 12 years, to have him act as an irritant to puncture their complacency is a joy. I suspect that he probably had to write more frequently than otherwise might have been the case due to the constant “Musical Chairs” of Ministers. As for sinking what was an awfully unimaginative design by the architect Richard Rogers for the Chelsea Barracks site, way to go Charlie, one more over inflated ego blown up !

From the Media of course, Prince Charles will never, ever be forgiven for the death of Diana which somehow must be his fault in some way – it robbed them of 40 percent of their output. It is quite touching to see the occasional tremor of “withdrawal symptoms” as even today, tabloid editors try to work a “Diana Angle” in somewhere.

The Reality

The likelihood of course is that if the Queen lives as long as her Mother, Prince Charles may never ascend the Throne because in another 17 years or so and providing Prince William is settled in a marriage, Prince Charles may well decide that it may be better that the Crown skips a generation. He is clearly a good father to his sons and having been a “King in Waiting” himself for so long may well decide that his son has a different fate. In addition, he clearly has a passion for many causes and may well decide that he would prefer to continue supporting those publicly rather than accept the constraints imposed by the role of Monarch.

He may be further aided in such a decision by a calculation that during his adult life he has often been unfairly derided for his ears, this and that by the Media. He may also take a view that in not ascending the Throne and therefore becoming “Supreme Governor” of The Church of England, he may remove a minor obstacle because of his second marriage to a divorcee, from the forward progress of the Anglican Church.

In addition, for the future of the Monarchy, a younger and quite popular Prince may be

Better Than a Republic

The Monarchy is a very odd and very British construct that works rather better for us in these Islands than any Presidency would and it is no accident that the Prime Minister of the day who holds all the Executive powers of Monarchs of old, is permanently denied being “Head of State”. People looking back to the Civil War and Oliver Cromwell often forget that for all his original intentions, Cromwell set his son up as his successor, like the De Montforts before, the lust for total power overcame him – one Crown to unite them all Golum ?

Our forefathers in Restoring the Monarchy were not foolish and let’s be honest, however much some may dislike Prince Charles, for me, he and Camilla seem far steadier people than say Tony and Cherie Blair as “President and First Lady” – Yucky !

An Objection

Having posted a comment to the Independent, I received a negative response from someone who is a Republican on those days they bother to get out of bed and decided to deal with them in the following way:

Response

The problem with all the “Republican Arguments” one ever sees is a lack of appreciation of “what exists” as well as the historical background. The problem with all “Thoroughly Modern Millys” is that they always imagine that the past has nothing to do with them, like teenagers discovering sex only they today know best.

The Russia of the Tsars, the Soviet Union and the Russia of Putin are little different, one to the other and the reason most likely is that many nations have a “destiny printed into their very DNA” which repeats the same patterns.

The position of the Monarchy in the UK, whilst curious is also a good example of a deliberate separation of ‘powers’ or ‘centres of influence’ that has historically been successful because it divides the concept of Nation from that of the Executive, the elected parliament and the political differences that represents. This is particularly important when you consider that Labour has held power for 12 years with an average of only 25 percent of the potential popular vote. The Monarch can appeal over and above the political disagreements in times of National Crisis as a unifying influence.

In the USA, they do things very differently and the same thing would not work in the UK. Whilst a President may be either a Democrat or a Republican, he is also the Commander in Chief and that is not only the rallying point but also, goes back to George Washington.

Needed Reforms

If you are really interested in reforming our Constitution, do not get side tracked as Labour has with reforming the Lords, a total nonsense when reform is needed most in the Commons and in particular by a distinct separation of powers between the Executive – Government and the Legislature – the Commons and to a lesser extent the Lords. It may amuse you to know that whilst this urgent requirement for reform has its origins in the Monarchy, it is how your elected officials have corrupted it which is the problem.

Consider the position of the Speaker of the House also known as the “First Commoner” because he was the interface between the Executive (King) and the Legislature (The Commons)but look what has happened.

Today the ‘King’ is the Prime Minister and with his ‘Court’ the Cabinet, sprawls on the Treasury Benches. As Labour demonstrated time and again plus the constant rise of the professional politician has overtaken those of independent minds, we in the UK may as well be living in a One Party Dictatorship. between elections we are no better off than the people of Zimbabwe even down to detention without trial.

In truth this situation has existed for generations but has only now become a problem because of people seeing being an MP as a career choice so that ‘service to the nation’ is now secondary to ‘getting on and developing a career’. How to fix this will not be easy, strengthening of Committees ? I don’t know but we now need it reformed – urgently, not the Monarchy.

One Response to “The Prince of Wales…”