Was Prince Charles right to make his views about the Rwanda plan widely known?

I should imagine that anyone with even the slightest interest in politics has an opinion on sending refugees to Rwanda, and as Prince Charles has shown over the years that he is aware of politics in the U.K. and abroad I would be more surprised if he didn’t have a view on this.

I am just fed up with the constant unnamed source, someone overheard etc., which is omnipresent in the news, news should be factual not akin to idle gossip

Agree Laura

I agree LauraNorder

I agree with you GG13. An unnamed source is a very annoying phrase. We don’t know if it’s true or not.

Of course the royal family have views on politics, but those in direct line to the throne are not supposed to make their political views known.

NO. Royals should stay out of politics no matter what their private feelings are. If they want to continue the Dynasty in years to come they should keep their thought and ideas to themselves.

My view is that this isn't politics. Its being British and upholding British values - you know, that thing that Royalists are so keen on, but can't really describe.

If he was commenting on a plan for taxes, or employment law, or building council houses, that's politics. But he is commenting on whether something is morally right. Something beyond "politics" that involves an inhuman treatment of people who we have decided are the bad guys for no other reason than for political capital and to pander to the more.... let's say "extreme" parts of the population.

A Head of State should not just be there to wave and have pretty children. They should be defending the character of this nation and trying to do something when the government are trying to break international law and ruin the reputation of this country.

I'm with him on this.

LauraNorderr

As a future monarch he is wrong to make his political views known.
As a human being and supposedly a Christian he is right to let it be known just how morally wrong this Rwanda policy is.
Surely he’s a human being first.

Yes, I completely agree.

The “wrong” here is from the person who leaked the comments. He should be able to express his views in private as we all are.,

Yammy

NO. Royals should stay out of politics no matter what their private feelings are. If they want to continue the Dynasty in years to come they should keep their thought and ideas to themselves.

What is the point of royals if they are not allowed to express their thoughts and ideas?

I wonder if some posters would be happier if the crown on a cushion were as animated as royalty ever got.

He didnt make it widely known it was a private conversation overheard, and broadcast by the media. Of course he has opinions, personally I don’t agree with many of them, Rwanda I do agree it is a bad idea.

I’m not a royalist but I’m actually pleased Charles had the b**lls to speak up about this inhumane situation (if he did indeed say it). He will become the king of this country soon. I would imagine he feels uncomfortable about ruling over a country that carries out ‘legalised people trafficking’. Perhaps, in the future, he’ll be a king who questions / challenges the PM during their weekly meetings. Interesting

It is the 'source', un-named naturally, who has made Prince Charles apparent views widely known.

It is interesting that some that are anti royal leaks, are happy enough about the royal leaks that disparage Meghan Markle. Not exactly impartial opinions.

Yes. It's not a political view, it's a morally decent view.

The Oprah interview wasn't a royal leak Gagajo.

I agree aonk his private conversations should remain private.

Smileless2012

The Oprah interview wasn't a royal leak Gagajo.

I agree aonk his private conversations should remain private.

I wasn't referring to the interview. I'm talking about 'sources from the palace say...'

* The incident with the bridesmaids. Leaked long before Ophrah.
* Leaks about MM bullying staff. Long before any court cases.
* Even the tiara leak.

Yes, to the original question. And since when is expressing an opinion 'interfering'?

?? On a par with Prince William choosing to sell the Big Issue on the street on the very day when the Prime Minister was announcing his crackpot housing 'policy' which will do nothing for the homeless.

He has said he won’t make political statements when he is King.

Well , he’s not king yet so go for it, Charles!

Riverwalk this subject is so so important that everyone should speak out even you
He s got a heart more than can be said of Patel who has forgotten conveniently her roots just like Trump forgot his family were all immigrants ….

and Nigel Farage can go and take a big old jump

Yes

It's pity that our monarchs are not allowed to provide moral leadership.

MaizieD

DiamondLily

No. Politicians are elected, royals are not. They should stay out of politics - whatever the subject.

We grans aren't elected, either. Do we have to stay out of politics?

By convention he was wrong to allow it to be 'leaked' (which he clearly must have done).

Naturally I agree with his view on Rwanda.

If he were actually king, would he be able to express this view in his regular audience with the PM?

Clarence House have clarified he doesn't have a view, and is neutral on the policy.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10906805/Prince-Charles-neutral-says-Clarence-House-amid-claims-called-Rwanda-deportations-appalling.html

The media. Making stuff up as it goes along. Had Prince Charles said this during an interview, fair enough. But someone has decided that a leak suggesting his disapproval of the Rwanda plan would be an OK thing to do. And it's not.

I would hazard a guess he's not best pleased with the idea. But we don't know.

I've just read an article where the BBC has had to apologise for saying that Anthony Gormley was binning his British passport due to Brexit. He has a British and German passport and is proud to be seen as a British citizen.

So much nonsense in MSM

Charles is to visit Rwanda shortly and is, rightly, concerned about the possible embarrassment of this policy.

Once again we have a 'well informed source' or a 'close friend' - it must be quite useful to put any lies on the front page, declaring in headlines that a member of the RF has said this. The RF never reply, wisely, as they would then be into a 'He said she said' situation that could go on for ever. I can't see how close friends would ever repeat what the PoW has said, especialy not to the press, and therefore dismiss it as a waste of newsprint.