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

No thanks!

Isn't that all a bit contrived?

You get the job because of who your mum is but if we don't like you, we vote you out?

Just vote somebody "in" in the first place.

In the hypothetical case that an unpopular individual become king by default then he can be deposed by democratic process.

But you say this as if it will automatically happen, it is only an accident of birth that Prince Andrew is not going to be King, would you be happy with his concepts of morality.

I see the danger, Galaxy.

The monarch is either an aristocrat or a king. Aristocrats may of course agree with the government, but a king must serve his subjects' welfare.

Would absolute monarchy work if the king got the job by virtue of primogeniture but could also be deposed by democratic vote?

Anniebach

grany nothing in your link confirms your claims that the royal family are racist,

There's none so blind as those who not see

Revelations from Guardian The household used to ban black and Asian immigrants from staff appointments.

The palace also successfully lobbied to be exempted from race laws that ban discrimination in the workplace.

So much for the royal family promoting race relations and strong links across the Commonwealth."

"To hear the Queen actively discriminated against black and Asian employees, and still has the freedom to do so, is shocking."

"These documents show the Queen had specifically lobbied for an exemption and was willing to withhold consent for the law to pass if it wasn't granted."*

And the law needs to be changed as soon as possible, to give palace staff the same protections as everyone else."

If that's not racism I don't know what is.

Then you give him the authority to agree with the government in this subject.

When politicians are in the politics industry to further their careers there is place for a monarch who has authority from mere primogeniture.

Anniebach

grany nothing in your link confirms your claims that the royal family are racist,

No, but it must be true because grany said it . . . Mustn’t it?

I'm sure she will. I'm sure she has had him wriggling on a hook on more than one occasion.
Should she be able to remove him from office? No.

Of course she shouldn't be able to remove him from office, nobody's suggesting that. (I think)

But she should have some say in him making this country an international law breaker. I don't care how "displeased" she is. If our government is breaking the law, the HoS needs to do something about it.

grany nothing in your link confirms your claims that the royal family are racist,

Hear, hear LauraNorderr.

This has reminded me of when, the day after the failed Scottish Independence Referendum, David Cameron publicly said that the Queen was "Purring down the phone" when he told her the result.

LauraNorderr

On reflection I do agree that our Head of State must appear to be apolitical in public, must not be seen to be supporting or opposing policy and thereby potentially influencing us politically. I sincerely hope that HM does express her displeasure to the PM during their private audience.
While Prince Charles is not Head of State I’m pleased to see that he is not afraid to give a stage whisper of disapproval of such a heinous policy and stand by my earlier comment that this is about humanity not politics.

I sincerely hope that HM does express her displeasure to the PM during their private audience.
I'm sure she will. I'm sure she has had him wriggling on a hook on more than one occasion.
Should she be able to remove him from office? No.

volver

What is supposed to happen when an elected Parliament pushes through legislation that is contrary to international law?

What is the point of an apolitical Head of State that allows that to happen?

We will protest and vote with our feet Volver.

On reflection I do agree that our Head of State must appear to be apolitical in public, must not be seen to be supporting or opposing policy and thereby potentially influencing us politically. I sincerely hope that HM does express her displeasure to the PM during their private audience.
While Prince Charles is not Head of State I’m pleased to see that he is not afraid to give a stage whisper of disapproval of such a heinous policy and stand by my earlier comment that this is about humanity not politics.

What is supposed to happen when an elected Parliament pushes through legislation that is contrary to international law?

What is the point of an apolitical Head of State that allows that to happen?

luluaugust

I wonder if Prince Charles has ever looked at Gransnet, he would be heartened by all the support I should think.
How awful to possibly have said something in private and find it all over the papers. Of course we don't actually know which bit of the plan was appalling.
The Queen Mother has been gone a long time now and her views were not uncommon, like it or not.

I think he knows and fully expected it to be made public.

He has already said that he knows full well that he could not express these views if he was H of S, which I am sure he would find very frustrating.

Our H of S is supposed to be apolitical.

In a monarchy, a king or queen is Head of State. The British Monarchy is known as a constitutional monarchy. This means that, while The Sovereign is Head of State, the ability to make and pass legislation resides with an elected Parliament.

The Queen's role in Government
As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.

It does not mean that Prince Charles has to remain neutral

LauraNorderr, thank you for making my day. Surely, being a humanitarian binds us all together, whatever our political persuasion - even PC.

Anniebach

They are not facing allegations of racism , please don’t lie

I am not lying

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/02/buckingham-palace-banned-ethnic-minorities-from-office-roles-papers-reveal

Exclusive: Documents also shed light on Queen’s ongoing exemption from race and sex discrimination laws

I think you have to divorce the issue from the fact you may agree with PC, which I do, it's not really the point. There are probably some issues I agree with Trump on, I imagine he says the world is round so I would agree with him on that, so what. PC expressing his views on this is utterly irrelevant to me, I hold it of no more importance than what Bob down the street says on the issue. The trouble is other people ascribe importance to the words of PC because of who he is.

Callistemon21

Is he wrong to speak out on what is essentially a humanitarian issue?

I don't think so. He is not the Sovereign.

I wonder what he thinks of foodbanks.

I think Maddyone has a point when she says^
If Charles involves himself in politics in the future, we may find ourselves on the road to being a republic which will suit me.^

Anniebach

Do post full facts of your allegations not something from your
republican sites.

Republican sites? ITV? Book by Tina Brown reviewed in the Independent?

There are allegations of racism. You don't believe them, I'm sure. But there are allegations of racism.

www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/rift-over-racism-claims-reignited-between-harry-and-meghan-and-the-

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/meghan-buckingham-palace-racism-allegations-b2063160.htmlqueen

Galaxy I thought the same, if he gave his opinion on abortion
on demand would this be acceptable

I wonder if Prince Charles has ever looked at Gransnet, he would be heartened by all the support I should think.
How awful to possibly have said something in private and find it all over the papers. Of course we don't actually know which bit of the plan was appalling.
The Queen Mother has been gone a long time now and her views were not uncommon, like it or not.