Lawyers acting for Prince Charles told the Court of Appeal yesterday that all identities of the ministers who received confidential letters from Prince Charles promoting his personal views must remain concealed…including the identity of all recipients.
Prince Charles is the first Monarch in British history to have been an assent benefactor and guardian of all three security services.
What we read today in the capital G Guardian is the result of that mutual patronage: an extraordinary deal between the Cameron Coalition and Prince Charles, scrambled through an unsuspecting Parliament under the Orwellian heading to a Royal Assent sub-clause, ‘Public appearances by the Royal Family’.
I first posted about the Royals looking for a higher level of personal privacy in May 2013. I’d love them to have more privacy from tabloid cameras, but then they’re quite happy to cooperate with the gutter press when it suits them – as Princess Diana and Charles demonstrated on many occasions during the later train-wreck stages of their marriage. What I don’t want is their desire for privacy to reach such dizzy heights that it becomes something above the Law. There’s enough people floating about up there as it is.
A further Slogpost in September 2013, I suggested that this was already a fact, observing….
‘….some new laws equally quietly passed to give our Royal Family an astonishing level of privacy from the eyes of the press. I sense that another kind of deal – not a big deal, but a quid pro quo deal – might have been done here. Prince Charles has been working along these lines for some time now – in particular, ingratiating himself with the security services, and getting clauses slotted into Royalty acts about less press intrusion. One HRH somewhere at the end of the Mall has traded some meaningless signatures (and potential future trouble) for some highly meaningful power to censor the press….’
In 2012, the extraordinarily ineffectual attorney general Dominic Grieve overrode an independent freedom of information tribunal – vetoing the publication of the Prince Charles letters referred to by the republican Guardian. In doing so, he had the full backing of the Camerlot Cabinet.
I posted In November 2012 about the relationship between Prince Andrew and paedophile pimp Jeffrey Epstein. Few dared go anywhere near it, but In November 2013, I tried to point out that the Windsor dynasty had already enjoyed over 70 years of suppression about the events of 1940, and the Nazi sympathiser the Duke of Wondsor….an illegal privilege far in excess of that applied to any other British family.
In today’s developments, the State has gone one further and refused to identify even the names of the recipients of the heir to the throne’s pearls of socio-ecological wisdom. The Royals can and will continue to hide behind this little legal instrument quietly slipped through during 2012….which, if we only had a grown-up Constitution, would be illegal.
To repeat several recent questions along the same lines here, WTF is the point of a Freedom of Information Act that denies freedom of access to the misdeeds of the privileged? George Orwell would’ve referred to the British FOI Act in action today as “nothing more than PR”.
I’d always thought that our one and only Civil War was fought to deny a Divine Right to monarchs. Just as with David Cameron’s class, this lot do seem to be genetically adept at kicking the can of inevitable history into the future.
Anyway my fellow Brits, we’re all in this together and it’s a level playing field of the Cloth of Gold, so let us now steel ourselves to our task such that people will call this period of our history The Swinest Hour.