David Cameron & Prince Charles
These days the British Monarchy are often under close scrutiny. Gone are the "off with their heads" days of old when ordinary folk were prepared to tug their forelocks and let their so called betters get away with murder.
That said this ruling class still enjoy more privileges than many people are aware off.
For instance, what do you know of Prince Charles and the Consent laws?
Well if you were like this writer the answer will be little. However, as the media today has reported that Downing Street currently has no plans to amend or repeal these laws, it has highlighted an outdated and possibly costly tradition.
That said this ruling class still enjoy more privileges than many people are aware off.
For instance, what do you know of Prince Charles and the Consent laws?
Well if you were like this writer the answer will be little. However, as the media today has reported that Downing Street currently has no plans to amend or repeal these laws, it has highlighted an outdated and possibly costly tradition.
The current consent laws require the government to seek Prince Charles's permission to pass legislation which could affect his private interests. Clarence House, on behalf of the Prince, has said that this is a "long-standing convention" which has nothing to do with seeking his approval or personal beliefs.
Recently the Guardian has reported that the government had consulted the Prince on 12 bills since 2005. They are said to have included gambling, coroners, the Olympics, economic development and construction, marine and coastal access, housing and regeneration, wreck removals and co-operative societies, and energy and planning.
Now here is what will be the rub for many people, namely the finanical implications. The BBC has reported that neither "Downing Street nor Clarence House would say whether bills were altered as a result of objections from the heir to the throne." You can read what you will into that.
It appears that Charles has the right to be consulted on matters pertaining to the principality of Wales, the earldom of Chester and the Duchy of Cornwall, his private business and property empire.
A spokesperson for UK Priime Minister David Cameron has said that it is all a matter of the correct protocol. Apparently it is all in the parliamentary guide book. Republic, which is a UK organisation seeking for an elected head of state rather than the British Royal family has had a field day. Their spokesman said, "That such a loophole exists shows our constitution is fundamentally anti-democratic." Hear, hear I expect you are shouting.
This subject has only come to the atention of the general public following a freedom of information request to the House of Commons by a newspaper.
Opinion: Well it makes me angry and sad that this sorry state of affairs continues. Whilst the UK deplores the lack of democracy in so many countries abroad, our own form of democracy leaves so much to be dsired. You have to laugh or else you would cry.
Recently the Guardian has reported that the government had consulted the Prince on 12 bills since 2005. They are said to have included gambling, coroners, the Olympics, economic development and construction, marine and coastal access, housing and regeneration, wreck removals and co-operative societies, and energy and planning.
Now here is what will be the rub for many people, namely the finanical implications. The BBC has reported that neither "Downing Street nor Clarence House would say whether bills were altered as a result of objections from the heir to the throne." You can read what you will into that.
It appears that Charles has the right to be consulted on matters pertaining to the principality of Wales, the earldom of Chester and the Duchy of Cornwall, his private business and property empire.
A spokesperson for UK Priime Minister David Cameron has said that it is all a matter of the correct protocol. Apparently it is all in the parliamentary guide book. Republic, which is a UK organisation seeking for an elected head of state rather than the British Royal family has had a field day. Their spokesman said, "That such a loophole exists shows our constitution is fundamentally anti-democratic." Hear, hear I expect you are shouting.
This subject has only come to the atention of the general public following a freedom of information request to the House of Commons by a newspaper.
Opinion: Well it makes me angry and sad that this sorry state of affairs continues. Whilst the UK deplores the lack of democracy in so many countries abroad, our own form of democracy leaves so much to be dsired. You have to laugh or else you would cry.
RSS Feed