AT LAST the secret is out. Senior ministers, from Tony Blair downwards, have been protecting the Prince of Wales from himself. Far from acting as closet republicans, new Labour has safeguarded the monarchy by keeping publicly silent about the often highly controversial interventions by Prince Charles.
Nothing in Mark Bolland’s statement will surprise ministers. Many — especially in departments dealing with farming, rural pursuits, architecture, heritage, education and foreign affairs — have been at the receiving end of letters and phone calls from the Prince.
These have often amounted to lobbying on behalf of particular interests on sensitive items of policy, such as new agricultural directives and planning applications.
There has been a marked contrast between the public and private reactions of ministers. Whenever news reports have appeared about the Prince expressing contentious views, the invariable reponse of Mr Blair and his spokesmen has been to play down any suggestion of disagreement.
The official line has always been that the Prince has been “absolutely right to speak out on issues which are of concern to him”. That view has been enforced across Government, much to the annoyance of many ministers.
They have been infuriated by the Prince’s activities which they have regarded as an abuse of his privileged position, as well as using up a lot of their time.
But they have generally adopted the tactic of humouring him, listening and responding politely, but ignoring his views. Some ministers have, however, rather enjoyed the Prince’s attentions, and the occasional invitations to Highgrove.
The underlying Downing Street view has been that, by not alienating the Prince, it may be possible to neutralise his more controversial views and nudge his activities in a more benign direction. Hence, Mr Blair and, more recently, Gordon Brown have sought to involve the Prince via regular meetings.
The Bolland statement has, however, exposed the worries of the establishment ahead of Prince Charles becoming King.
No one disputes that he should have a public role, notably via the work of The Prince’s Trust, the widely praised activities of which have helped many young people. The Prince is also entitled to have views.
What he is not entitled to do is to act as a political player himself, either by leaking his views, as Mr Bolland vividly describes, or by lobbying.
The Prince is in no sense an ordinary citizen, let alone the absurdly self-pitying label of “dissident” working against the political consensus.
The danger is that, as King, the Prince will stumble into partisan disputes, becoming identified with one side or another. That could be fatal to the monarchy as an institution. The official hope is that there is still time to wean the Prince off controversy and towards the more discreet role performed by the Queen for 54 years.
According to Walter Bagehot, the 19th-century economist who explored the constitution, the sovereign has the right to be consulted, to encourage and to warn. But this requires a “genius for discretion”, which the Prince has yet to acquire.
After this week’s disclosures, the Prince should heed the advice of Clement Attlee, as new Prime Minister, to Harold Laski, the outspoken Labour chairman, in 1945: “A period of silence on your part would be welcome.”
HOW POLITICIANS REACTED TO THE PRINCE'S LETTERS
“If he wants to be a political Head of State, fine — he can stand for election. But if he wants all the benefits of the divine right of kingship then he should not get involved in politics. We have a constitutional settlement in this country. We pay for him to have someone to squeeze his toothpaste on to his brush in the morning and he stays out of politics — that’s the deal”
Stephen Pound, the Labour MP for Ealing North
“Either the monarch is the neutral Head of State that the Armed Forces can swear to, or they are politically active. If they are politically active, they can’t be the monarchy. If he’s trying to exploit his position as future monarch then that’s unacceptable”
Paul Holmes, chairman of Liberal Democrat parliamentary party
“What does he know about life. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he has become a man who takes advice from his focus group of scientific advisers who advise him about grey goo. The public know more than he does”
Dr Ian Gibson, veteran Labour MP and former chairman of the Commons science and technology committee
“His actions are suicidal. The only reason why the monarchy and the Queen are successful is that she has kept out of all political decisions and the only way it can continue to survive as an institution is if the monarchy is seen to be above politics.
“If he is going to find it irresistible to interfere in politics — sometimes on the side of sense, sometimes on the side of nonsense — then the monarchy would be in grave peril with him as head of state. It would collapse”
Paul Flynn, Labour MP for Newport West
“Our party is very supportive of the Prince. Certainly every time I talk to former ministers who were approached by him they all welcomed his comments”
Oliver Heald, the Shadow Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs
“It is wrong to give the impression that he was constantly badgering ministers because he was not badgering me. He was genuinely interested and had perfectly sensible views”
Nick Brown, the former Cabinet minister, who was contacted by letter or phone three or four times a year during his five years in office
