[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I actually see it as rather divisive, it sends a message to the would be king that his interference is not welcomed no matter how well intentioned.
Would I want the prince of Wales to stop giving his opinions? No.

I think it's the other way round - a future head of state taking sides on controversial political matters when they're supposed to be neutral is more divisive. And I say that as someone who agrees with a lot of what he says.

[bots]

I'm with MTVN. The queen is always quoted and indeed does not interfere in government issues. This was highlighted by her refusal to influence the vote in the Scottish referendum.

Everyone knows that Prince Charles is something of an activist, many of the Royal family are representing the UK in inter country relations and promoting UK business. If their views are not transparent, then they could easily be manipulating situations for their own agendas. So, if they feel they must comment, it must be with full disclosure

[the truth]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

I'm with MTVN. The queen is always quoted and indeed does not interfere in government issues. This was highlighted by her refusal to influence the vote in the Scottish referendum.

Everyone knows that Prince Charles is something of an activist, many of the Royal family are representing the UK in inter country relations and promoting UK business. If their views are not transparent, then they could easily be manipulating situations for their own agendas. So, if they feel they must comment, it must be with full disclosure

1) I thought the princes/princesses could state their opinions before becoming king or queen...then had to withhold opinions?
2) maybe Charlie thinks he will never get the top job so doesn't give a hoot for the censorship

[bots]

Originally Posted by the truth

1) I thought the princes/princesses could state their opinions before becoming king or queen...then had to withhold opinions?
2) maybe Charlie thinks he will never get the top job so doesn't give a hoot for the censorship

State their opinions by all means, but not under the radar. It has to be no influence at all, or transparent.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

State their opinions by all means, but not under the radar. It has to be no influence at all, or transparent.

I don't quite understand how you've worded your sentence there

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

State their opinions by all means, but not under the radar. It has to be no influence at all, or transparent.

Well good yeah, it's out there.. I hope they don't think they've muzzled him with this expose.
It's up the the prince to show they can't subdue him like they do us maybe

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I think it's the other way round - a future head of state taking sides on controversial political matters when they're supposed to be neutral is more divisive. And I say that as someone who agrees with a lot of what he says.

Meant to be... is that not subject to change?
That's the thing about laws which dave knows all too well is that they can change with the times, rights can be amended...or removed.
I would welcome the head of state having a say, especially if he feels the governments decisions are detrimental to his kingdom.