Prince charles

This week's issue of Country Life magazine has been guest-edited by the Prince of Wales. As long term perspectives disappear from national debate, we should all be grateful for his presence in public life, says Ben Goldsmith. It is hard to name an area of modern life which has not been overcome by short-term considerations. Companies sacrifice long-term growth for their quarterly financial reports, politicians are blind beyond the next election, and the attention span of rolling news channels is shorter than ever. In cricket, the deep satisfaction of a five-day Test Match is threatened by one day or even shorter match formats. Long termism speaks with a quiet voice; a voice that has been all but obliterated.

It could have all gone very, very wrong for Prince Charles on the day he reached retirement age. The Prince of Wales has not even started the job he was born to do, yet as part of his training he is in India ahead of his officially deputising for the Queen as Head of the Commonwealth. Where back home a simple candle on top of a cake would have done the birthday justice, the owner of an antiques shop in Kochi put out 65 oil lamps for the visiting heir, one of which set fire to the Prince’s linen jacket. According to ITV News who witnessed the festivities, Charles quipped: 'How quickly did you put me out?' It’s safe to say he has not inherited his father’s wicked sense of humour.

Hard on the heels of the 90th birthday of Nicholas Parsons (10 October) comes the 65th birthday of the Prince of Wales (14 November). Neither is due for retirement any day soon. Indeed, I suspect retirement would be the death of the long-serving host of Radio 4’s Just A Minute. The Duchess of Cornwall listens to his programme, I know. Perhaps her husband does too. Either way, Parsons is a perfect role model for Prince Charles. Nicholas is young at heart, unfailingly charming and wholly committed to the strange lot that fate has accorded him. He has been hosting Just A Minute for 46 years and not missed a single recording. He will be at it until he drops. For his birthday I gave Nicholas a copy of my book The Seven Secrets of Happiness.

Prince Charles told it like it is when he was hijacked by the royal baby press pack this morning: ‘Absolutely nothing at the moment, we're waiting’. Others, though, are not so patient. The BBC is excelling itself: this is a royal occasion so it must provide hours of vapid commentary, conveyed in hushed tones. It’s a thankless task, as newsanchor Simon McCoy made clear on air: 'Plenty more to come from here, none of it news of course, but that won't stop us... Let's speculate, because that's all we can do.' Over on Sky News, Kay Burley is the real queen of days like this: ‘I asked how many centimetres…but they said it's not the kind of info they give out’.

I wonder what Prince Charles makes of the fashion for abdication? Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and the Pope are both vacating the seat of power before shuffling off this mortal coil. Perhaps the old Lupin-whisperer imagines his destiny is close. Royal chatter reaches Mr Steerpike that someone at Clarence House recently commissioned a private poll on the public’s perception of senior royals. I hear that they were delighted with one pearl amongst the grit: Prince Charles is the most popular Prince of Wales ever. Funnily enough, the living population had little recollection of how previous heirs apparent conducted their public duties; smiled as they opened leisure centres; worked the room; or treated their spouses on awkward trips to India.

There has been much hilarity in the wake of the abdication of Queen Beatrix. The obvious comparisons between Willem-Alexander of Orange and our own Prince Charles have been laboured elsewhere; but I was reminded this morning of the Queen’s response to the another Dutch abdication in 1980. The story goes that Her Majesty’s Press Secretary telephoned her to report that Queen Juliana had just abdicated, to which Brenda replied: 'typical Dutch’, before promptly hanging up. Seasoned Royal watchers will know that Elizabeth frowns on abdication, not least as a dereliction of duty, but also due to the impact it had on her own father.

Much is being made of Dominic Grieve’s decision to ban publication of Prince Charles’ correspondence with ministers. Republic, a group which campaigns for the abolition of the monarchy, has been pressing for their release through freedom of information requests over the last seven years. Having successfully convinced three judges of the public interest in seeing the Prince of Wales’ letters, Grieve has taken the unusual step of vetoing their decision. Almost two years ago the CIA tipped off their counterparts in MI5 and MI6 that al-Qaeda was planning a ‘Mumbai style’ terrorist attack in the UK.

It is no secret that the Prince of Wales is a plant-whispering greeny; but the precise nature (and bias) of his ministerial lobbying is to remain secret. Republic, the gloriously self-important but sparsely supported campaign to boot out Brenda & Co, have been using Freedom of Information laws to expose what suggestions Prince Charles has made to government; but their attempts have been blocked, ironically, on grounds that publication would damage the future king's claims to impartiality. The revolutionaries claim: ‘The Attorney General’s decision is all about protecting Charles and the royal family from scrutiny, putting his demands above the rights of the British people.

Max Hasting’s essay in the Daily Mail about the dangers for the monarchy of Prince Charles becoming king is an important moment. Hastings, who is very much part of the establishment, is reflecting a view that many hold in private: that Prince Charles’s desire to advance his political views is incompatible with a modern constitutional monarchy. As Hastings puts it, ‘he is so set in his ways, so accustomed to not being contradicted — because those who argue with him are swiftly expelled from his counsels — that I am convinced that if he becomes King he will persist in trying to save the world, and thus precipitate a crisis.

The Prime Minister is, as we know an Aston Villa fan. So we can expect him to be disappointed at Martin O’Neill’s departure. On his trip to Birmingham the other week, Cameron’s support for Villa caused the PM to, as the phrase has it, misspeak. He told the Birmingham Post that with “the Governor of the Bank of England as a supporter, the next King of England and the current Prime Minister, [Aston Villa] got a good set” of fans in high places. But his reference to the next King of England being a Villa fan will raise a few eyebrows as it is Prince William — not Prince Charles — who is the Royal Villain. Now it is obvious that Cameron just slipped up and that he didn’t mean to impart any information about the succession.

Today’s Evening Standard features an interview with Bernice McCabe, co-director of the Prince’s Teaching Institute. McCabe tells the paper that: “He [the Prince of Wales] is very passionate about the fact that children need a good grasp of literature and that all children need to understand the history of our country,” she said. “He is passionate that these subjects should remain there in the curriculum.” I happen to agree with the Prince of Wales on this point, but it is completely unacceptable that someone is speaking for him on what is a political issue. The monarchy survives in this country on the basis that it doesn’t express political opinions in public, a rule that the Queen has observed.