DOCUMENTARY:
ELIZABETH II
THE HOUSE OF WINDSOR AND THE WINDSOR DICTATORSHIP’S
PARTNERSHIP
WITH GLOBAL MUSILIM DICTATORSHIPS.
The pampered, petulant, self-pitying Prince: New book by Britain's top investigative author Tom Bower reveals Charles's remarkable travel demands including bringing his entire bedroom on trips
'Nobody knows what utter hell it is to be Prince of Wales,’ Charles said in November 2004. His idea of hell, it must be said, is unlikely to be shared by most of his future subjects.
Take, for example, accounts of what it is like to have Prince Charles come to stay for the weekend.
Before a visit to one friend in North-East England, he sent his staff ahead a day early with a truck carrying furniture to replace the perfectly appropriate fittings in the guest rooms.
And not just the odd chest of drawers: the truck contained nothing less than Charles and Camilla’s complete bedrooms, including the Prince’s orthopaedic bed, along with his own linen.
A new book by Britain's top investigative author has revealed Charles's remarkable travel demands including bringing his entire bedroom, complete with orthopaedic bed, on trips
The next delivery to arrive was his food — organic, of course. His hosts decided, despite their enjoyment of his company, not to invite him again.
Their experience was less distressing, however, than that of the family asked to host Charles for a long weekend on the Welsh borders.
Over the preceding months, they’d invited many friends for the four meals at which he’d preside; they’d also hired staff and ordered in masses of food and flowers.
But on the Friday afternoon of Charles’s expected arrival, there was a call from St James’s Palace to offer regrets. Under pressure of business, the Prince could not arrive until Saturday morning.
The following day, the same official telephoned to offer regrets for Saturday lunch, but gave the assurance that Charles would arrive for dinner. Then, that afternoon, the whole visit was cancelled due to ‘unforeseen circumstances’.
The considerable waste and disappointment were not mitigated when Charles later revealed to his stricken hostess the reason for his cancellation. He had felt unable to abandon the beauty of his sunlit garden at Highgrove, he said.
For about six months of every year, the heir to the throne enjoyed a unique lifestyle in beautiful places, either in seclusion or with friends.
Although his travelling staff (a butler, two valets, chef, private secretary, typist and bodyguards) could anticipate most of his movements between his six homes, the only definite confirmation of his final destination, especially to his hosts, would be the arrival of a truck carrying suitcases, furniture and food.
There then followed endless telephone calls with his staff as he changed his mind about his future plans and projects.
For four months every year he lived in Scotland, where he expected people to visit him from London, usually at their own expense.
Sometimes, he travelled abroad. After the death of the Queen Mother in March 2002, for instance, he flew to Greece to stay for three days on his own in a monastery on Mount Athos.
His travelling staff include a butler, two valets, chef, private secretary, typist and bodyguards
Unfortunately, someone took a photograph that showed the Prince stepping off a boat with a butler and a remarkable amount of luggage in tow — certainly far more than anyone could need for a few days’ meditation.
The image didn’t exactly chime with the theme of the imminent Jubilee celebrations: to emphasise the monarchy’s relevance in modern Britain. Charles’s staff could see this, even if he couldn’t.Julia Cleverdon, an executive on one of his charities, stuck the photo on her office wall and wrote, with risky irony: ‘We’re off to Mt Athos with 43 pieces of luggage.’
The Prince’s other free weeks were likely to be divided between well-off friends. At Chatsworth, the 175-room home of his beloved Debo Mitford, the Duchess of Devonshire, Charles and Camilla would be assigned a whole wing for up to three weeks.
During the shooting season, the Prince opted for the company of Gerald Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster, at either Eaton Hall, near Chester, or at the Duke’s shooting lodge in the Forest of Bowland in Lancashire.
In between, he stayed at Garrowby, the home of the Earl and Countess of Halifax in Yorkshire, and with Chips and Sarah Keswick in Invermark, Scotland.
And if he was expected to sit for a meal, the host would be informed in advance that an aide would be delivering a bag containing the Prince’s food. This was in complete contrast with the Queen, who always ate what everyone else was having.
None of this petulant behaviour would be on show, however, when Charles emerged in public. On those occasions, he’d show what appeared to be genuine interest in people and events.
Few outsiders could guess, commented one adviser, whether or not he was ‘just putting on a game face’.
Sir Christopher Airy, who became his private secretary in 1990, was once reprimanded for suggesting to Charles that a forthcoming visit was ‘your duty’. The Prince shouted at him: ‘Duty is what I live — an intolerable burden.’
At home, his demands were constant, which meant an assistant had to be on call in Charles’s office until he went to sleep.
All his aides were subject to familiar daily tirades. ‘Even my office is not the right temperature,’ he’d moan. ‘Why do I have to put up with this? It makes my life so unbearable.’
Sir John Riddell, his private secretary for five years from 1985, once told a colleague that Charles was better suited to being a second-hand car salesman than a royal prince.
In this picture one of Prince Charles's flunkies is revealed to be the 'keeper of the royal cushion'
‘Every time I made the office work,’ Riddell observed, ‘the Prince f***ed it up again.
‘He comes in, complains that his office is “useless” and people cannot spell and the world is so unfair, then says: “This is part of the intolerable burden I put up with. This incompetence!” ’
When Charles entertained at home, everything was geared to his own habits and convenience. Dinner would be served to guests at 8pm, but he wouldn’t arrive until 8.15pm, because he’d decided against eating a first course.
It was fine, therefore, for dinner guests to start without him. Not at breakfast, though: visitors to Highgrove were cautioned by Camilla not to begin eating before the Prince appeared.
He was also unusually particular about his gardens at Highgrove. Because he refused to use pesticides, he employed four gardeners who would lie, nose-down, on a trailer pulled by a slow-moving Land Rover to pluck out weeds.
In addition, retired Indian servicemen were deployed to prowl through the undergrowth at night with torches and handpick slugs from the leaves of plants.
Charles also gave rein to extravagance in his office, where he employed an individual private secretary for each of his interests — including the charities, architecture, complementary medicine and the environment.
And anyone visiting the office at St James’s Palace would be escorted to it by no fewer than three footmen, each responsible for a short segment of corridor.
A weekend with the Prince at Sandringham, meanwhile, can be a decidedly odd experience. One group of writers and journalists, invited five years ago, arrived to find that each of them had been assigned a servant.
Friday after dinner was listed as a cinema night. The chosen film was Robert Altman’s Gosford Park, depicting upstairs/downstairs life to an audience surrounded by the reality of that social order. The film became a regular feature of Charles’s culture weekends.
Michael Fawcett, the Prince’s former valet and fixer, supervised the placing of chairs in front of a screen in the ballroom. In the front row were two throne-like armchairs for Charles and Camilla.
Soon everyone was seated, and servants entered with silver platters of ice cream. The film started. Charles and Camilla instantly fell asleep, and the ice cream slowly melted away.
On Saturday, the guests took a walk with Charles, during which he spoke about his belief in a sustainable environment. They were careful to avoid debate: their host, they had been cautioned, was easily offended.
‘People think I’m bonkers, crackers,’ Charles groaned suddenly, in the middle of a field. ‘Do you think I’m mad?’ he asked, in a manner that forbade a positive reply.
The two-hour walk ended back at the house, where the guests were served tea.
‘Right, we’re off,’ Charles announced, striding out of the house after a quick cup. Jumping into his Aston Martin, he drove at breakneck speed down narrow, twisting lanes, reassured that police motorcyclists had cleared other traffic.
His guests followed in a fleet of gleaming Land Rovers, arriving at Charles’s local church in time to hear a short concert.
On Sunday, female guests had been instructed to wear appropriate hats and gloves for a trip to the local Anglican church, St Mary the Virgin and St Mary Magdalen. The two who chose to go to mass at a nearby Roman Catholic church felt Charles’s displeasure.
By Sunday dinner, some of the guests had become puzzled about their host. His habit of commandeering a small bowl of olive oil just for himself provoked one visitor to recount a story of Charles during a recent trip to India.
The Prince had invited the banking heir Lord billionaires be rounded up to accompany him. During the tour, a sumptuous lunch was held in a maharaja’s palace.
Unexpectedly, a loaf of Italian bread was placed on the table. As an American billionaire reached out to take a piece, Charles shouted: ‘No, that’s mine! Only for me!’
In reply to that story, another visitor recalled that on a previous weekend at Sandringham, a guest had brought Charles a truffle as a gift. To everyone’s envy, Charles did not share the delicacy at dinner but kept it to himself.
As they listened to these curious tales, Charles’s guests did not laugh; there was merely bewilderment.
Those who know him have often asked themselves why Prince Charles is so extraordinarily self-indulgent
At the end of the Sandringham weekend — the guests were asked not to leave until the Monday morning — some were told to leave £150 in cash for the staff, or to visit the estate’s souvenir shop.
Most would tell their friends that Charles seemed genuine, but that the weekend was surreal.
Those who know him have often asked themselves why Prince Charles is so extraordinarily self-indulgent. Why can’t he be more like his mother, who lives without complaint under leaky roofs and in rooms that haven’t been repainted since her Coronation?
In 2006, for instance, Charles used the royal train simply to travel to Penrith to visit a pub — at a cost of £18,916 — as part of his ‘pub in the hub’ initiative to revitalise village life.
And he spent £20,980 for a day trip by plane from Scotland to Lincolnshire to watch William receive his RAF wings.
By contrast, the Queen travelled by train — courtesy of First Capital Connect — to Sandringham at Christmas. Her ticket cost £50, instead of the £15,000 her journey would have cost by the royal train.
Some have speculated that Charles’s extravagance is a kind of revenge on the Duke of Edinburgh, for sending him to Gordonstoun in Scotland during his formative years. The Prince loathed the school’s Spartan regime, but his father insisted he stay there to complete his secondary education.
The other mystery is why Charles has never seemed to appreciate his great good fortune. Instead, he has given vent so frequently to resentment that one friend has dubbed him ‘an Olympian whinger’.
With a personal income of millions from the Duchy of Cornwall (£16.3 million in 2007 alone) he could afford to indulge his slightest whim — yet even that didn’t satisfy him.
One evening, the Prince was particularly maudlin at a dinner hosted by a billionaire in Klosters, Switzerland, for a number of the super-rich. When they’d finished eating, Charles huddled in a corner with King Constantine of Greece. ‘We pulled the short straw,’ sighed the Prince.
Compared with others in the room, he complained, both he and the King were stuck for cash. In his case, he explained, the Duchy of Cornwall administrators would repeatedly tell him what he couldn’t afford to do.
In fact, Charles doesn’t have to answer to anyone over his use of the duchy’s income.
At the time of his complaint, among his 124 staff — most of them paid for by taxpayers — were four valets.
Why four for one man? So that two would always be available to help him change his clothes, which he did up to five times every day.
It could be argued that it is his association with billionaires that has made Charles so dissatisfied with his lot. During a recent after-dinner speech at Waddesdon Manor, Lord Rothschild’s Buckinghamshire home, Charles complained that his host employed more gardeners than himself — 15 against his nine.
Fortunately, the public were unaware of such gripes. His staff, however, began to realise that his extravagance was threatening to undermine his public image.
To counter this, Michael Fawcett told a charity donor: ‘His Royal Highness lives modestly. He hasn’t got a yacht and doesn’t eat lunch.’
This had the benefit of being partly true: Charles has never bought a yacht and prefers not to eat lunch — though he could easily afford both.
More worryingly, the Prince’s then private secretary Sir Michael Peat decided to brief a journalist that ‘Charles does not enjoy a champagne and caviar lifestyle’.
Contrary to the public’s perception, he continued, the Prince possessed only one car, and did not even own his own home.
In reality, Charles had access to a fleet of at least six cars, including two Aston Martins, a Bentley, an Audi, a Range Rover and a Land Rover.
And Peat’s quibble about the legal ownership of the six homes variously occupied by the Prince (Clarence House, Highgrove, Birkhall, the Castle of Mey, Balmoral and Sandringham) was clearly disingenuous.
Among other things Peat failed to mention was that when Charles moved into Clarence House, in 2003, the cost of refurbishment had soared from £3 million towards £6 million — all funded by the taxpayer.
Or that the 15-bedroom Castle of Mey, had been rebuilt with the help of a £1 million gift from Julia Kauffman, a Canadian-born heiress living in Kansas City.
Foreign Office officials, however, were well aware of the Prince’s tendency to demand the best of everything, without dipping into his own pocket.
Indeed, relations with the heir to the throne became increasingly strained as he continued to insist on travelling on private planes, especially to the Continent.
After one particularly nasty spat, Charles reluctantly agreed to fly commercial in Europe. But on his return, he refused ever again to take a BA plane.
‘He wanted the convenience — and not to mix with hoi polloi,’ observed one mandarin dryly.
REBEL Prince: The Power, Passion and Defiance of Prince Charles by Tom Bower, published by William Collins on Thursday at £20. © Tom Bower 2018.
To order a copy for £14 (30 per cent discount) visit mailshop.co.uk/books or call 0844 571 0640, p&p is free on orders over £15. Offer valid until March 31, 2018.
William was furious when aides snubbed Kate's mum
While Prince Charles’s relationship with his parents was set in a permanent frost, his connection with his sons was almost as uneasy. One of his most painful recollections was of a visit to Kensington Palace while Diana was alive, and the boys were still small. As soon as Harry saw his father, he ran towards him — then suddenly stopped short.
‘Mummy says I mustn’t,’ he cried, just as Charles was about to hug him.
There was only one conclusion to be drawn: Diana had poisoned the boys’ minds towards their father.
After her death, the brothers had to cope with a continuing onslaught of public revelations about their parents’ adulterous relationships. Grieving for his mother, William would say, was especially difficult because ‘it was so raw’, and there was minimal privacy.
Prince Charles worried he was being usurped by the Middletons, and decided to ignore Carole Middleton on social occasions. To counter the hurtful snubs the Queen made a point of inviting a TV cameraman to film her driving the former air hostess around the Balmoral estate (pictured)
And then there was Camilla. Charles’s relationship with his sons certainly wasn’t helped by her presence — which was a constant reminder of their mother’s torment.
For months, staff at Clarence House noticed that William and Harry entered the building through the servants’ quarters, in order to avoid both their father and Camilla.
Camilla got addicted to luxury too
Marriage to the Prince of Wales changed Camilla. When she accepted an invitation to a dinner party, her hosts were now sent a list of the foods she liked and disliked.
After all, her husband had done this for years, so why not adopt his habit?
As Duchess of Cornwall, she soon became accustomed to a life of luxury. At her request, Charles’s private secretary provided her with a chauffeur-driven car; and when she flew, it was normally only on private jets.
She could be stubborn about this. When Charles was invited to New York in 2008, to collect a Global Environmental Citizen award, the Foreign Office insisted the couple fly BA. Camilla, however, demanded a private plane.
Even Camilla (pictured on a yacht with Prince Charles) became addicted to luxury
It was pointed out that the sight of Charles arriving on a chartered jet to receive an environmental prize would be unhelpful. So the Prince reluctantly agreed to fly BA — only for Camilla to dig in her heels.
She had a cut hand, she said, which would prevent her travelling to New York. After a fierce argument, she finally agreed to fly on the BA plane with Charles and 14 staff, including her hairdresser, butler, dresser, two valets, press officers, a doctor and five police protection officers.
One year, the Prince chartered a private yacht for about £210,000, but Camilla wasn’t impressed. She grumbled that it was smaller than those of Greek shipping billionaire Yiannis Latsis or car park tycoon Donald Gosling — who’d offered her cruises for free.
More free hand-outs came from the public. In 2008, an official report claimed that Camilla cost taxpayers a mere £2,000 a year. But it failed to mention the taxpayer had also spent £1.8 million on security around Ray Mill — the home she’d kept in Wiltshire — and a further £200,000 on her various travels.
Despite her cosseted lifestyle, however, Camilla had a habit of being late for everything. This annoyed Charles, who frequently shouted from the bottom of the stairs at Clarence House: ‘Come on, get a move on!’
‘Where are we going?’ she’d ask, as she rushed down.
‘Haven’t you read the brief?’ Charles would snap, as if he were speaking to a slow learner.
Clarence House staff, however, were ordered to give her special treatment: they had to bow to her, and reply ‘Yes, Ma’am’ to all her demands.
To reinforce his wife’s higher profile, Charles also requested that flags should fly on public buildings on Camilla’s birthday.
In the opinion of some of his staff, Charles’s lifestyle had blinded him to his sons’ personal troubles, and he was largely unaware of their coolness towards his mistress.
Harry was the more worrying. Ever since his confession to smoking cannabis at Highgrove as a teenager, Charles had struggled to control him.
Paparazzi had sold photographs of Harry emerging bedraggled with a topless model from Boujis nightclub in South Kensington; then chasing Chelsy Davy, his Zimbabwean girlfriend, across Africa; and misbehaving at endless parties.
As William grew up, it became clear that he too was a very different royal from his father. Since leaving university, he had neither shared his father’s interests nor offered to continue his charities. Specifically, he refused involvement in The Prince’s Trust.
After his own marriage, William chose to retreat with Kate to Norfolk, where they could preserve their privacy. They also preferred to spend Christmas with her parents rather than at Sandringham with the other royals.
The distance between Highgrove and Norfolk isolated the Prince from his grandchildren, and allowed Kate’s mother, Carole Middleton, to take charge.
Charles began to fear that he was being usurped by the Middletons, and several of the Queen’s courtiers picked up on this. As a consequence, they decided to ignore Carole Middleton on social occasions.
This so infuriated William that he consulted with his grandmother. To counter the hurtful snubs against Carole Middleton, the Queen then made a point of inviting a TV cameraman to film her driving the former air hostess around the Balmoral estate.
Meanwhile, Charles had decided, as neither of the boys showed any interest in classical music, he’d invite Kate to her first opera — Bellini’s La Sonnambula (The Sleepwalker) at Covent Garden.
It should have been a wonderful night out. As usual, Michael Fawcett had organised for dinner to be sent from Clarence House and served in the Royal Box during the interval on Charles’s personal china, using his personal silver cutlery.
Sadly, however, even the Prince had to admit the production was ‘awful’, and his hope that Kate might be converted to classical music was lost. Like William, she preferred Phantom Of The Opera.Once she’d married William, Charles grew worried that the public’s attention was switching to them.
To his disappointment, the Canadian government had asked for his proposed tour of the country to be delayed, so that his son and new daughter-in-law could visit first.
For her part, Camilla was unconcerned about Kate taking the limelight.
‘She didn’t give a damn,’ noted Robert Higdon, the chief executive of Charles’s charity foundation in America. ‘[But] Charles saw Kate and William as the new stars and feared he’d be in trouble.’
Camilla also dismissed the presumption that Kate would be the first commoner Queen.
‘That’ll be me,’ she’d say with a laugh.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5511397/Prince-Charless-remarkable-travel-demands-revealed.html#ixzz5A2grvHBV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The Queen’s Cold War against Camilla: Weeks before Charles married, the Queen cut Camilla out of ceremonies and dinners. And the final insult? As TOM BOWER reveals she didn't even talk to her at her own wedding party!
To Charles's intense annoyance, the Queen disapproved of his relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles, even when they were both divorced. In the gripping third part of our serialisation of a new biography of Prince Charles, Britain’s top investigative author reveals how a frustrated and angry Prince decided to have a late-night showdown with his mother at Balmoral . . .
On A late summer’s evening at Balmoral, Charles decided the moment had finally come. He was going to confront his mother and demand, once and for all, that she end her continued hostility to the woman he loved, Camilla Parker Bowles.
For years, both the Queen and her mother had refused to have anything to do with Charles’s mistress. Not only did they not want her present at any royal function, either formal or informal; they actively disapproved of her, and of Charles’s relationship with her.
Tensions: The Queen with Charles and Camilla on their wedding day in Windsor on April 9, 2005
But by the summer of 1998, Camilla was growing increasingly annoyed with Charles’s continued insistence that she must keep a low profile.
‘You’re off to the theatre with friends, so why can’t I come?’ she’d snap. She also wanted to meet William and Harry, and to be able to join Charles on holiday — and could see no reason, almost a year after Diana’s death, why that shouldn’t happen.
However, as the Prince knew better than anyone, there was no possibility of bringing their relationship out into the open without the Queen’s approval.
Princess Margaret, who sympathised with him, had tried to intercede on his behalf. But the Queen had told her sister she didn’t want to meet, or even talk about, Camilla.
So, exasperated by what he termed an intolerable situation, and egged on by Margaret, he approached his mother one night in her sitting room at Balmoral.
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
He asked that she soften her antagonism so he could live openly with Camilla. His hope was that the Queen, who rarely interfered, would at least not directly forbid it.
But on that evening she’d had several martinis, and to Charles’s surprise she replied forcefully: she would not condone his adultery, nor forgive Camilla for not leaving Charles alone to allow his marriage to recover.
She vented her anger that he had lied about his relationship with what she called ‘that wicked woman’, and added: ‘I want nothing to do with her.’
Met with a further hostile silence, Charles fled the room. In his fragile state, her phrase — ‘that wicked woman’ — was unforgettable. Tearfully, he telephoned Camilla. In fact, the Queen’s disapproval of Camilla wasn’t limited simply to moral grounds. She was also nervous that her character, exposed in the infamous ‘Camillagate’ tapes six years earlier, was that of a shrewd mistress.
Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales and The Duchess Of Cornwall, Camilla Parker-Bowles pose for the Official Wedding photograph with their children and parents
‘Oh darling, I love you . . . I need you all the week, all the time,’ Camilla had gushed. The much less savvy Diana never made such over-the-top declarations.
Charles was distraught. As far as he was concerned, his mother had shown that she had little concern for his happiness.
Carried away by a gust of tenderness towards himself, the Prince complained that neither Diana nor the Queen had ever sympathised with his needs. His mother even stopped him moving into Clarence House, then his grandmother’s home, after his 1992 separation from Diana.
Why? Because the Queen felt that he had to be reprimanded — and, in any case, the prospect of Charles entertaining Camilla in a palace shared with the 92-year-old Queen Mother was offensive to her. Instead, he was given St James’s Palace, a cold, comfortless dwelling. To make matters worse, Charles’s beloved grandmother had also remained implacably opposed to Camilla.
Neither the Queen nor the Queen Mother would allow Camilla even to be present in the same room as them.
Both, however, pointedly welcomed her ex-husband Andrew Parker Bowles to receptions, race meetings and house parties.
Princess Margaret wasn’t the only one who’d tried to make them see reason. The Earl of Carnarvon, the Queen’s racehorse trainer and close friend, had volunteered to act as a go-between.
Unfortunately, that had been a disaster. After talking to the Queen, he’d subsequently switched to her side.
Charles had also recruited Angus Ogilvy, the husband of Princess Alexandra, to speak up for Camilla. And, rather dramatically, Ogilvy had informed the Queen that her son would neither compromise nor surrender.
Nothing made any difference. The Prince boiled with frustration.
Ironically, it was Diana’s infamous Panorama interview in 1995 that convinced the Queen that Camilla needed to go. More than 22 million people had watched as the Princess not only questioned Charles’s suitability to be king, but intimated that he’d slept with his mistress on the night before the royal wedding.
‘There were three of us in the marriage, so it was a bit crowded,’ she said memorably. After the broadcast, the Queen and Prince Philip — neither of whom Charles viewed as well-meaning advisers — told him that he could not rebuild his image nor dampen the controversy about the succession until he broke with Camilla.
His misery deepened, and under pressure from his mother he agreed that he and Diana should divorce.
Racked by self-doubt, he telephoned friends for reassurance, often talking well into the night. He mainly sought consolation in long calls with his divorce lawyer, Fiona Shackleton, and Camilla. ‘No one else,’ he later remarked, ‘was willing to lift a finger to help me.’
By December 1996, Charles felt that the entire House of Windsor was ranged against him. During the Christmas holiday that year, he brooded over his suspicion that his brothers, Edward and Andrew, were plotting his downfall.
Andrew, he believed, had been spreading poison about Camilla to the Queen and Prince Philip.
Now, mindful of Diana’s prediction on Panorama that he would never be king, Charles convinced himself that Diana and Sarah, Andrew’s estranged wife, were hatching plans to replace him as heir — by announcing that on the Queen’s death, or abdication, Andrew would be Regent until William was 18, when he would take over.
‘Andrew wanted to be me,’ Charles later told his assistant private secretary, Mark Bolland, who acted as his spin doctor. ‘I should have let him work with me. Now he’s unhelpful.’
As FOR Anne, his sister had aggravated the situation; instead of mediating between her siblings, she had criticised Charles for his adultery.
‘She’s one to talk,’ he said, irritated by her Goody Two-Shoes image. ‘Look at her past.’
The couple’s engagement was duly ‘welcomed’ by the Queen, though few could be sure what she really thought. Thereafter, the wedding plans hit one embarrassing snag after another
Anne, he declared, had enjoyed an intimate friendship with Andrew Parker Bowles at the same time that Charles was with Camilla.
By the end of the Christmas holiday, Charles had decided to ignore his parents and continue his relationship with Camilla.
So when Prince Philip wrote his son a private letter, urging him not to marry her, Charles didn’t keep it to himself. Instead, he angrily read it out loud to his spin doctor, urging him to leak it to a newspaper — which Bolland duly did.
On another occasion, Charles dared to tell his mother’s private secretary, Robert Fellowes, that the Queen ‘needed to move with the times’.
Unsurprisingly, the Prince’s advice was ignored.
Fellowes had no sympathy for Charles and Camilla. ‘Those two are the most selfish people I’ve ever met,’ he said.
As for the Queen herself, by 1997, she was feeling battered. ‘I cannot believe what’s happening to me,’ she confessed to an adviser, after describing her continuing struggle with Charles.
Philip, her most loyal ally, offered little comfort. He merely encouraged her distrust of Charles and reinforced her anger towards Camilla.
Relations between the two palaces at times descended into farce. When Charles held a fundraising dinner at Buckingham Palace in the Queen’s absence, he knew that she’d object if Camilla sat at his table.
The solution? Her name was kept off the seating plan, and she came in late — to slip into a seat opposite her lover.
‘While Ma’am is away, the mice will play,’ Charles told his guests.
After the showdown with his mother at Balmoral, Charles’s tactics became more sophisticated.
In 2000, he invited her to a 60th birthday party for King Constantine of Greece, knowing full well that she’d be loath to miss it — even though Camilla would be there. He was right: the Queen agreed to come, though she made it clear that she’d refuse to be introduced to his lover.
It WAS the Queen’s firm belief that Charles would not marry Camilla in her lifetime. Yet, in 2005, he proposed marriage to his mistress, by then aged 57
‘For Her Majesty, she does not exist,’ one courtier commented.
It was the death of the Queen Mother, in 2002, that finally led to a turning-point in the Queen’s attitude.
Initially, she’d decided that Camilla couldn’t be invited to the funeral, because the Queen Mother had disapproved of her so strongly. But she changed her mind after hearing Charles’s emotional tribute to her mother on TV.
And so, she relented — a little. Camilla, she conceded, could be present at the funeral as ‘a friend of the Queen Mother’, but not as Charles’s partner.
It WAS the Queen’s firm belief that Charles would not marry Camilla in her lifetime. Yet, in 2005, he proposed marriage to his mistress, by then aged 57.
The couple’s engagement was duly ‘welcomed’ by the Queen, though few could be sure what she really thought. Thereafter, the wedding plans hit one embarrassing snag after another.
First, Charles’s private secretary announced that the couple would have a civil ceremony at Windsor Castle, followed by a blessing by the Archbishop of Canterbury in St George’s Chapel.
Within days, however, it emerged that three separate Marriage Acts specifically forbade the marriage of any member of the Royal Family in a register office. Charles could be married only in a church — yet the Anglican Church would not unite two divorcees.
On top of that, he’d ignored the fact that civil marriages must be held in public places. Windsor Castle was the Queen’s private home, which meant it was out of the question.
In the end, to limit the royals’ embarrassment, the Prime Minister Tony Blair and Charles Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, decided simply to overlook the statutes, and permit Charles and Camilla to be married in a register office after all.
The next cause for consternation was a YouGov poll that revealed the majority of Britons preferred William as the next king, and only 16 per cent welcomed Camilla as the next queen.
Yet Charles’s private secretary, Michael Peat, had already categorically denied that she’d ever be queen. After Charles’s accession, he’d announced, Camilla would be named princess consort instead.
He was wrong. Government lawyers quietly admitted that the marriage would not be morganatic — that is, a marriage between people of unequal social rank, which prevents a husband’s titles and privileges passing to the wife.
This meant that on the Queen’s death, Camilla could, and would, become queen.
To minimise public displeasure in the meantime, Buckingham Palace briefings described her as an ‘unwilling bride’ and ‘a bundle of nerves’ who’d gladly remain in the shadows — silent and supportive — and had no ambition to be queen.
In a similar vein, courtiers gave the impression that Charles had dithered about marriage until the Queen herself had persuaded him of the importance of averting a constitutional crisis if he were still unmarried at time of the succession. As supreme governor of the Church of England, he could not ‘live in sin’.
The wave of disinformation about Camilla being a protesting bride was soon ridiculed. This was a woman, her critics riposted, who’d always posed as reluctant.
There was no mistaking the Queen’s frostiness towards her future daughter-in-law. During the weeks leading up to the big day, she excluded Camilla from both royal ceremonies and official dinners
To get her way, she’d feigned resistance to marrying Charles; then she’d hesitated about accepting a royal title; and now she was pretending to oppose being crowned queen.
It was all nonsense.
Certainly, she relished the prospect of her new title. As Duchess of Cornwall, she’d rank above Princess Anne and Sophie Wessex, both of whom would be expected to curtsey to her and to acknowledge that no one could leave a room before her.
The final ignominy in the run-up to the wedding was the Queen’s unexpected disclosure that she wouldn’t be present at the town hall ceremony.
Charles was inconsolable. In every spare moment, he phoned friends and sympathetic officials to complain about his fate.
‘He needed to get things off his chest,’ recalled one person on the list for regular tirades. ‘He needed to let off steam. He would go on forever, far into the night.’
On top of declining to attend the ceremony, the Queen had also rejected Charles’s proposal for a glittering dinner party for 650 guests at Windsor Castle. Anxious to avoid any controversy, she decreed that it would have to be a modest celebration.
Then she vetoed Charles’s plan for his former valet and fixer Michael Fawcett — whom the Queen disliked — to supervise it.
Still, the Prince was at least allowed to choose the guest list for the reception, which included those loyal friends — the Palmer-Tomkinsons, the Marquess of Douro, the Earl and Countess of Halifax and the Duchess of Devonshire — who had allowed their homes to be used by the couple after Diana’s death, when they were trying to keep their relationship secret.
Wallowing in gloom during the run-up to his wedding, Charles was asked, half-jokingly, by one of his friends whether the Queen might abdicate. ‘No,’ replied Charles, taking the question at face value. ‘Can you imagine her looking out of the window of Clarence House and waving to me as I paraded in a carriage down The Mall?’
Meanwhile, there was no mistaking the Queen’s frostiness towards her future daughter-in-law.
During the weeks leading up to the big day, she not only excluded Camilla from both royal ceremonies and official dinners, but also remarked that there was very little special Welsh gold left to make Camilla’s wedding ring.
‘There won’t be enough for a third wedding,’ she pointed out.
On the morning of April 9, a small, enthusiastic crowd cheered outside Windsor’s register office. After the marriage, which was witnessed by Charles’s three siblings, the Prince and his bride shed a few tears as they went on to St George’s Chapel in the castle for the archbishop’s blessing.
The Queen looked serious as the archbishop asked: ‘Will you, his relatives, his friends and supporters, support the Prince in his marriage vows and his loyalty for the rest of his life?’
As she emerged into public view, she smiled then walked briskly to a side-room. The Queen was, as planned, just in time to watch the Grand National with Camilla’s ex-husband and other racing enthusiasts.
Afterwards, Charles looked warily at Andrew Parker Bowles as the Queen entered the reception. There was a call for silence.
‘I have two important announcements to make,’ she said. ‘I know you will want to know who was the winner of the Grand National. It was Hedgehunter.’
After the laughter subsided, she continued: ‘Secondly, having cleared Becher’s Brook and The Chair and all kinds of other terrible obstacles, they have come through and I’m very proud and wish them well. My son is home and dry with the woman he loves. They are now on the home straight; the happy couple are now in the winners’ enclosure.’
Amid the cheers of approval, few noticed that the Queen had not once mentioned Camilla by name. Nor did she speak to her during the party.
‘I can’t believe it,’ the new bride repeated to her friends in the room. ‘I can’t believe it.’
The Queen was also noticeably cool towards her son. As for Charles, he hadn’t appreciated her wedding gift.
She’d given him a brood mare as a wedding present, and a promise to cover her with a stallion and pay the expenses for the foal. Perhaps she forgot that Charles wasn’t interested in racing.
After her speech, the Queen again went into the side-room to watch a replay of the big race. To her irritation, the event hadn’t been recorded. ‘Someone forgot to push the right button, Ma’am,’ explained a nervous courtier.
At this point, the Queen headed for the exit, passing Michael Fawcett — the servant closest to Charles — on the way. ‘Oh look,’ she said loudly to Philip, ‘there’s Fawcett. He’s got so fat.’
Charles was waiting for her on the steps outside. ‘That went rather well,’ said the Queen.
‘Yes,’ Charles replied.
‘We’re leaving now.’
‘Oh, I really want a picture of us all.’
The Queen stood for just 52 seconds, then, without another word, walked away.
After she’d left the wedding reception, Charles turned to Billy Tallon, known as ‘Backstairs Billy’, who’d been the Queen Mother’s favourite steward.
‘If only Grandmama could have been here and seen this,’ he said.
‘If she’d been alive,’ Tallon replied, ‘you couldn’t have married.’
REBEL Prince: The Power, Passion and Defiance of Prince Charles by Tom Bower is published by William Collins on Thursday, priced £20. © Tom Bower 2018. To order a copy for £14 (30 per cent discount) visit mailshop.co.uk/books or call 0844 571 0640. P&P is free on orders over £15. Offer valid until March 31, 2018.
Plus, get an additional 5 per cent off this title when you redeem through MyMail.co.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment