Charles’s secret letters will NOT be released

Making notes public could undermine his role as king, says law chief

LOBBYING letters from Prince Charles to ministers will be kept secret because they could cast doubt on his political neutrality and undermine his role as future king.

The High Court had previously ruled that two dozen ‘black spider’ letters – which Charles wrote to ministers in the last Labour government – should be revealed.

A judge said it was in the public interest to release the letters, which were described in court as ‘advocacy correspondence’ through which the Prince of Wales had sought to influence government policy.

But yesterday the Government’s chief legal officer overturned the ruling. Attorney General Dominic Grieve said the letters must be kept secret because, if published, they would cause the public to believe that the future king was not politically neutral.

‘The Prince of Wales is party-political neutral,’ said Mr Grieve. ‘Moreover, it is

‘Seriously damaging to his role’

highly important that he is not considered by the public to favour one political party or another.

‘This risk will arise if, through these letters, the Prince of Wales was viewed by others as disagreeing with government policy.

‘Any such perception would be seriously damaging to his role as future monarch, because if he forfeits his position of political neutrality as heir to the throne, he cannot easily recover it when he is king.’

Critics of the prince said the public had a right to know what he was lobbying ministers on, and attacked the decision for protecting the Royal Family from legitimate public scrutiny. Senior royal sources signalled the prince felt he had done nothing wrong and had a right to advise ministers.

In 2009 it emerged that Charles had written letters – known as ‘black spider’ memos because of their scrawled handwriting – on issues such as eco-towns, hospital design and housing.

Former Labour Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine said he had been ‘bombarded’ by the prince about matters including the Human Rights Act. The subjects of the letters which were vetoed yesterday remain unknown, but they date from September 2004 to April 2005.

They were requested under the Freedom of Information Act by a journalist from the Guardian newspaper. The request was rejected by the seven Government departments where the letters were sent.

But last month an Information Tribunal at the High Court ruled that 27 letters qualified as ‘advocacy correspondence’ in which Charles expressed a view on the rights or wrongs of a particular policy.

With these letters, the tribunal said, there was a ‘public interest strongly in favour of disclosure’. Mr Justice Walker said the prince was exploiting his privileged access to ministers, adding: ‘Those who seek to influence government policy must understand that the public has a legitimate interest in knowing what they have been doing.’

But yesterday Mr Grieve used the ministerial veto over Freedom of Information requests to order the letters be kept from public view.

He said they reflected Charles’s ‘most deeply held personal views and beliefs’ and were ‘in many cases particularly frank’. It is now unlikely their contents will become known until after the prince’s death. Clarence House refused to comment. But senior royal sources insisted it was the prince’s ‘absolute right, even duty’ to correspond with ministers over ‘issues of national importance’.

The Campaign for Freedom of Information criticised the decision. Its director Maurice Frankel said: ‘The tribunal concluded that the Prince’s lobbying on behalf of various charitable causes did not fall under the constitutional convention designed to educate the heir to the throne to become monarch. He is trying to change government policy, not learn about it.’

Graham Smith, chief executive of Republic, which campaigns for an elected head of state, said: ‘It’s an open secret that Prince Charles lobbies the Government. What the public has a right to know is what he is lobbying for.’

The Guardian last night announced a High Court challenge to the veto – on the grounds the Government had acted unreasonably. But legal experts say the challenge is unlikely to succeed.

IN some ways, it is admirable that Prince Charles takes such a keen interest in the nation’s affairs that he is forever writing ‘ black spider’ letters, expressing his opinions to ministers.

But if he insists on trying to influence public policy, the public surely has the right to know how. This is why the Mail deplores the Attorney General’s decision to overrule the High Court’s order to release the letters for publication.

If the Prince is worried that they may be thought improper, he shouldn’t write them.