Prince Charles v Lord Rogers

[Uter]

Has Prince Charles done good, or is he just a very naughty boy? Discuss.

BBC NEWS | Have Your Say | Should the power of the Royals be re-examined?

 

[beorhthelm]

i really dont see the problem. Charles hasnt written to the council and forced them to change their decision, he has gone straight to the developer and asked them to reconsider. thats not an "abuse of power" as some say and has f*** all to do with constitutions and stuff. the Qatars could have told him to do one, they chose to review their plans.

 

[Man of Harveys]

He's both. He did a lot of good to curb the real excesses at a time when a load of real crap was being built. But to assume that every modern building is awful as he seems to is, of course, crap as well.

 

[pork pie]

He's both. He did a lot of good to curb the real excesses at a time when a load of real crap was being built. But to assume that every modern building is awful as he seems to is, of course, crap as well.

So Richard Rogers' Lloyds building is no a load of crap? The bloody place is costing a small fortune to maintain.

I think his rant is because he thinks he knows best about everything, and probably has little time for the Royal Family being a red.

 

[Uter]

Well for me this issue isn't about architecture.

The planning process has been followed, but now Charles has used his influence to get the Qatari's to withdraw their plans.

Suppose after so many years waiting for Falmer and seeing it pass through the planning system, Prince Charles decided he would rather it wasn't built and now wrote to the University to ask them not to sell their land to us?

This man has much greater influence than the man in the street and this to me is an abuse of that power for purely selfish reasons.

The Royal Family should be apolitical and keep out of planning issues.

 

[clapham_gull]

Well for me this issue isn't about architecture.

The planning process has been followed, but now Charles has used his influence to get the Qatari's to withdraw their plans.

Suppose after so many years waiting for Falmer and seeing it pass through the planning system, Prince Charles decided he would rather it wasn't built and now wrote to the University to ask them not to sell their land to us?

This man has much greater influence than the man in the street and this to me is an abuse of that power for purely selfish reasons.

The Royal Family should be apolitical and keep out of planning issues.

Yep.

 

[beorhthelm]

Suppose after so many years waiting for Falmer and seeing it pass through the planning system, Prince Charles decided he would rather it wasn't built and now wrote to the University to ask them not to sell their land to us?
...
The Royal Family should be apolitical and keep out of planning issues.

a poor anolgy, the plans have not yet been submitted and he is not objecting to something being built. the Prince has not interfered with the planning process since the plans were not sumbitted. He has every right as a citizen to raise his objections and as he happens to know the developers, he can appeal to them directly. If you want a Falmer comparison, its like an influential individual objecting to how a stadium would look against the backdrop of the downs and asking Knight to consider the plans so they are more symapthetic to the surroundings.

 

[clapham_gull]

a poor anolgy, the plans have not yet been submitted and he is not objecting to something being built. the Prince has not interfered with the planning process since the plans were not sumbitted. He has every right as a citizen to raise his objections and as he happens to know the developers, he can appeal to them directly. If you want a Falmer comparison, its like an influential individual objecting to how stadium would look against the backdrop of the downs and asking Knight to consider the plans so they are more symapthetic to the surroundings.

That's all well and good but.....

Since the development involves another Royal Family and that Royal Family don't want to be seen be upsetting another one, it's a completely different scenario from a member of the general public raising an objection.

It's been covered for months up here in the press, quite frankly he should keep his nose out. Anything is better than the ugly buildings that were there before. Can't see what his problem is.

 

[Uter]

a poor anolgy, the plans have not yet been submitted and he is not objecting to something being built. the Prince has not interfered with the planning process since the plans were not sumbitted. He has every right as a citizen to raise his objections and as he happens to know the developers, he can appeal to them directly. If you want a Falmer comparison, its like an influential individual objecting to how a stadium would look against the backdrop of the downs and asking Knight to consider the plans so they are more symapthetic to the surroundings.

My understanding is the plans were submitted and the planning officers had produced a report that praised the development. The plans were withdrawn shortly before Westminster Council were due to vote on them. Prince Charles could have objected through the proper channels, but chose not to.

 

[clapham_gull]

My understanding is the plans were submitted and the planning officers had produced a report that praised the development. The plans were withdrawn shortly before Westminster Council were due to vote on them. Prince Charles could have objected through the proper channels, but chose not to.

And it's hardly a usual objection is it. He wants his mate to design the site and fill it with those dreary mock classical things he is famous for.

 

[beorhthelm]

Since the development involves another Royal Family and that Royal Family don't want to be seen be upsetting another one, it's a completely different scenario from a member of the general public raising an objection.

thats their business. it is not a political issue, it is either private or commercial. i dont see the difference with this between two royal families and two blokes on the street who agree over a pint to change a planned extension. Lord Roger's is driving this issue as political and improper because he is out of pocket, ie for his own economic reasons. step back and remove who its about and its not such an issue.

 

[drew]

thats their business. it is not a political issue, it is either private or commercial. i dont see the difference with this between two royal families and two blokes on the street who agree over a pint to change a planned extension. Lord Roger's is driving this issue as political and improper because he is out of pocket, ie for his own economic reasons. step back and remove who its about and its not such an issue.

Is he really out of pocket. Not sure how the process works but I am sure he would have been paid a fee by the Qatari's for drawing up the plans. Maybe an additional fee when the project given the green light!

As for Charles, he is using his position to influence the decision so it is different to the man on the street. If Prince Charles had said to DK I don't like the design, he would have been more likely to consider changes than when the bakers from forfars objected. If the project had proceeded despite charlie boy's letter then it would have been a big international slap in the face for him.

 

[clapham_gull]

thats their business. it is not a political issue, it is either private or commercial. i dont see the difference with this between two royal families and two blokes on the street who agree over a pint to change a planned extension. Lord Roger's is driving this issue as political and improper because he is out of pocket, ie for his own economic reasons. step back and remove who its about and its not such an issue.

Simple question - Does any new development have to go past Prince Charles now ?

 

[Pavilionaire]

It's difficult to justify his interference. There is a line to be drawn, and I consider giving speeches and passing his opinion to be acceptable but actively getting involved in the planning and construction process overstepping the mark. RIBA's position on this issue is also the same as mine.

God knows we have enough planning committees before anything can be built and the process is pretty rigorous. Apparently, £30million has already been spent on the scheme, which has now been completely scrapped. That's a lot of jobs lost in a recession.

This incident throws up all sorts of issues, not least the "split" of the monarch's job between the Queen, Charles and William.

The Queen is 83 years old and not fit for the rigours of the job. She is sending her family out to do parts of her job and clearly the power is going to Charles' head.

I'm all for the monarchy but in today's 'global village' we need one figurehead doing the job properly, not an old and infirm monarch farming the work out to her family. The recent debacle re the French D-Day Commemoration is a worry.

It would be much better for all concerned if the Queen abdicated and gave Charles the gig. He'd then have more important matters to attend to than intervening in this way.

 

[beorhthelm]

Simple question - Does any new development have to go past Prince Charles now ?

no. i dont see he would be as interested or have as much influcence over normal developments anyway.

Apparently, £30million has already been spent on the scheme, which has now been completely scrapped. That's a lot of jobs lost in a recession.

whatever has or hasnt been spent is upto the developers. i think theres alot of bull around that side of the story too. seems Lord Rogers PR has won the public opinion, at least here, its all about who intervened not how or why.

 

[Pavilionaire]

We know how and why, which is why RIBA are against Prince Charles on this.

If I was the ruler of Qatar I'd be wary of upsetting the future King of Great Britain and head of the Commonwealth, so in light of that is it really "up to the developers" or do they feel under undue pressure to back down?

 

[beorhthelm]

If I was the ruler of Qatar I'd be wary of upsetting the future King of Great Britain and head of the Commonwealth, so in light of that is it really "up to the developers" or do they feel under undue pressure to back down?

that seems to be the prevailing perception, but id suggest that in this day and age the ruler of Qatar could easily tell Charles to go swing. im sure its more down to personal contact between the two, probably polo chums. i'd seriously wonder if it were a normal private developer would the Prince have gone so far as to write directly and i wonder if a normal private developer would have been swayed.

 

[clapham_gull]

that seems to be the prevailing perception, but id suggest that in this day and age the ruler of Qatar could easily tell Charles to go swing. im sure its more down to personal contact between the two, probably polo chums. i'd seriously wonder if it were a normal private developer would the Prince have gone so far as to write directly and i wonder if a normal private developer would have been swayed.

By all accounts he knocks out letters on a variety of subjects to a variety of people telling him that the Prince is "not best pleased".

He's been doing it for years.