Now why would you say such a mean thing about Camilla?
Posted on 03/01/2006 9:27:40 PM PST by beaversmom
The Prince of Wales wants Britain to be transformed into an "organic oasis" with no chemicals used on any crops -even at the cost of imposing trade barriers and pulling out of the European Union (EU).
He outlined his vision in a meeting with Lord Haskins, the former chairman of Northern Foods, who was appointed by Tony Blair to head a rural review. Prince Charles's comments are understood to have been privately dismissed by Haskins as ill-thought out and impractical.
Charles's vision of Britain as an organic island was disclosed in the midst of controversy about his attempts to influence government decisions. His supporters say he has rightly championed worthy causes, but he faces criticism for lobbying ministers.
In a High Court case last week, Mark Bolland, the prince's former deputy private secretary, said Charles referred to himself as a "dissident" who was working against the "prevailing political consensus". Charles's advisers said this weekend that he was pursuing the privacy action to stop a "nest of thieves" exploiting his confidential writings.
When Haskins was appointed to head a review of rural policy in 2002 Charles was said to have raised concerns about the appointment. Blair then advised the prince to speak to Haskins in person.
At a meeting in his private apartment at St James's Palace, Charles told Haskins of his passion for organic food -and his opposition to the government's support for GM foods. He is said to have started "preaching" about how he wanted Britain to become an organic island -with its fields exclusively used for organic meat and vegetables, rather than chemically grown crops.
Haskins, who has always argued that organic production is not cost effective, was taken aback by Charles's idea. Such a scheme would mean imposing trade barriers and pulling out of the EU, Haskins politely suggested. Charles is believed to have responded: "So?"
Last week Haskins would not comment on the details of the meeting, but said: "He (Prince Charles) took an interest in the environmental agenda and everyone was made aware of his views. I don't believe the market for organics can possibly be the answer to the world's food problems."
A Clarence House spokesman said: "We do not comment on private meetings." But a source close to Charles said he had a sophisticated understanding of agriculture and did not insist tenant farmers on Duchy of Cornwall land were involved in organic production.
It emerged last night that Charles had lobbied Blair during the 2001 foot-and-mouth crisis, urging him to abandon the policy of culling livestock and introduce vaccination.
Describing himself as an "interfering busybody", he wrote that the EU was "short-sighted" because of its refusal to sanction nationwide inoculations, while the opposition of the National Farmers' Union was based on "ignorance and fear".
Charles's habit of lobbying ministers on political issues was formed at an early age. Even when head boy at Gordonstoun in 1967 he asked Michael Stewart, a cabinet minister, to speak to the school on the political issues of the day.
Two years later the Labour government was alarmed at Charles's potentially "dangerous" views on Welsh identity and their influence on the nationalist movement.
George Thomas, the Welsh secretary, wrote to Harold Wilson, the prime minister: "I am concerned by the speeches made by the prince ... a dangerous situation is developing. On two occasions he has made public speeches which have political implications."
Despite these concerns, Charles went on to lobby ministers throughout government.
Lord Irvine, the lord chancellor, is said to have complained about being "bombarded" with letters from Charles.
Clare Short, a former Labour minister, who was sent correspondence on the fate of the bushmen in Botswana, said she saw letters from Charles about once every six months when she was in office. "I didn't always agree with him, but he was always interested and sincere," she said.
Other MPs are concerned about Charles routinely giving ministers his views on issues. Labour's Paul Flynn said: "I'm sure when his letters arrive they're taken to the minister on a silver platter, but there's no reason he should have any greater access to ministers than any other taxpayer. The problems will come if he continues to do this when he is monarch. Would he have signed the hunting bill, for instance?"
Clarence House said Charles would continue his privacy fight: "We have got to stand up for what is right and have been heartened by the public response. Public figures must be allowed their own private correspondence."
The High Court case centres on eight travel journals, including one account of the handover of Hong Kong to China. Char-les circulated about 100 of these journals to close acquaintances, and has now asked for their return. His advisers are considering contacting the police about any stolen documentation once the court action is over.
No wonder Diana hated the royals.
Pfft!
As one of our Generals Said Chucky Cheese "Don't Be Stuck on Stupid!"
Chuck's wife, Trigger, could possibly donate some manure for the cause.
Water's a chemical, just how far does he want to go with this idiocy?
Now why would you say such a mean thing about Camilla?
"Now why would you say such a mean thing about Camilla?"
'Cause I can't post pictures.
That's a little harsh but it does seem that Chuck isn't wrapped very tightly.
He is certainly welcome to experiment all he wants on the acreage he owns, and good luck to him. And good luck explaining it to his mum, who will probably not be amused.
I have never been able to get the picture out of my mind of Charles roaming the castle in his arabic garb. When he whips out that prayer rug, it will complete the image.
Can anyone say *Irish potato famine*? You've got to control disease and pests somehow. What good is raising everything organic, when the crops fail and you are forced to buy non-organic produce from overseas?
ROFLMAO
And the bigger the Organ, the better. Camilla is so demanding...
Man, that's a cool shot. It looks like they're singing along with Paul Anka's "Diana".
Man, that's a cool shot. It looks like they're singing along with Paul Anka's "Diana".
Paul Anka's "DIANA"? That's so cruel (LOL).
Is that guy a nut? GB is a damp place and grains and veggies will rot pretty quick if not chemically protected.
I guess they could go back to having famines in the year following dampness at harvest time.
What a royal dolt.
Doesn't necessarily follow. In fact the growing conditions here are just about optimum, without major fungal disease problems, for a very wide range of vegetables and soft fruit, including all brassicas, nearly all leaf crops and roots (potatoes excepted), most legumes except the subtropical beans, and some grains (barley). Among the widely-grown crops the main exceptions I can think of are potatoes (blight), curcubits and the 'fruiting' vegetables (tomatoes, peppers, aubergines etc - but here these are mostly grown under glass anyway), some soft fruit (particularly strawberries) and wheat, which really prefers lower humidity.
I grow all my own vegetables and fruit, and I find I grow more or less organically not out of conviction or because the results taste better (which, for the most part, they do!): but simply because that with my local soil and climate chemical inputs are rarely necessary.
Of course, I wouldn't extrapolate my own conditions as a small grower to the very different requirements of large-scale commercial production: but even there, I think that you'll find that in the widely-grown crops, with the exceptions I've mentioned, the chemical inputs are predominantly for yield and pest control rather than fungal disease control related to damp.
Your Prince is German, pass it on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.