Liz Truss orders King Charles not to attend COP27 climate summit

[Celerity]

King Charles has long been known for his support on the issue of climate change and was thought to be delivering a speech at the annual conference of the world's nations

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/liz-truss-orders-king-charles-28132773



Prime Minister Liz Truss has reportedly blocked King Charles from making an appearance at the upcoming COP27 climate talks. The annual gathering of nations to discuss the global environment is due to take place in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt in November. During his time as the Prince of Wales, Charles often spoke about the issue of climate change and his desire for creating a sustainable world.

In September 2021, he wrote exclusively for the Daily Mirror on his personal lifelong quest to help future generations and said: “I have spent some forty years of my life trying to indicate what needs to be done to ensure we do not bequeath a destroyed world to our children and grandchildren.” He went on to warn that the world was "on the brink".

It was thought the King would be delivering a speech at this year's conference but the prime minister is believed to have rejected the idea - Ms Truss herself is unlikely to attend. A senior royal insider told The Times : "It is no mystery that the King was invited to go there. He had to think very carefully about what steps to take for his first overseas tour, and he is not going to be attending Cop."

It is said the choice to stop the King attending the meeting was due to Government advice, although Charles will find other means to support the event. The COP events are also know as the United Nations Climate Change Conference this year runs between November 6 and 18. At last year's COP26 in Glasgow the then-Prince of Wales gave a speech before urging world leaders to unite together and tackle climate change.

snip

[ananda]

1. She's a piece of work. Worse than Thatcher...

if that's possible.

[Ocelot II]

2. Thatcher without Thatcher's brains or political savvy.

Maybe just Trump with better social skills?

[XanaDUer2]

3. Wow. Nt

[mitch96]

4. "orders King Charles"... How well is that gonna go over with the king?...nt

[hlthe2b]

12. I think it is the Mirror (rag, UK) wild provocative interpretation only.

For all my (at best) equivocal feelings toward Charles, had she tried to "order" him my guess is he'd not be afraid to put her in her place (directly behind closed doors and via the nasty use of aids to the press in public).

[Irish_Dem]

13. The British monarchy's role is mostly ceremonial.

They no longer have political or executive roles in government.

Power resides with parliament and the prime minister.

[mitch96]

14. So does she have the power to stop him from going? What would happen if he went?

Cut the royal allowance?
m

[Irish_Dem]

22. No. The King is obligated to support the policy of the Prime Minister and Parliament.

If King Charles goes against the Prime Minister, he could lose his crown.
Or create a constitutional crisis.

The King reigns only by consent of Parliament and Parliament can remove him or his powers if it wants.

And yes the British taxpayers could demand an end to the royal family as well.

King Charles is unlikely to provoke this kind of serious crisis, especially early in his reign.

Though this move by the Prime Minister may cause some backlash with the public
as King Charles is popular right now.

[True Dough]

27. Well, is he truly committed to the climate change agenda or not?

If so, this would be a perfect opportunity to push it to the forefront. It would bring heaps of attention to the issue if he were to defy Truss.

And if he wind up losing his crown, he knows his son William is next in line and they seem to share concern for the environment.

Go for it, Chuck. Make your stand!

[Irish_Dem]

31. The British monarchy has existed for 1000 years.

I seriously doubt King Charles is going to be the one to end it.

And he most certainly is not going to hand over the throne to his son right now.
Charles has waited his entire life for this moment.

And he would not do this to Prince William who is now the Prince of Wales.

To put William in this position would be cruel for political and personal reasons.
William has a young family he wishes to raise, and he does not want to step into a huge
controversy.

That said, the British Monarchy plays the long game and does have referred power and immense influence.
We shall see how this plays out behind the scenes.

Prince William and his wife, the Princess of Wales, plan to come to the US soon for Earth Shot,
a global initiative they have founded to repair the environment.

Prince William and Kate are hugely popular with the British public and if the PM orders them
to cancel the long awaited Earth Shot program it is going to infuriate the Brits.

The Prime Minister takes on the royal family at her own risk.

For example Parliament could overrule the Prime Minister and humiliate her.

I am on a number of British forums and I will see how this goes over with the British public
and what the palace gossip is.

Stay tuned.

[Retrograde]

48. Parliament had deposed 2 kings in the past

Charles I and James II, so I suppose they could do something to show their disapproval.

Actually, my own belief is that since they love to claim they have an "unwritten constitution" the Brits are actually making this up as they go along. Elizabeth II was famously silent about anything not related to horses and few people had a clue to what she thought. Victoria spent most of her reign mourning her husband and let parliament pretty much do what they want. I'd like to see Charles actually get stand up and say, yes, climate change is important and we need to do something about it now. BTW, Edward VII did try to have an international role as king, so things aren't as set in stone as some think they are.

[Trueblue1968]

34. Charles should go anyway

[gldstwmn]

46. I don't think Charles will be kowtowing to anyone these days.

He waited 70 years to be in charge. If he wants to go then I think he'll go.

[Celerity]

52. King Charles abandons plans to attend Cop27 'following Liz Truss's advice'

Prime minister reportedly raised objections to him going during personal audience at Buckingham Palace

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/01/king-charles-abandons-plans-to-attend-cop27-following-liz-trusss-advice

King Charles III has reportedly abandoned plans to attend and deliver a speech at the Cop27 climate change summit on the advice of Liz Truss.

The monarch, a veteran campaigner on environmental issues, had been invited to the 27th UN climate change conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, next month.

But the prime minister is understood to have raised objections during a personal audience at Buckingham Palace last month, according to the Sunday Times.

Buckingham Palace has confirmed King Charles III will not attend the summit.

snip

[Dorian Gray]

55. Whelp

I guess that deflated that.

(Traditionally the ruling monarch doesn't attend politicized events that would negate parliament, so some of his personally supported work will take a backseat now, including climate change orgs.)

[gldstwmn]

59. Welp...

[spanone]

5. Charles should tell her this....

[fantase56]

16. I want a t-shirt that say's this.... n/t

[spanone]

26. 👍🏼

Welcome to DU

[gldstwmn]

47. I am stealing that.

[Leith]

6. Weird

What possible reason could she have for not allowing him to attend an international conference? And does she have the power to stop him?

[PlutosHeart]

37. Control and her allegiance to Fossil Fuels and the wealthiest.

I have no doubt the extreme conservatives were breathlessly waiting for the Queen to pass. Because you see, there cannot be "two rulers" or people of importance for the people. There is just them and them alone.

Expect the worst to come from the actions of PM "Less Trust". And they will be rapid, harsh and in alignment with the other bleached blond from Italy.

Being somnambulist at this point should not be an option anywhere.

[frogmarch]

7. All I know about her

is that not one of my British friends or relatives like her.

[The Blue Flower]

8. Got a bad vibe from her at QE2's funeral

I didn't know who she was when she delivered her remarks in the cathedral but felt repelled by her demeanor.

[OAITW r.2.0]

9. Picking a fight with the King?

On climate Change? Wrong issue to butt heads with the King.

[Stinky The Clown]

10. Ask Harry and Meghan to do it.

Oh. And fuck you Liz.

[Rebl2]

17. That's what

I thought of too. Have Harry do the speech. Could Prince William do the speech? Does she have control over him too? I think things are not going to go well for her very soon. What has happened to freedom of speech over there. No longer exists?

[former9thward]

38. There is no First amendment in Great Britain.

[Rebl2]

44. Well that

explains that.

[MyMission]

60. Harry would be perfect

Because they are not working royals, they don't have restraints on their speech or actions.

I thought William at first, but as heir he's bound by the same restrictions as his father.
Harry could attend, to give his father's speech. Then again, Meghan's the actress, so she could probably do good job too.

[magicarpet]

11. Here's an idea,...

King Charles III sends his son Prince Harry in his place to give his intended speech.

Since Harry is out of the royal fold and a private citizen. Not much Ms. Tuss can do to stop Harry.

[mitch96]

19. "Not much Ms. Tuss can do to stop Harry." She can "order" the Daily Mail to trash him..again.

The few times I fly by that site there is always a story trashing him or his wife about something foolish.. Got to love trash rags.. The National Inquirer of the UK I guess..
m

[EndlessWire]

41. I read a story that Chuck was so horrible to Meghan

during the Queen's funeral and associated ceremonies that Harry couldn't wait to get away from there. I think that ship has sailed. I am a big fan of Harry's, and Diana, and I can tell you that I think that Chuckie is well beneath the standard set by QE. QE may have botched dealing with Diana, but at least Diana gave it a shot, and didn't commit adultery during the damned honeymoon.

"King" Chuck should turn it all over to William, and see if he can do better.

[Dorian Gray]

56. Harry, William, Edward....

any of them can go speak here. The ruling monarch would step down bc of tradition.

I don't think this is the conflict this thread is making it out to be.

It's tradition for the ruling monarch not to go to political events. (And climate change is treated as political.)

[greatauntoftriplets]

15. Was the king "not amused" at Truss' order?

[ms liberty]

18. Send Harry.

[Lucinda]

54. +1

[Deep State Witch]

20. He Needs To Remind Her

That the PM serves at the Monarch's pleasure.

[former9thward]

40. Not how it works.

The King is ceremonial.

[asm128]

42. Hmm

[link:https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/appointment-prime-ministers-role-of-king]

The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. These are residual powers remaining with the Sovereign that have not been placed elsewhere. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King.

[former9thward]

43. No the King does not "appoint" the PM.

That is a purely ceremonial function. The majority party or coalition in Parliament selects a leader. That leader is automatically appointed the PM by the King. He has no choice in the matter.

[Celerity]

53. it is more complicated than that (but you are right in terms of the real world outcome atm)

see


https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217214754#post49

and

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217214754#post22

Many (not just on DU) are not all that familiar with the Royal Prerogative, the Crown's reserve powers, and the comlex and nebulous balance of power that emanates from our (I am a British citizen as well) uncodified constitution.

[myohmy2]

21. how...

...can she stop the King?

...he's the King...

...unless being King ain't what it used to be...

...fuck it Chuck, show up anyway...

...

[Mike Nelson]

23. Yay!

... I don't see much use for the Royal family - but this should be a public opinion disaster for Liz Truss!

[kimbutgar]

24. So what is she going to do to him if he attends?

King Charles do what is right and attend and tell her to F off!

[paleotn]

29. Seriously. Go all Cromwell on his ass?

I kind of doubt that.

[mahina]

25. Or what?

[paleotn]

28. When you thought she couldn't fuck up any worse....

I can't wait to see her encore for THIS major fuck up. I also wonder how low public perception of the Tories can go.

[Marcuse]

30. Charles would do well not to emulate the first of his name.

[Disaffected]

32. Some commentators in the UK don't think

she will last long, particularly in view of the latest economic cock-up. Just another RW asshat I guess.

They are even talking about bringing back BoJo! And Labour currently is about 30% up on them.

[Rebl2]

45. Oh I

hope she doesn’t last long.

[Bristlecone]

33. She is a zero and not long for this office.

[JI7]

35. Does she have the ability to prevent him from attending ?

[Celerity]

49. Yes, via ministerial Advice, which would fall under a limitation of the

Reserve Powers of of the Crown (within the penumbra of the Royal Prerogative).

In theory the Crown (King Charles III in this case) could refuse to follow the Advice, but that would set up a Constitutional crisis (remember that we (putting on my British cap) do not have a codified constitution) and open the door to the possible removal of any and all vestiges of the Royal Perogative (something Tony Blair wanted to do but never succeeded, unfortunately).

IF it really continued to be pushed by the Crown (I saw some saying that the PM serves at the consent of the King, but William IV's dismissal of Lord Melbourne's Whig government in November 1834 was the last time a British monarch tried to assert political authority by bringing down a government that had majority support in the House of Commons, and it eventually failed) Charles would be risking the entire Monarchy, especially if more acts invoking Reserve powers against the Advice of the ministers were put forward.

[JI7]

50. I feel like he would have the public on his side on this

so she wouldn't completely prevent him from going but just ask he doesn't.

[Celerity]

51. I am a republican (ie end the monarchy) and completely Labour, so for me it would be pleasantly

ironic if the bloody TORIES ended up helping to bring it all down, lolol.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

36. Probably not a good idea to spread whoppers from disreputable tabloids.

Liz Truss has no authority to "order" King Charles, and this is clearly a bullshit spin on what actually happened.

People should really check their sources before posting false narratives and conspiracy theories here on DU.

.

[GenThePerservering]

39. Brits I know

think Liz will be out on her backside fairly soon - she's a half-wit.

[DFW]

57. OK; so if King Charles III of England can't go........

Can his friend, and remarkably similar-looking friend, Chuck Windsor go in his stead?
He looks just like the king, just doesn't dress as fancy.

[Boomerproud]

58. So climate change is "political"?

I get it , the wealthy haven't and will not be affected by huge storms, ever. Oops my bad.