Marina Hyde
Poor HRH. Why must misfortune dog him, when his
only crime is a passion for lovely things paid for by other people?
‘Famously, Charles attaches indispensable qualities to
the man who used to squeeze toothpaste on his toothbrush for him.’
Tue 7 Sep
2021 14.49 BST
One of my
favourite modern curiosities is the “diversity and inclusion” page on the
official website of the British royal family. “We are proud to champion
diversity throughout the organisation,” this auto-satirical cri de coeur runs.
“We employ and reward the very best talent, regardless of gender, race, ethnic
or national origin, disability, religion, sexual orientation or age. And that’s
how we seek out future potential too, recruiting from the widest available
pool. Our approach to recruitment and selection is fair, open and based purely
on merit.”
On what,
sorry? If your reflexive response to this is to cackle “BUT YOU’RE LITERALLY A
HEREDITARY MONARCHY, YOU MAD BASTARDS”, then please: just relax. Simply allow
the sentiment to splash on to you, like royal urine into a sample bottle that a
valet is holding, and realise that we live in times where “diversity” can mean
whatever the firm talking about it wants it to mean. In this case, a commitment
to getting more black servants. (You may recall that the House of Windsor did
have one mixed-race senior manager, but she and her husband left the organisation
last year to take up a position with Netflix.) So yes, it doesn’t matter that
this “firm” is one where – by law – you only get the big jobs because of who
your parents are. As for that bit about “recruiting from the widest available
pool”, you should simply read it as a reference to having made a mildly
concerted effort to finally stop interbreeding with their cousins. “We would
never want a certain type,” this advanced bollocks insists. “The key is to be
individual and different.”
Which
brings us to Michael Fawcett, Prince Charles’s longtime closest aide, who has
been accused of being involved in flogging a CBE and the promise of a
knighthood and citizenship to a Saudi billionaire who paid £1.5m for some
windows and woods and whatnot in a couple of the Prince of Wales’s Scottish
residences. Charles himself presented the CBE to Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin
Mahfouz in a private ceremony, presumably under the strong impression that he
was gilding the Saudi billionaire purely on merit. Mahfouz, by the way, denies
any wrongdoing. Indeed, according to Clarence House this morning, even Prince
Charles has “no knowledge” of this scandal. Doesn’t he read the papers? Maybe
it’s one of Fawcett’s many eclectic responsibilities to read them to him.
Fawcett, I
note, has “temporarily stepped down” from whichever confected role he currently
occupies. Do believe that it will be temporary, because history shows us that
whenever Michael steps down – as he has twice previously, following allegations
of bullying and for fencing royal gifts (an internal inquiry cleared him of
financial misconduct) – a way is always found for him to step right back up.
Famously, Charles attaches indispensable qualities to the man who used to
squeeze toothpaste on his toothbrush for him. That’s actually not a euphemism,
though I seem to remember people at one time thought it was. (It was Fawcett
who once held Charles’s urine sample pot for him too, after HRH had hurt his
arm by lifting a finger or something.)
At the time
of these donations, Fawcett was working to secure funding for Dumfries House,
for which Charles also pantingly accepted the loan of 17 paintings, apparently
valued at £217m, from a sublebrity gold bullion dealer. Charles has already
raised more than £45m on turning Dumfries into his charity headquarters. The
prince wrote to this donor that the paintings would “provide us with
much-needed security as an asset for the charity if things ever get tough”.
What’s not to love about the idea that royal financial security is
“much-needed”, or indeed about the notion that it was best Charles enjoyed the
paintings for now, keeping them in his back pocket in case “things ever get
tough” for his charity.
And now
this. Poor HRH. Why must misfortune dog him, when his only crime is a passion
for lovely things paid for by other people? Albeit for huge amounts of them. I
say his only crime – Fawcett and Charles have this week been reported to police
by Republic, the anti-monarchy activists, for suspected breach of the Honours
(Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925, so we shall see where that goes.
Just
kidding! Arguably, the two best things going for Prince Charles these days are
that he’s not Prince Andrew (who associated with a known paedophile and is
accused of worse); and that his institution is under constant criticism from
Prince Harry and Meghan (who many people seem to despise even more than
paedophiles). Ultimately, nothing very bad will happen to Charles while his
mother remains alive. I’m sure he’ll become king “purely on merit”. But after
that … well, one can’t help feeling all bets are off for Charles III, for whom
the waters of the talent pool look increasingly choppy.
Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist
.jpeg)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário