.webp)
Mark Bolland: the PR guru whose job was to ‘make
Camilla more presentable’
Royal ‘spin doctor’ Prince Harry mentions in his
memoir is widely believed to be Bolland
Caroline
Davies
Caroline
Davies
Fri 24 Feb
2023 16.00 GMT
As Camilla
is crowned alongside the king at Westminster Abbey on 6 May, might she cast her
mind back some 20 years and reflect on the debt of gratitude she undoubtedly
owes to one man in particular?
If the Duke
of Sussex is present – though it’s not certain Charles’s avenging younger son
will be – might he too dwell, with less appreciation, on the part played by the
same man in his stepmother’s once unthinkable transformation from mistress to
queen consort ?
As he
writes in his memoir, Spare, Harry sees himself as collateral damage in the
campaign orchestrated in the late 90s and early 00s to rehabilitate Charles and
pave the way for marriage to Camilla, partly though “the new spin doctor
Camilla had talked Pa into hiring”.
Unnamed in
the book, he is widely believed to be Mark Bolland, who meticulously
choreographed those early first steps towards the realisation of his royal
master’s non-negotiable ambition: to reign with Camilla seated on the throne
beside him.
Today,
Charles’s popularity soars compared with the “sagging” reputation Harry
describes immediately following Diana’s death. And Camilla’s acceptance reached
its zenith when the late Queen Elizabeth II used her platinum jubilee message
to express her “sincere wish” she become queen consort.
Bolland,
described in Valentine Low’s book Courtiers as “clever, charming, manipulative”
and “one of the most colourful and interesting players in the royal drama of
the last 30 years”, is now long gone from palace life. He departed St James’s
in 2002, after six years as assistant then deputy private secretary, to set up
his own PR consultancy, initially with Charles and Camilla as star clients
until ties were severed in early 2003.
Yet the way
he seemingly set about his task, which at the time sent shudders through a
Buckingham Palace old guard unfamiliar with Bolland’s brand of PR alchemy,
clearly made a deep impression on a then teenaged Harry. Indeed, from Harry’s
narrative, it may be possible to detect some of the seeds of his trenchant
loathing of the press and his accusations of palace collusion with the fourth
estate back to the, some would say, overzealous methods Bolland is alleged to
have employed.
“Bolland’s
number one job was to make Camilla more presentable. And he was very, very
successful. Very good at it,” said one royal observer.
“If you
look at Camilla now, she’s on the privy council. She was a firm favourite of
the queen. And when she became queen consort, that was the culmination of the
job that Bolland started.”
The problem
was that at Buckingham Palace, just down the Mall from St James’s, they simply
did not know how to deal with him. Stories unflattering to other royals were
appearing.
And the way
they were dealt with caused concern. The Earl of Wessex found himself trounced.
And Harry has lamented being spun “right under a bus”.
Critics
attributed this partly to Bolland, and claimed he operated on a “Charles good,
all other royals bad” basis in his quest to augment the then Prince of Wales.
It’s a claim Bolland has previously denied, insisting it was put about by
Buckingham Palace courtiers jealous of the success of Charles’s team.
During the
Bolland era there was consternation at Buckingham Palace. People feared leaks.
People were saying that bad things were happening and discussing where they
were coming from, the Guardian has been told. Everybody was very stressed.
“But he did
a great job for Charles. What people – what Harry in particular – call
‘leaking’, well that’s just information. There’s a difference,” said the royal
observer.
Reportedly
called “Lord Blackadder” by William and Harry – another sobriquet for the
smooth operator was, apparently, “Lip Gloss” – Toronto-born Bolland, who was
schooled at a Middlesbrough comprehensive, was definitely different from the
traditional idea of a courtier. Depicted in the latest season of The Crown as
young, dynamic and decisive, he was lured to St James’s, aged 30, in 1996 from
the Press Complaints Commission, where he was director, and enjoyed easy access
to Fleet Street editors. He was friends with Rebekah Brooks, then Wade, who at
the time was editor of the News of the World.
Under his
auspices, Camilla was introduced to New York society in 1999. That same year,
the first photograph of Charles and Camilla together, leaving her sister
Annabel’s 50th birthday party at the Ritz, attracted so many photographers that
the British Epilepsy Association reportedly urged broadcasters not to reuse
footage in case it triggered seizures. A first meeting with the queen and
Camilla, at a Highgrove party for ex-King Constantine of Greece, followed.
Then there
was the PCC’s 10th anniversary party, hosted by Bolland’s then partner who
became his husband, the Conservative peer Guy Black, who is now deputy chair of
the Telegraph Media Group but back then had succeeded Bolland as director of
the PCC. Stars mingled with politicians and royals against the backdrop of the
Gilbert Collection at Somerset House: an “unadulterated, alpha plus, 24-carat
triumph”, one admirer told the Observer. With Charles, Camilla and William
together in public for the first time, it was another significant milestone.
The
narrative was changing. But at what cost?
Harry
certainly believes he was sacrificed in the process, along with his brother. In
Spare, he points the finger at the unnamed Bolland for aiding and abetting the
“pinpoint accurate” details that appeared of 16-year-old William’s first
private meeting with Camilla, though “royal sources” have reportedly denied
these claims made in the book of leaking on behalf of Camilla.
He also
writes of being “horrified, sickened” at a seven-page spread in the News of the
World, which had obtained a dossier of evidence of his teenaged drinking and drug
taking. Bolland, on not being able to deny the story, had in response informed
the newspaper of a visit Harry had made to a rehabilitation centre. The result
was an overspun story: “Worried Charles chose to terrify Harry away from drugs
by sending him to therapy sessions with hardcore heroin addicts.” A “family
friend” was quoted: “He has never done drugs since.” A win-win for Charles.
Except the
rehab centre visit had taken place two months before the evidence obtained by
the newspaper and was a “typical part of my princely charitable work”,
according to Harry’s book. Bolland later explained, in a rare newspaper
interview in the Guardian in 2003, that he had told the News of the World about
the visit, but had subsequently been “embarrassed” at the newspaper’s
overzealous attempts to be helpful. “They presented it in a much more
triumphalist manner than was justified,” he said.
Harry’s
conclusion is he was spun “right under a bus” in order to portray Charles as a
“harried single dad coping with a drug-addled son”.
Another
alleged example of Bolland’s discomfiting spinning occurred when Prince
Edward’s Ardent Productions crew failed to obey palace instructions for all
media to leave St Andrews after a photocall with William while at university.
Stories appeared quoting a “royal aide” saying Charles was “incandescent” and
called his brother a “fucking idiot”. Bolland later told the Guardian: “I doubt
I used that language, but it’s probably got my fingerprints on it.”
Bolland
declined the offer to comment for this article.
In December
2001, the Daily Telegraph, in a highly critical article, called Bolland “the
real power behind” the future king and asked: “Has the puppet master of St
James’s finally pulled one string too many?” Another, in the Spectator, asked:
“Charles’s spin doctor may be good for the prince’s ego but is he good for the
royal family and the nation?”
Bolland,
who was about to set up his own PR consultancy, departed St James’s in February
2002, although he retained Charles and Camilla as clients until 2003. Relations
between him and Charles’s new private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, imported
from Buckingham Palace, over the handling of stories were reportedly strained.
After his
consultancy contract expired, he maintained links with Camilla for several
months, until it became too difficult. “That’s when I said to Camilla: ‘I love
you dearly, let’s have lunch or dinner a couple of times a year, but I can’t be
at the end of a phone any more,’” he said in a 2004 interview for the British
Journalism Review.
But he did
not disappear completely, rocking up as a columnist at the News of the World,
called Blackadder, in which he sometimes shared his critical analysis of
Charles and his aides. He disbanded the column little more than a year later,
finding it too time-consuming.
In 2006 he
surfaced again, this time in the form of a witness statement on behalf of the
Mail on Sunday, which was embroiled in legal action with Charles over its
publication of his travel journal, in which he described some Chinese officials
as “appalling old waxworks”.
In the
statement, he not only said Charles’s travel journals were not especially
private – being circulated to between 50 and 75 people – but also revealed
Charles “often referred to himself as a ‘dissident’ working against the
prevailing political consensus”.
It was
revealing, too, about the way Bolland operated.
Back in
1999, when Charles did not attend a return banquet hosted by the Chinese
president, Jiang Zemin, during his state visit to the UK, a St James’s Palace
spokesperson denied reports it was a “snub” by Charles, a known admirer of the
exiled Tibetan leader the Dalai Lama, and saying the prince had a previous
engagement.
Roll
forward to that 2006 witness statement, and Bolland attests he was given “a
direct and personal instruction” by Charles to draw the media’s attention to
his banquet boycott and that Charles was “delighted” at the ensuing coverage.
One former
royal correspondent wonders how proactive Charles himself was back in those
Bolland days. “I suppose the question is how far Charles himself led that
campaign. How much he was on board with it. He must have been, otherwise
Bolland wouldn’t have done it.”
Bolland’s
task was to “win over the Mail and the Sun, particularly, because they were
very pro-Diana”, added the correspondent. In that, he very much succeeded.
Years have
since passed. Camilla’s stock continued its ascent. But few could disagree over
who first laid the foundations for the journey that will ultimately culminate
on 6 May when the crown is finally and firmly placed on the head of the
nation’s new queen consort.
.jpeg)
.webp)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário