Confirmation in the recently released Cabinet Office “precedent book” that Prince Charles has had access to cabinet papers for decades (Report, 16 November) will come as no surprise to historians. The clue’s in the name. The issue has a far longer history, but we know from an earlier precedent book – produced in the 1950s but only declassified in 2006 – that, as first in line to the throne, Charles’s mother began receiving cabinet minutes and memoranda in June 1950 at the age of 24. Given that our constitutional monarchy is largely constructed around precedent and convention, it would have been far more surprising to learn that Charles hadn’t enjoyed similar access. And his supporters will claim that this follows naturally from his right to be “educated” in preparation for his future role as monarch.
Nevertheless, as citizens, we surely also have the right to be “educated” in how constitutional monarchy actually operates in the present day, and to have some means of knowing whether the current heir to the throne is behaving in ways that might undermine trust in his political neutrality. To that extent, the most disturbing aspect of this story is the long battle that has been fought by the Cabinet Office to prevent the release of material that might serve such an “educational” purpose.
Professor Philip Murphy
Director, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
