BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Friday 25 June 2010

Sarah McDermott | 11:43 UK time, Friday, 25 June 2010

Here's Kirsty with more details on tonight's Newsnight:

Prince Charles's opposition to modernist architecture is well known, but did he overstep his constitutional position when he lobbied the Qatari royal family - behind the scenes - to express his passionate opposition to a multi-billion pound property contract in London which was later cancelled?

Does he, as his supporters claim, simply give voice to the views of local residents who feel ignored by the planning system? Or is his clout increasingly making it impossible for new exciting architecture to find favour?

Today Judge Geoffrey Vos ruled that CPC group, a developer whose Chelsea Barracks property scheme in London was cancelled following opposition from Prince Charles, is entitled to damages.

In June last year the Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment withdrew its planning application for the Chelsea Barracks development masterminded by Richard Rogers for CPC.

It followed a letter Prince Charles had written to Qatar's prime minister and the head of Qatari Diar expressing his opposition to the design.

Judge Vos said, both the developers, the Candy Brothers, and Qatari Diar "were faced with a very difficult position once the Prince of Wales intervened in the planning process" in March last year. "His intervention was, no doubt, unexpected and unwelcome," he said.

Live on Newsnight one of the Prince of Wales advocates faces a leading architect.

As world leaders jet into Toronto for the start of the G20 we have a live interview with the head of the OECD about the dangers of a double dip recession, as European nations tighten their belts in concert. Plus, when he described George Osborne's budget as "courageous," what exactly did he mean?

And, on the subject of these straightened times, our Science editor Susan Watts has a special report from the See Further festival on London's South Bank which opens today, timed to coincide with the 350th anniversary of the Royal Society.

It is a celebration of science that also heralds a big warning - spending cuts for short term savings in the area of science and innovation, engineering and design could have disastrous, long term consequences for Britain's prosperity.

Could we risk losing our place as one of the world's leading scientific nations?

Sir James Dyson tells Susan about the dangers of neglecting science, in particular in our education system.

Do join me at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

Kirsty


--------------------------------------------------------------

From earlier today:

David Cameron has urged a "tight focus" on priorities at the G8 and G20 summits - his first as UK PM - to make sure they "deliver for people".

The leaders of the G8 industrialised nations are meeting in Muskoka, Ontario to discuss help for poor countries.

Tonight we'll be speaking to the head of the OECD, Angel Gurría.

Then Richard Watson will be examining the curious world of planning and property development in Britain.

A high-profile court case has blamed Prince Charles for the demise of a scheme for luxury apartments in one of the country's wealthiest areas.

The case saw property developers the Candy brothers accuse the Qatari royal family of dropping the £3bn development plans for Chelsea Barracks in London after the prince's intervention. They sued the developers, state-backed Qatari Diar, for £81m compensation.

So is Prince Charles overstepping his constitutional role? Is his influence in affecting the landscape of our cities benign or otherwise? And does it lead to an inherent conservatism in British architecture?

And our Science editor Susan Watts will be reporting from the South Bank's celebration of science which coincides with the 350th anniversary of the Royal Society. She'll be considering if cuts in Science and university budgets could undermine Britain's position as one of the world's leading scientific nations, and affect our long term growth prospects. Read more about that story on Susan's blog.

More details later.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    The media are so busy trying to find divisions within the coalition that you wonder how long it will be before "sources" associated with second cousins of Lib Dem MP's are selling their stories about the profound discontent in the Lib Dem ranks.

    In reality there seems to be near unanimous agreement on the course of action and its only if the economic plans go terribly wrong that we will see disagreement if people are getting hurt for ideological reasons.

    But then the Tories themselves have no interest in re-alienating people where there is a clear disparity between what is intended to happen and what is happening.

  • Comment number 2.

    I would hope that somewhere on the G8 and G20 are focusing on the effects of cuts.

    I suppose the UK is in a difficult position as we probably would like Germany NOT to cut so they can keep the Eurozone stable yet we oursleves have already committed to cut.

    The problem for the poor countries I would guess is the less wealthy and more troubled G20 countries will have less money and will to help and the leading economies have to worry about reserves in case the sovereign debt crisis sees a domino wave of defaults so can't make up the shortfall.

    Therefore they will probably get less whilst the economic guru's take a wild guess about how things will be in two years.

    Perhaps there can be agreement to defer the shortfall.

    Inevitably Saints Blair and Brown and others will complain and yet again this all comes down to agreeing to financial roulette games with bankers when we did not even understand the rules.

  • Comment number 3.

    On architecture a plague on all the Houses as Charles is too conservative and meddlesome but many of the "modern" architects would applaud good form whilst taking no account of the function and sustainability of the design.

    For me the sub-text is that in a society trying to become classless it is an anachronism to have clearly class based individuals, though decent people, interfering.

    Getting rid of the monarchy may unglue the union and reforming Parliament so that both Houses are elected and may create paralysis may show the need for a new higher figure like an elected President who was not head of state.

    Oh for a democratic republic.

  • Comment number 4.

    I don't know the detail of the higher education budget cuts but as a Lib Dem voter I have to say that I am not in favour of tuition fees as I still fear it will drive away people from poorer backgrounds. Starting people off with large debts, few jobs and a changing economic strategy does not seem sensible.

    It also does not sit right if we are cutting back on science and maths and we know that in some areas we have expertise that we need to maintain and in others - like maths - we simply need more and better mathematicians.

    It is also a concern how much we will now be dependent on foreign income that may suddenly disappear. I gather some redbrick universities get 30% of their income from China alone and with the cuts could they have almost as much influence as the government?

  • Comment number 5.

    The last thing these poor countries need is help from us rich countries. They'll end up selling their nations identity.. and land, then the IMF will shackle them forever and a day. Stop giving loans to these basket case third worlders and poor countries; stop throwing aid at them. Aid is a racket as we already know, stop this nonsense. Let these countries find there own way. Once the Big 8 and the banks have finished with them, the'll be just another wheelchair bound case like all the other countries they crippled.

    I sense a Pavlov dog response...ding! ding! aup, there you go. bnp, griffin and Belfast. Anybody got a towel..its everywhere.
    I could be wrong.

  • Comment number 6.

    The Aryan Strike Force chaps (not the ricin guy who got ten yearsa few months back) got sentenced and got 30 months and two years for inciting racial hatred and "possessing information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism and disseminating a terrorist publication".

    Their QC's suggested that there was a large element of the fantasist about them but surely that is a consideration that may be outweighed by what they were trying to promote and encourage and possibly engage in themselves - terrorism.

    The good work of the police should not dampen judgement of what the accused were trying to do.

    So for me those sentences are far too light.

    On the other hand I thought whilst Carlisle was speaking from a position of genuine concern and knowledge about control orders and detention periods he does not fully address our need to maintain high democratic standards.

    The increased detention periods have never really been used and emergency legislation could be enacted at the time and its probable that detention orders have been used on innocent people by the sounds of the NN piece the other day.

    It probably would lead to a greater chance of a major terrorist crime but then nobody wants to end up being shifted by degree to a police state.

  • Comment number 7.

    It has been many weeks if not months since the last internal spat of the BNP.

    So far as I know Collett who was their publicity officer and was arrested for threatening to kill his party leader over expenses and policy differences is definetly out of the party.

    Nobody has leaked a membership list for months.

    A few councillors have left and a few more get dumped by the voters.

    Griffin is standing down and so the heir apparent must aleady be under consideration.

    Is it almost inevitable that there will be tensions between Griffin and the heir apparent?

  • Comment number 8.

    In the opinion of the Judge, the intervention of Prince Charles was "unexpected and unwelcome". The Candy brothers will not receive a penny in damages. I think your interpretation that Prince Charles has been "blamed" for the demise of the scheme is wrong must have been coloured by your Republican tendencies.

    A very large number of sane and reasonable people who fought very hard to protect the Barracks site from Richard Rogers unattractive and over-large design considered the intervention of Prince Charles to be extremely welcome. Chelsea could have ended up being blighted by a monstrosity comparable to that other Rogers/Candy Brothers eyesore that calls itself 1 Knightsbridge.

  • Comment number 9.

    #5 kevseywevsey

    "I sense a Pavlov dog response...ding! ding! aup, there you go. bnp, griffin and Belfast. Anybody got a towel..its everywhere."

    You Nationalists are so sensitive!

    Its not unfair if you say you are a nationalist and think that "the Griff" could have been a kingmaker and "the Cleggster" wasn't going to make much impact your loyalties lie within the realms occupied by the BNP. That's because "the Griff" phrase indicates a certain disposition and I could be wrong but when they did their launch I believe it was you, but could be wrong, who thought "it wasn't Nuremburg - yet".

    As for Belfast if you brag about your youth and the joys of throwing bottles at the British army and singing songs about them and how "Prozac liberals" don't have your depth of experience as they didn't see the rubber bullets flying about then people will colour their views accordingly.

    Also when you suggest "then the IMF will shackle them forever and a day" you are using your political judgement of what the IMF is all about in much the same way that I interpret your remarks.

  • Comment number 10.

    its just a pity that the 'royal' family does not speak out more about the poverty gap in the UK, about the desperate state of millions of their 'subjects', about the hypocrisy and corruption of those 'at the top'.

    of course, that might be hard to stomach coming from the very Bastion of privilege and wealth.

    but he is certainly right to express any doubt he has about architecture and planning - he is also a free citizen, just as the rest of us are. He is more than entitled to have an opinion and express it. We are also free to disagree.

    that doesn't sound too difficult to grasp?


    on cuts to the science budgets - insanity. Just as the Arts/Humanities, investing in Science is intended to produce future growth. Yet another example of the almost incomprehensible policies coming out from Osborne's Poison Pen.

    perhaps the Science Laboratories should be researching more effective pitchforks???

  • Comment number 11.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 12.

    Prince Charles has behaved unacceptably with regard to the Chelsea Barracks development. He is entitled to express his views, whether they chime with public opinion or not, but he is in a position of power, and has clearly abused it in this case. There are too many weasel words excusing his behaviour; he is exploiting his (unearned) privelege, and it is about time the government warned him formally about such behaviour.

  • Comment number 13.

    1

    the story behind much of NN coverage is 'finding divisions'. given some have a relationship to the labour party its predictable?

    investigative journalism died a long time ago on the bbc. maybe all the money has been wasted on 'talent' rather than programming?

  • Comment number 14.

    10

    one must wonder why the 'fairness' lobby are silent on the role gamers as head of state, why the national oath is not to protect all the people but one family and their privilege, why its against the law to suggest anyone else be head of state, why the national anthem is a monarchy sing song and why millionaire landowners get billions in subsidy merely for owning land?

    Brits are dying to bring a higher principle of democracy to afghanistan [previously iraq] than we enjoy here? Indeed to bring the same level of democracy to the uk would class one as a terrorist, an offender against the treason laws and have the full weight of the state to crush the idea.

    the concept of a poverty gap is an hallucination. anyone whose needs have been met is not in poverty. what people mean is that it is 'unfair' that some have more money than that class of people who just have the basics therefore they must be taxed till everyone is 'equal'. Marxist claptrap.

  • Comment number 15.

    Re: science

    Are you feeling nicely settled in and comfy, house scientist?

    Repondez, as says the French journalst, Mr Jean Pierre Elkabbach of Europe1 amd who I don't listen to because of you.

    Feelimg proid?

  • Comment number 16.

  • Comment number 17.

    HRH storm in A T cup with NO T

  • Comment number 18.

    Top Gear on son Damn Fine

    Get Some Heavy Music Down The Head Try MastaDon Crack The Sky/SkYe Clarkson.

    Is Mastadon some kind of Beastie

  • Comment number 19.

    Watched A Bit of Florence (Damn Fine)

    I Look Around and I Cant Find You

    Perhaps He doesnt Kneed 2 B Found

  • Comment number 20.

    seen the Ex Vicar who's Daughter was Slaughtered by Brain Deads

    That could have been Your/My Daughter who cares EH

    Lets Worry about The Brain Deads human rights (the lawyer/liar oo lovely Dozy Taxpayers Hard Earned Cash CHEERS SUCKERS)

    eurowpissin court of you man rights (nice little earner) BIN IT

    British Uk Irish Welsh English Scots SoveRaint should Rule OK

    a guv 1st job is 2 protect the pop u believe that u believe

    bbc blair brown cambell 3 skidmarks

  • Comment number 21.

    The Cameronian pm Q's has he answered more Q's than the last Idiot ever did

  • Comment number 22.

    B.L.R. Beyond Local Recovery

    B.E.R. Beyond Economic Recovery

    what's the idiot on aboat now

  • Comment number 23.

    Mark Four Lee Enfield Point 303 Wrong its 307

  • Comment number 24.

    As Mark and Lard would Say

    MusINT Grumble

  • Comment number 25.

    A MUST READ STORY...

    The Great Inertia Sector: A whistleblower's account of council work where staff pull six-month sickies

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289702/Public-sector-inertia-council-office-employees-month-sickies.html

  • Comment number 26.

    POWER TO THE PEOPLE

    The POWER of the Monarchy? What Power?

    For sure they have position, and privilege and it is paid for and upheld by the people. But there have been no heads on spikes on the walls of the tower for a number of years now.

    THEY have less real power than Messrs Capello, Lloyd Webber, Cowell or any of their cronies. They can maybe deny you a knighthood or a garden party invite. Yaboo sucks!

    Most leaders of governements, except the despots, are worn out or thrown out after a handful or so of years. And they can retire at 65/68 whatever.

    Don't be fooled that the senior royals merely 'turn up and smile' once in a while. I would defy many hard working intelligent, 60, 70, 80+ year olds to put in an average day chez Buck house or Gatscombe or Tetbury.....

    It/They may be far from perfect but I've not seen many better models. I mean, look what happens when you let the people VOTE for their favourite!!!!!! ;)

  • Comment number 27.

    26 ..look what happens when you let the people VOTE..

    yes that is the monarchist anti democracy anti human rights mindset. they have been using that line since monarchy role gaming was invented [in the bible, from which they claim their authority, there was no monarchy in the garden of eden -it was invented later]. If one listened to the role gamers we would never have democracy or human rights. They only accepted it after they were looking down the barrel of cromwell's cannon. The monarchists will never accept democracy/human rights as a principle.

    The focus of a state and its institutions should not be the preservation of one family of role gamers but the rights and laws of all the people. Our institutions have a personal oath of loyalty to the role gamers like the ss had to hitler. This makes everyone else in the uk a potential enemy. its very small minded and perverts the soul of the nation.

    the uk state cannot justify Brits dying for a higher principle of democracy abroad then we have here. reminds me of the injustice of black people fighting for the usa when they couldn't sit in the same room as white people. its a fundamental injustice.

  • Comment number 28.

    25

    yes massive waste in public sector. I have a friend who works in business computing. he loves march as councils squander thousands on unnecessary computer kit just to 'use up the budget' before year end.

    public services is the one place the unions/professional closed shops still reign. The justice system is just as bad at stringing stuff out as their philosophy is that good justice is slow and expensive justice. which is rot. Justice is swift.

  • Comment number 29.

    very funny that a piece about modernist architecture is followed by pictures of the south bank bunker. 1960s modernist estates are being pulled down and replace with sensible architecture. either you accept everything is in ratio or you don't. buildings not in ratio are fit for nothing and are rejected. or if you like should your clothes fit you [be in ratio to you]?

    the new industries

    sure science. Also media content. everyone needs content to fill the new media. one only has to look at uk tv to see the poverty of media. People are hungry for stories well told but all we get is a top heavy diet of makeover/talent/gameshows.

  • Comment number 30.

    #27

    I can't fault you on that one, Brightyangthing, though I have a sneaky feeling that .... unless they are liars????

    I'm expecting an official change very soon, in the meantime I shall follow my own paths with all the twists and turns, wherever I might happen to be as well as my instinct.

    mim

  • Comment number 31.

    #30 addendum

    How about Google, BYT, how do you see it from your angle?

    mim

  • Comment number 32.

    Googling.

    I believe it is a perfectly legal activity between consenting adults!

  • Comment number 33.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 34.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 35.

    #32

    Brightyangthing

    Your angle on googling turned me into gigglong on my return ti the sky suite and listening to beautiful songs.

    You are a star ****

    mim

  • Comment number 36.

    The planning process has been honed to provide for democracy in developing our built environment, specifically to nuetralise special interests and eliminate corruption and the effects of undue influence.

    Up and down the country planning issues are highly contentious. From amongst ourselves we elect people to give serious, balanced consideration to strategies and policies to guide and determine development. Those involved are subject to a strict code of conduct which exerts considerable pressure on the conscientious.

    Prince Charles' interference in the Chelsea Barracks planning issue is a gross violation, insulting to each one of us. In effect he says "I am not restricted to using the process and have my own ways".

    I say all this as a supporter of the monarchy and no great admirer of modern architecture. Sad to say, I feel he is not to be trusted with privilege

  • Comment number 37.

    Whatever happened to freedom of speech? What is wrong with Prince Charles giving his opinions on something? We, as the public, have a right to do so, so why should he be restricted?

    On another note, The Economist has hailed Jeremy as the modern Socrates :o)
    Source: http://www.economist.com/node/16423350?story_id=16423350&fsrc=rss

    Goood luck today to the England football team!

  • Comment number 38.

    #37

    A very apt comparison, Mistress76uk, adding M&S pants & socks to the intellectual bit, though Jeremy is much well kempt and in much better shape than Socrates ever was. I see myself somewhat akin to this type of thought and being. Perhaps I should change my name to Sock/r/être????

    mim

  • Comment number 39.


    #27 jaunty

    Don’t do a GO1 here and mistake a general defence of a person/people/idea as a hard line ism of any sort. Being open minded, sometimes playing devil’s advocate and trying to giving benefit of doubt and view from the other side when all around us are ‘innit to winnit’ to some extent wasn’t a crime last time I looked.

    In terms of undue influence especially in planning and local government issues I have far great concerns about consistent and damaging conflicts of interest enjoyed by many councillors, planners and developers, many of whose relationships are not so tenuously interlinked. It is seldom about following set guidelines, but about getting the right people on side. It’s a dirty game.

    “.....there was no monarchy in the garden of eden –“ Err, sorry? You read a very different bible from me then. We are all still paying the penalty are we not for a vengeful GOD who smote those who strayed from his policy document. Some meritocracy that. Bow down before me or you will face eternal damnation. Cool! Fair? Good?

    Human rights (and responsibilities) are a cornerstone of what most (myself included) would consider civilised society and yet they are inexplicably intertwined with what you yourself frequently point out as the battle/difference between Good and Fair. Where does equality sit on that see saw?

    I find, as I think you often intimate, that a fully equal society is neither possible nor desirable in the ultimate measure. But in a civilised ‘fair’ and good society, where there are greater and lesser, the most important remit of the greater is that the lesser should be cared for and supported. That’s Good and it is also fair??

    A BIG question for the BIG Society is exactly how far that support stretches, it’s nature (help up vs hand out) and how the greater can be entrusted, encouraged and perhaps even enforced to provide the correct level of support.


    I had better NOT get started on LA/Public Sector Wastage. Life is just far too short and the sun still shines.

  • Comment number 40.

    UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM SOLVER

    Every football match, every goal line, two linesmen/women, line call judges (one each side of the net) whose sole remit is to WATCH THE LINE.

    After all, getting the ball across it is the SOLE AIM of the game???

    They do it at Wimbledon, why NOT at Bloomfontein?????

    But like the Murphy's................

  • Comment number 41.

    #37 mistress76uk

    "Whatever happened to freedom of speech? What is wrong with Prince Charles giving his opinions on something? We, as the public, have a right to do so, so why should he be restricted"

    Is Prince Charles the public or a constitutional monarch and if a constitutional monarch becomes where does that leave the reality of our democracy?

    Is he really much the same as Joe Bloggs from Somewhere or as some have suggested is the surprise here that he actually became public. If he has a right to demonstrate his views and exercise his influence why is he som unhappy his intervention became public?

  • Comment number 42.

    #10 mindys_housemate

    "its just a pity that the 'royal' family does not speak out more about the poverty gap in the UK, about the desperate state of millions of their 'subjects', about the hypocrisy and corruption of those 'at the top'."

    You were whinging the other day that I always end up accusing people of being the BNP and slating them all the time and so on.

    Can you suggest nobody to end this "corruption and hypocrisy"?

    I know it won't be the BNP as the odious Nick Griffin wants to get top a tea party and try and get in with the in crows as soon as possible.

  • Comment number 43.

    The media asks the same questions a thousand times until it gets the answer it wants.

    "A YouGov/Brand Democracy survey, which will alarm already restive Lib Dem MPs, shows 48% of those who voted Lib Dem at the election are now less inclined to back them again as a direct result of the increase in VAT from 17.5% to 20%."

    But "less inclined" does not so far as I know cover the fact that in the last polls the Lib Dem was exactly where you would expect it to be outside an election.

    Previously before the general election Ipsos concluded, I seem to recall, that roughly 66% were against electoral reform and a hung Parliament and after the election we find that actually most are happy - at this time - with the result and a large majority would like to see fairer voting.

    Given the Labour narrative that huge multitudes of politicians and voters are defecting to them when do they become the most popular opposition in history?

    Will these defectors acknowledge what role Labour itself played in creating the problems that this current coalition are having to deal with?

    They are having to deal with these problems incidentally in a way that is actually quite consistent with other leading European states and we are not the US where they have such a large consumer sector that they rarely slip into negative growth.

  • Comment number 44.

    #39 brightyangthing

    "Don’t do a GO1 here and mistake a general defence of a person/people/idea as a hard line ism of any sort. Being open minded, sometimes playing devil’s advocate and trying to giving benefit of doubt and view from the other side when all around us are ‘innit to winnit’ to some extent wasn’t a crime last time I looked."

    The only thing I tend to trash absolutely is the far right posters trying to promote Hitler and National Socialism and Holocaust denial and racial differences.

    I am not suggesting you are promoting those but being "open minded" when somebody for instance might suggest that "there is a mountain of evidence for and against the Holocaust" is just plain drivel and encouraging said "open mindedness" would be naive and a path to the loss of the democratic liberties that have been so hard won.

    Last time I checked there was no "general defence" for Hitler.

  • Comment number 45.

    #39 brightyangthing

    "I find, as I think you often intimate, that a fully equal society is neither possible nor desirable in the ultimate measure."

    "It is seldom about following set guidelines, but about getting the right people on side. It’s a dirty game."

    That as they say is entirely in your world and in my view you will find very few people will ever endorse acceptance of less fair world and as soon as they hear phrases like "the right people" then they have every reason to start worrying.

    That is because it is usually an elite who are trying to promote their own interests against the interests of the majority.

  • Comment number 46.

  • Comment number 47.

    #44 Well Gango another silly statement by you (No)racial differences

    Birmingham Heartlands Hospital and the Anthony Nolan Trust doesn't agree with your theory that we are not different... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Anthony-Nolan-Trust-Needs-More-Donors-From-Different-Ethnic-Groups-For-Its-Bone-Marrow-Register/Article/201006315652117?lpos=UK_News_Third_Home_Page_Article_Teaser_Region__0&lid=ARTICLE_15652117_Anthony_Nolan_Trust_Needs_More_Donors_From_Different_Ethnic_Groups_For_Its_Bone_Marrow_Register

    We may all be the same on the outside but our genetic make up varies enormously, that's why they need more ethnic donors here, because they don't have english etc. genes!

  • Comment number 48.

    Pathetic football today :o(
    More worrying news thanks to President Obama
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-can-shut-down-internet-for-4-months-under-new-emergency-powers.html

  • Comment number 49.

    #5: i would agree with your comment about cutting Aid - but only if it is replaced with a national effort to only buy FairTrade products.

    #14: would you prefer an elected President? We seem free to talk about it.....?

    "the concept of a poverty gap is an hallucination. anyone whose needs have been met is not in poverty. what people mean is that it is 'unfair' that some have more money than that class of people who just have the basics therefore they must be taxed till everyone is 'equal'. Marxist claptrap."

    what are "needs" defined as? Adam Smith argued that "needs" included the necessities that those employed would regard as necessities - clothes, internet, food etc.

    as for "everyone being equal" - that may be Marxist clap-trap (although it also fits Feudal-Capitalism quite well, think 'McDonalds'), but it is futile. Not everyone wants the same things, and some are happy to sacrifice Home life with children for higher incomes for themselves. Some might want to work longer hours, some to spend more time on non-paid-work. The ultimate key is to remove the exploitation in the system, so people generally work in cooperatives, sharing the productivity they produce equally.

    this allows for different remuneration, whilst preventing the grotesque wealth gap that comes from allowing people to exploit others for profit.


    #36: perhaps if the proposed development was not such a hideous Modernist eyesore, i would be more sympathetic to the complaints of the wannabe developer? As it is though, i also agree with the Prince that the proposal brought a 'tear to my eye' when i saw it, and i could not fault his powerful opposition to it. Indeed, that such a development could go ahead, with the clear general opposition to it, is indicative that local Councils are not responsive enough to local residents, and far too much responsive to wealthy and powerful developers. Many towns and villages across the Country have felt this, as Tescos and Sainburys have sprouted across the land like poisonous toadstools.

    perhaps he has "abused his power", but i strongly suspect that is because of the passion he felt to oppose this monstrosity in the heart of London. Had the proposed development have been less objectionable, i doubt he would have been as impassioned.


    #37: remember what happened to the great teacher Socrates!! :/


    #38 re Pbama: Gulp! :/ :/

  • Comment number 50.

    ---btw, off-topic, but has anyone else noticed we've lost pretty much everything since the Tories came to power? We even came last in Eurovision! And now the World Cup...

  • Comment number 51.

    INNIT TO WINNIT? INNIT?

    #50
    I await your explanation for the cricket, the unbroken sunshine (OK, so it rained here last night) and the fact that the Elgin Marbles still have pride of place in the BRITISH Museum!
    :p

  • Comment number 52.

    @ #41 Gangofone - Prince Charles is a human being, and his rights are covered under The Human Rights Act 1998 Section 13 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion). He has every right to give his opinions.

  • Comment number 53.

    52 RE GOO

    Yes Your Right His Right GOO is Wrong GOO is 2 gooee for me

  • Comment number 54.

    #51: ...luck? ;)

  • Comment number 55.

    Has someone been running Markov chain text generators here or are most of the above posters totally off their rockers?

    Mimpromptu - your posts look like someone ran some random word selector on a dictionary and spewed it here using some web bot or something. Do you suffer from schizophrenia, or are your posts generated by a defective simulacrum?

    Anyway, aside from the semi-crypted babble, you insinuated you had some useful information. What exactly is the identity of JadedJean?

 

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.