THE Prince of Wales suggested in a private conversation with
Tony Blair and Paddy Ashdown that a Roman Catholic should be
allowed to ascend to the throne.
The surprise call for the overturning of the Act of Settlement of
1701, which bars Catholics from the line of succession, could have
an explosive impact on the long-running dispute between
traditionalists and modernisers in the Church and elsewhere.
It came five years ago as the Prince travelled back to London
from Israel, where he had attended the funeral of Yitzhak Rabin,
the former Israeli Prime Minister. He was chatting on the official
aircraft with Mr Blair, then leader of the Opposition, Mr
Ashdown, then leader of the Liberal Democrats, and Jonathan
Sacks, the Chief Rabbi.
Mr Ashdown risks condemnation by disclosing the contents of
what was clearly a confidential discussion in his diaries, which are
being serialised in The Times. His action in quoting private
remarks from the Prince surprised senior ministers. A senior
government source said last night: “It is one thing revealing private
conversations with Tony Blair, which some might consider bad
enough. But it is quite another to compromise the heir to the throne
in this way.”
However, those calling for disestablishment of the Church — the
Liberal Democrats became the first party to back it at their annual
conference last month — will receive a huge boost from the
disclosure. It is expected to be the next big issue to dominate
Church of England debate after women priests.
In the diaries Mr Ashdown says the small group on the aircraft had
an “interesting discussion” about religion. Mr Blair is reported to
have told Dr Sacks that he was reading the Bible nightly and had
got as far as Ezekiel.
Dr Sacks made a contribution that prompted the Prince to ask:
“Are you making an argument for disestablishment?” The Chief
Rabbi at this point retreated, Mr Ashdown says. But the Liberal
Democrat leader intervened to say: “Yes, of course he is. And
he’s right.” Mr Ashdown then records: “Charles looked at me,
smiled broadly and said: ‘I really can’t think why we can’t have
Catholics on the throne.’ ” Mr Ashdown reports that he gulped
because “it seemed such an obvious reference to Camilla Parker
Bowles”.
Last night, constitutional experts cast severe doubts upon Mr
Ashdown’s inference. They pointed out that the Act of Settlement
would not in itself prevent Mrs Parker Bowles sitting on the throne
if she were to marry the Prince. She is not a Catholic, although she
was once married to one.
The British monarch is the Supreme Governor of the Church of
England and a Catholic could not become King or Queen until the
Church is disestablished. Even then it would be unlikely to happen
for generations because most of the Queen’s immediate family,
including her heir, are devout Anglicans.
The Prince’s remark was seen to be fully in line with his belief that
Britain should embrace all faiths and cultures. He said several
years ago that he wanted to be “defender of faith” rather than
Defender of the Faith.
Mr Ashdown’s decision to disclose a private conversation with the
Prince will surprise and anger some politicians, although his own
circle are expected to be relaxed over the disclosure of views with
which they are familiar.
Mr Ashdown, continuing his disclosures about his secret contacts
with Mr Blair over a post-general election coalition, tells today
how Mr Blair reneged on their private agreements when he
encountered opposition from leading members of his Shadow
Cabinet.
Mr Ashdown records that Mr Blair told him he had become
convinced of the need for electoral reform, “but it is not as
important to me as it is to you”. Mr Blair said: “For the time being
I must preserve my own position and I must not be seen to be
being pushed around by you. I cannot therefore go further than ‘I
am not convinced of the need for electoral change’.”
Mr Ashdown told Mr Blair: “I am bound to tell you that I find it
very disturbing indeed that the very first time you and I reach an
imporant private verbal agreement you can’t deliver. Frankly I am
not sure how much further we can go on this.”