Prince Charles - Ethical, Moral or Plain Smelly?

[MOIC]

So, Clarence House has confirmed that Prince Charles received €3 million in €500 notes during meetings with Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, the former prime minister of Qatar, the reason has not been made clear. The cash was handed to Prince Charles in a suitcase on one occasion, a holdall on another, as well as in Fortnum & Mason carrier bags.

The cash was hand counted by 2 of his aides.

A Clarence House spokesperson said the money given during meetings was “passed immediately to one of the prince’s charities who carried out the appropriate covenants and assured us that all the correct processes were followed”.

This stinks, to say the least!

 

[Ian J]

This stinks, to say the least!

I agree but it is the donor that is stinky and not the recipient

 

[MOIC]

I agree but it is the donor that is stinky and not the recipient

I think receiving it is 'more stinky'. Black mark against the future King.

 

[Ian J]

I think receiving it is 'more stinky'. Black mark against the future King.

But he handed it straight over to a sidekick who counted it and then banked it in the charity account so Charles had nothing to do with it apart from physically receiving a bag

 

[MOIC]

So Charles had meetings, received cash in a suitcase, a holdall and Fortnum & Mason carrier bags, and that's OK. He had nothing to do with it?

 

[fisicx]

So Charles had meetings, received cash in a suitcase, a holdall and Fortnum & Mason carrier bags, and that's OK. He had nothing to do with it?

Correct.

 

[WaveJumper]

Small chunk change for the Sheikh, Charles handed the donation straight over to the charity ....... another big non-story from a press who should be focussing on bigger issues this country is facing

 

[fisicx]

Back when I as in the Army I was part of a team doing a demo for the Saudis. We did the demo then went back to the Mess for lunch and discussion. The Prince motioned to his aides who distributed carrier bags to all the UK team. Inside each was cash and gift (can't remember what it was). We were instructed to say thank-you and then pass the bags to the Officer in charge. Wasn't a bribe, it was just a thank-you gift. Because that's how they do things. And they do cash because it's very visible. The money went back to the Treasury.

Sometimes these gifts are millions and seen as bribes in the west. They aren't in the eyes of the Arabs.

 

[Fagin2021]

I'm not a fan of Charles but I think he's off the hook with this one...

1. Was it done secretly? No.
2. Was it for his personal benefit? No.
3. Was it in return for favours? No (as far as we know).

 

[MOIC]

Charles handed the donation straight over to the charity

He couldn't exactly put it under the Queens mattress, or his cot.

Agree, there are much more important events happening in the world right now, sometimes we need a diversion.

Sometimes these gifts are millions and seen as bribes in the west. They aren't in the eyes of the Arabs.

Gifts?

We should be looking at it in the eyes of the UK public and not in the eyes of the Arabs, who are trying to influence many things in the west, (football, golf . . . .buildings).

"Charles was said to have lobbied Hamad to shelve the £3bn redevelopment of London’s Chelsea Barracks – writing a letter in which he told the country’s then prime minister that the state-backed Qatari Diar’s proposed steel-and-glass design “made my heart sink”. Charles later met the emir of Qatar for tea at Clarence House where the topic was raised once again. Qatar subsequently pulled the plans."

 

[Mark T Jones]

Breaking news

Person receives money
Accounts for it
Handles it correctly.

Tomorrow's headline.

Man exceeds speed limit by 3 MPH then slows down.

 

[MOIC]

3. Was it in return for favours? No (as far as we know).

Hmmm

"Charles was said to have lobbied Hamad to shelve the £3bn redevelopment of London’s Chelsea Barracks – writing a letter in which he told the country’s then prime minister that the state-backed Qatari Diar’s proposed steel-and-glass design “made my heart sink”. Charles later met the emir of Qatar for tea at Clarence House where the topic was raised once again. Qatar subsequently pulled the plans."

I think so.

 

[fisicx]

We should be looking at it in the eyes of the UK public and not in the eyes of the Arabs

In the eyes of the UK public it was a gift. An odd gift to be sure but still a gift.

It's a non-story from a Murdoch owner paper.

 

[MOIC]

Breaking news

Person receives money - Not your ordinary bloke
Accounts for it - How?
Handles it correctly - His handlers (Watched The Crown?). I wonder if it passed Coutts' Anti-Laundering policy as to where the CASH (in a suitcase, holdall and Fortnum & Mason bags) came from?

Tomorrow's headline - I think it will get traction for at least a week!

Man exceeds speed limit by 3 MPH then slows down - And gets a slap from Mummy!

 

[Gyumri]

Man exceeds speed limit by 3 MPH then slows down.

In Victorian times driving a carriage at more than 4mph was considered to be "reckless". How times have changed!

 

[MOIC]

In the eyes of the UK public it was a gift. An odd gift to be sure but still a gift.

When was you made aware of it?

Gift . . . . for favours?

 

[Mark T Jones]

I think the 'how' question is the valid one.

 

[fisicx]

When was you made aware of it?

When I read about it on the BBC

Gift . . . . for favours?

Nothing to do with Charles. The investigation is on the charity and it's governance.

It's still a non-story. Read Private Eye, corruption is rife in every country.

 

[Financial-Modeller]

In September 2021, The Sunday Times and The Mail on Sunday newspapers reported that Michael Fawcett (senior valet to Charles) had fixed a CBE for Saudi businessman Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz who donated more than £1.5 million to royal charities.

Interesting to note that whilst this one also took place on his watch, his name did not appear in the article. There could be more to come.

 

[MOIC]

Nothing to do with Charles

If you told a Saudi architect not to redevelop your street , had meetings with him and he subsequently gave you 3 million cash in a suitcase and subsequently cancelled the redevelopment, would you say there's a connection?

The investigation is on the charity and it's governance.

I'm not referring to the investigation, and given it's just been brought to light is even more worrying.

It's still a non-story. Read Private Eye, corruption is rife in every country.

Agree that corruption is rife in every country . . . . . are you suggesting this is corruption?

I think it's a story, but he'll still be King!

 

[Newchodge]

If you told a Saudi architect not to redevelop your street , had meetings with him and he subsequently gave you 3 million cash in a suitcase and subsequently cancelled the redevelopment, would you say there's a connection?

Surely, it's the wrong way around. Charles wanted a favour. He got the favour he wanted (redevelopment pulled AND 3 million. Surely if this was money for favours, Charles would have paid it?

 

[Clodbuster]

Surely, it's the wrong way around. Charles wanted a favour. He got the favour he wanted (redevelopment pulled AND 3 million. Surely if this was money for favours, Charles would have paid it?

Absolutely, I lived in Zimbabwe and you could do nothing without bribing someone.

 

[Bob Morgan]

Suitcases, Holdalls or Carrier Bags? - Surely a 'Leather Polo Bag' would have been more appropriate? - With a Monogram perhaps? Especially when Holdalls lost favour some time ago, when people were found to have committed suicide by locking themselves inside them!

However, the broader question must be is how this affects the UK Gas Bill? Annually, 6.2 Billion M3 of Gas (96 Terrawatt Hours) is imported to the UK from Qatar! - Which is transported by ship powered by 'Bunker Diesel!'

 

[MOIC]

Absolutely, I lived in Zimbabwe and you could do nothing without bribing someone.

Yep, Including fixing a CBE for a Saudi businessman.

Once you receive money for nothing, you owe these people. No matter who you are.

 

[IanSuth]

Yep, Including fixing a CBE for a Saudi businessman.

Once you receive money for nothing, you owe these people. No matter who you are.

The obligation is still the wrong way to be connected to the redevelopment - I am not saying it is not connected to something else we have yet to hear anything about.

But currently the fact that they stopped a development they wanted to do because Prince C asked them to AND also gave PC money for his charity points to them actually respecting his views and his charities aims NOT that thy were buying him off . I would not be surprised to find either the Sheikh or a very close relative was at Sandhurst with Charles or one of his sons.

The money being talked about is literally chump change for the Sheikh even if it is a vast amount for most of us

 

[MOIC]

The obligation is still the wrong way to be connected to the redevelopment - I am not saying it is not connected to something else we have yet to hear anything about.

But currently the fact that they stopped a development they wanted to do because Prince C asked them to AND also gave PC money for his charity points to them actually respecting his views and his charities aims NOT that thy were buying him off . I would not be surprised to find either the Sheikh or a very close relative was at Sandhurst with Charles or one of his sons.

The money being talked about is literally chump change for the Sheikh even if it is a vast amount for most of us

Here's some money. I'll ask for favours later.

You're simply opening yourself up to being pressured into reciprocating. Not unlike the political parties and their donors.

 

[IanSuth]

Here's some money. I'll ask for favours later.

You're simply opening yourself up to being pressured into reciprocating. Not unlike the political parties and their donors.

Maybe

But that would be separate from the development being axed as that in itself would be another favour from Sheikh to Prince. The money is flowing in the wrong direction for what you appear to be suggesting was an indirect cash for favours deal

 

[estwig]

Bloody foreigners, coming over here, donating millions to one of our charities, trying to help those worse off than they are!

Send 'em home, that's what I say!

 

[Paul Norman]

Taking bags of cash from a distinctly dodgy state - or, indeed, from anyone is either:

1. So naive that I question whether he has the skills to dish out liquorice allsorts at a kids party. Sadly, he brother very much does.

2. He is so utterly detached from the real world that he actually doesn't know how dodgy this was.

This is a big error of judgement. Very big. And I was starting to like him.

 

[MOIC]

Maybe

But that would be separate from the development being axed as that in itself would be another favour from Sheikh to Prince. The money is flowing in the wrong direction for what you appear to be suggesting was an indirect cash for favours deal

Arranging a CBE? That’s a favour in my book.

As I said before, once you accept money (especially from a state that has dubious human rights) in the way that it was done is just asking for trouble, whether now or in the future.

He spouts the rights and wrongs as he sees them, yet does this.

Our future king, he’s detached from the real world, as are most of his siblings.

 

[PugwashEQ]

Arranging a CBE? That’s a favour in my book.

As I said before, once you accept money (especially from a state that has dubious human rights) in the way that it was done is just asking for trouble, whether now or in the future.

He spouts the rights and wrongs as he sees them, yet does this.

Our future king, he’s detached from the real world, as are most of his siblings.

And yet you have a business operating with one of the most corrupt, unethical and immoral regimes to have existed in a country famous for its really disingenuous business practices.

my point is that just because something appears to be one thing, it isn't necessarily ACTUALLY that thing. I have no doubt that you and your business are really well run, ethical businesses providing a quality service, but you could, if you had a chip on your shoulder , interpret what you do in a really negative way.

Honestly accepting some money that goes straight to charity really isn't the worse thing to happen-0 having dealt with a few Emiri Sheikhs the giving of substantial gifts is seen as entirely culturally normal- they really don't understand why we get upset about it (and indeed they are often very insulted when refused). FWIF my view is that this is Charles doing his job. even if we don't like the real world in which he has to operate.

p.s. I'll on record as being quite pro the prince of wales- my Uncle used to run the Prince's trust, so i have something of a first hand experience.

 

[MOIC]

And yet you have a business operating with one of the most corrupt, unethical and immoral regimes to have existed in a country famous for its really disingenuous business practices.

my point is that just because something appears to be one thing, it isn't necessarily ACTUALLY that thing. I have no doubt that you and your business are really well run, ethical businesses providing a quality service, but you could, if you had a chip on your shoulder , interpret what you do in a really negative way.

Honestly accepting some money that goes straight to charity really isn't the worse thing to happen-0 having dealt with a few Emiri Sheikhs the giving of substantial gifts is seen as entirely culturally normal- they really don't understand why we get upset about it (and indeed they are often very insulted when refused). FWIF my view is that this is Charles doing his job. even if we don't like the real world in which he has to operate.

p.s. I'll on record as being quite pro the prince of wales- my Uncle used to run the Prince's trust, so i have something of a first hand experience.

I don't disagree with much of what you say. My point is that it doesn't look good and it opens the door for 'favours' in the future, whatever they may be and however they're interpreted, in the eyes of the public as well as media.

Would the Queen do something similar? No

PS. I did the Duke of Edinburg Award and agree there are some very useful projects some of the royals get involved with.

 

[Ian J]

My point is that it doesn't look good and it opens the door for 'favours' in the future, whatever they may be and however they're interpreted, in the eyes of the public as well as media.

Methinks you don't like the bloke and are just looking for reasons to justify your dislike

 

[MOIC]

Methinks you don't like the bloke and are just looking for reasons to justify your dislike

Totally wrong! It's a very 'grubby' way of receiving money and from whom it was given, and why?

As I said, it leaves it open for favours to be done in the future.

Not good from our future King.

 

[fisicx]

Totally wrong! It's a very 'grubby' way of receiving money and from the whom it was given, and why?

If the cash was handed over in public with Charles thanking the donor on TV for the charitable contribution would it have been acceptable?

 

[MOIC]

If the cash was handed over in public with Charles thanking the donor on TV for the charitable contribution would it have been acceptable?

Not from the Saudis! And it wasn't!

The fact that it was cash and in suitcases, holdalls and carrier bags makes it look, sound and feel 'not correct'. Why wasn't it sent via a bank, as any normal donor would have done?

You're missing the point.

The question will always be asked - why?

The fact that it 'cleared' all regulations is also not the point. Anybody in Prince Charles' position together with his handlers, as well as using Coutts as their bankers can ensure that all 'regulations' were cleared.

 

[fisicx]

Not from the Saudis! And it wasn't!

I know it wasn't. But if it had been very public would it have been acceptable?

The fact that it was cash and in suitcases, holdalls and carrier bags makes it look, sound and feel 'not correct'. Why wasn't it sent via a bank, as any normal donor would have done?

Because that's not how the Saudi's do things. The gift is made in cash.

It's like handing over lucky money in China. The act of handing over is part of the process.

 

[MOIC]

I know it wasn't. But if it had been very public would it have been acceptable?

No. (I think I've said that already)

Because that's not how the Saudi's do things. The gift is made in cash.

Why was the gift made?

It's like handing over lucky money in China. The act of handing over is part of the process.

That's for close friends and family and in a red envelope.

Not in suitcases, holdalls and Fortnum & Mason carrier bags who currently hold royal warrants from the Prince of Wales. (Do you think he passed on the bags to the Saudi's?)

 

[Ian J]

I didn't realise that this happened seven years ago

 

[fisicx]

I didn't realise that this happened seven years ago

That’s why it’s a non-story.