Sunday, April 24, 2011

Why Are The Two Former Labour PM's Left Off Of The Royal Wedding List?


I refuse to believe (unless it is confirmed) that the Queen, Prince William and Kate Middleton have been instrumental in the omission from their wedding list, the two former Labour Prime Ministers Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. I am not a keen royalist, but respect the queen in many ways and one way because she simply stays out of this kind of "dirty politics", I believe that this is something that she just would not do. In fact, I find this so strange, I do question if the Queen, Prince William and Kate Middleton even realise that this has happened? I think on behalf of all labour MPs and all labour supporters, who will all feel snubbed, that an official statement must be issued as soon as possible, if this doesn't have the propensity to overshadow the coming wedding, then it certainly has the propensity to become a huge hot topic after the big day! This is like a huge snub to every single labour supporter in the country and if this is of the Prince's making then it is a huge mistake by him, because what it is saying that the future King doesn't rate labour governments or labour supporters and I just cannot see the prince allowing this to happen.
I wish there was some way we could officially protest, but as usual there isn’t, is this the “new politics” Cameron and Clegg promised us in action? I found those excuses from St James palace to be ridiculous,

 A St James’s Palace spokesman, said: “Sir John Major is the only former prime minister going. Baroness Thatcher was invited, as were all Knights of the Garter, but is unable to attend. It is not a state occasion so there is no reason why they [Mr Blair and Mr Brown] would be invited.”

Perhaps they have forgotten that the princes used to play with the Blair’s children at Balmoral and Chequers, but I haven’t!

If anyone deserves to attend this wedding on merit then it is Gordon Brown, who since losing the election has donated half a million pound to various charities and towards working for charity, rather than salt away earnings made on the back of his time in the Labour government unlike Tony Blair, John Major and Margaret Thatcher.

Why would the Queen allow herself to become embroiled in these unseemly politics? Surely she should have just told Cameron, the two former prime ministers are on the guest list and that is that? I cannot believe that she would take political sides and neither can I believe this was the wish of Prince William and Kate Middleton. Prince William’s mother Princess Diana was known to be very fond of the Blairs, so that doesn’t make sense, none of this makes sense. I think this is more than likely to be a political decision and one of the Prime Minister David Cameron's spiteful decisions than it has anything at all to do with the queen or the prince. Prince William does not strike me as being the petty petulant kind of man who would deliberately go out of his way to cause upset, hurt or embarrassment like this. Protocol would have been followed here and it is just not feasible that the two immediate former prime ministers would have been deliberately over looked, this has all the machinations of David Cameron, who has already proved himself not to be above being spiteful and vindictive.

Since becoming Prime Minister, David Cameron has demonstrated a vindictive petty streak, never has that been more evident than it was last week when Cameron publicly humiliated and embarrassed his immediate predecessor, Gordon Brown, on the world stage by publicly declaring he would not support Mr Brown's application for MD at the IMF should the position arise, he cited a feeble excuse which in itself was a complete lie, the truth is of course that if Mr Brown was to take the IMF position it would greatly undermine Cameron's whole ethos of  blaming Brown for the global economic crisis and the banking crisis that affected so many different countries, it would of course completely expose Cameron's ethos as being the total bizarre enigma that it really is and Cameron would never allow that to happen. It matters not that Brown in the MD position of the IMF could actually be beneficial not only to to this country but to the world, and because Mr Brown is deeply respected and admired for his part in stopping the global financial meltdown and for his charitable work and his theses on why it is so vitally important that China and America agree on an exchange rate. Why it is vital to the world's economy that China has a "middle-class" and that the lower classes in China be brought up to decent living standards and lifted out of poverty and that Africa must play a part in the rebalancing of the global economy, without all this happening then we are all heading for another huge global financial crash (looking ever more likely with the price of gold bubble that will soon burst AFTER the bond market bubble bursts). Brown understands all the macroeconomics of "minilateralism" and "multilateralism" and he is so respected for his work in the third world it all adds together to make him an ideal candidate for MD at the IMF, in order to bring nations together to discuss a global solution to what is a global financial crisis. Cameron knows this and so does Osborne and they are both jealous of Brown's economic and intellectual clout in the world, (something these two could never even hope to aspire to) that he has blocked Brown from the one thing that could have brought this country stability and real hope for the future and all in the name of stupid partisan politicking and being afraid of losing the next election, how utterly appalling is that?

It is also a strange position not least because of the tireless work that Gordon Brown does for Africa and both the princes have connections with African charities. I smell a huge political rat all over this and it has David Cameron written on it!

So yes David Cameron could have very easily vetoed Gordon Brown and Tony Blair's name from the guest list.

Why doesn't one of the national papers actually ask Downing Street directly if David Cameron had anything to do with with choosing the politicians that were included in the guest list? A lot could be gained from how they worded their answers!

As a citizen of this country, a loyal subject of the queen and country and a labour supporter, I demand to know the truth about why these two former prime ministers were left off of the invitation list.

Was this David Cameron's doing? Yes or No?

8 comments:

Peter Robson said...

If it's not a state occasion how come we are being given a public holiday ? As you say Gracie it stinks. 2 former conservative PMs invited, smell of camoron all over this.

fourbanks said...

The queen is very good on very small detail and think she is unaware at this time

On the list is The Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi / The Emir of The State of Qatar and Sheika Mozah bint Nasser Al Missned
Prince Mohamed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia and Princess Fadwa bint Khalid bin Abdullah bin Abdulrahman
which i thought to be in poor judgement as their human rights record is none to good and i know they are friends of the queen but none the less she should over the years on a one to one friendship should have been able to get them to mend their ways

I mean we here in this blog don't have thugs as friends so am slightly concerned that the queen has had a good friendship with them over many years doesn't make any sense to me

Gracie Samuels said...

Hi Fourbanks and Peter, the more I think of this the stranger it seems, something has gone on here and it is more political that royal! As you say Fourbanks the queen is good on detail, I do not buy that silly statement from St James's palace either, someone is covering for something or someone.

Exactly so Peter, it is a state occasion and if it isn't then why is the taxpayer footing the huge multi-million pound security bill?

I do hope one of the nationals contacts Downing Street and asks them directly if this was Cameron's doing. I feel almost certain he would have been given the task of compiling the political guest list, this is a massive snub and I do not see the queen or the prince being involved, even though the Telegraph has tried to make it look like it is Prince William's wish, I do not thnk it is. None of it makes sense.

Nicky said...

Like you, Gracie, this business really bothers me. I saw some tweets quite early on Sunday morning from Labour people who'd been out doorstepping for the elections - and people were telling them they were really shocked about Blair and Brown not getting invited.

It may be that St James's Palace are telling the truth when they say only knights of the garter were being invited (hence Major and Thatcher's invites). However the Torygraph and the rest of the Tory press pack were mad keen to interpret it as a snub. I had a look at the comments to the Torygraph story, which was a mistake - such a lot of nasty bile about B & B - not much sweetness and light from them on Easter Sunday!

I really wish the palace could clarify this matter. Like you say, the Queen is non-partisan and fair-minded, and it seems unlikely that she would sanction this. Likewise William, very much his mother's son and influenced by her, and she was close to Blair. Also, William neglected to inform Number 10 in advance about his engagement to Kate which seems to indicate that his relationship with them isn't that great. William is also privy to the cutbacks to the RAF that this govt is making, which he isn't impressed by.

Nicky said...

By the by, the Queen's biographer, Ben Pimlott, has noted that the Queen has tended to get on better with her Labour PMs rather than with the Tories (although she got on well with Churchill). She was especially close to Wilson and his wife Mary. She couldn't bear Thatcher and made her stand during their meetings.

As a young woman she had a tutor in constitutional affairs, who was a member of the Fabian Society!

Nicky said...

I meant add, agree also with what you say about Camoron's petty and vindictive behaviour re blocking Gordon Brown's appointment with the IMF. It's purely because Dave knows that Brown would show up his shambolic govt and its woeful economic policies. Shameful doesn't even begin to cover it.

fourbanks said...

i don't think your right their nicky lady thatcher was made by the queen the order of knights of the garter of which there are only 24 and all personal friends of the queen so the queen must have got on well with her irrespective of what the press has said

Gracie Samuels said...

Fourbanks I too am under the impression that the queen and Thatcher did not get on very well, in fact Thatcher once described herself as "Head of State", she was not of course, the queen is.

When Princess Diana died the queen got herslef into difficulties by not realising how deeply her death would affect the nation. The queen stayed in Balmoral for a while and the flag on Buckingham palace was not even at half mast which angered many people, in actual fact royalty's popularity really shrunk rapidly at that time, it was Tony Blair who stepped in advised the queen and helped placate the country. There is something really odd about all of this, there have been a couple of further reports which have hinted ministers are not to blame but have noit come outright and said it and neither have the palace denied it. Whoever is at fault needs to admit it now, it will come out in the end it always does.

I believe either the palace gave cameron the list to approve and they messed it up (as is the norm) or number 10 were supposed to draw up the domestic list of politicians and they did not add Blair or Brown. Whichever way it is it looks to be a deliberate decisions rather than accidental!