Comments on: How come Prince Charles has a .gov.uk site?

By: The Worst of Perth

The Worst of Perth — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:04:11 +0000

That still sounds like he's part of the government to me. From here, I would have assumed that everyone would consider him so. Really not so? The royal family is not some part of the tourism dept? I don't see how he can't be.

By: Malcolm Coles

Malcolm Coles — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:10:50 +0000

As his own annual report says (my emphasis):

"While there is no established constitutional role for The Heir to The Throne, The Prince seeks, with the support of his wife The Duchess of Cornwall, to do all he can to make a difference for the better in the United Kingdom and internationally. The way in which His Royal Highness does so can, in simple terms, be divided into three parts."

He lists those as undertaking royal duties in support of The Queen , working as a charitable entrepreneur, and promoting and protecting national traditions, virtues and excellence."

He's just the son of the Queen - he is no part of the government.

By: The Worst of Perth

The Worst of Perth — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 03:29:21 +0000

Surely he's an arm of the government? Or at least a local body?

By: Worm

Worm — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:59:06 +0000

I have no life, so I've gone through the first 40 pages of Google results for .gov.uk , and Charlie appears to be the only one that is an individual, the others are all councils or government departments of one sort or another. Quite why he needs his own site as opposed to say a detailed section on the general 'Monarchy' site is anyone's guess.

By: Gerry White

Gerry White — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:21:22 +0000

I hate to admit this but its actually an excellent site, too many .gov websites are terrible, but this is good, I agree it shouldn't be a .gov site though...