THE ROYAL ASSENT

NOW THAT WE HAVE HAD ANOTHER spirited public intervention from our beloved, now divorced, ex-third-in-line-to be-Queen-of-England, the pouting, flame-haired Sarah Ferguson (see Sunday Mornings passim), coinciding with the forming of a new government of right-thinking gentlemen from good families, I imagine that we may be able to re-assess the role of the royal family once again, something which has not been done since the days of King Edward VIII.

SARAH DUCHESS OF YORK, although technically no longer of the Royal Family, is simply continuing a tradition that has often been used by ambitious girls in the past: using the obvious influence attached to being attached to a member of the Windsor-Battenberg-Schleswig-Holstein-Sondeburg-Glücksburg clan in order to promote oneself and to do a good business service to the country of which we are all proud. Indeed, many people will consider that “serving Britain” was the main reason why Mrs Wallis Simpson tried to sell the country to Hitler in 1936.

IT IS NO SHORT OF A NATIONAL DISGRACE to see otherwise worthy members of society being reduced to taking money for favours from dubious, shifty foreign businessmen when the sensible thing to do would be to restore dignity and purpose to our God-appointed leaders by legitimising their positions. Thus, as I wrote in The Sunday Times today, could we not save time, effort and money by giving members of the Royal Family and those occasionally attached to them positions in government, replacing the millionaires currently appointed by the Camelegg Twins? Prince Charles could be the Prime Minister, Prince Andrew and Duchess Sarah Chancellor of the Exchequer and Trade Secretary, Prince Edward and Countess Sophie Foreign Secretary and Minister for Sport and the Olympics, and Princess Anne could have Margaret Beckett’s old job. Prince Philip could remain in his position as the Highest Peer. I’m not sure that many people would notice the difference.