More like this
Daily Mail fury over Blair and Brown palace ‘snub’
Paper surprises readers by supporting Labour PMs uninvited to royal wedding
Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, the two Cinderellas of British public life since neither received an invitation to Prince William and Kate Middleton's wedding, have found an unlikely champion: the Daily Mail.
The entrenchedly right-wing paper is fuming today about
Friday's royal guest list. "So why are oiks like Kate's uncle invited
to the royal wedding while Brown and Blair aren't?" asks a headline.
The palace's explanation for inviting David Cameron, Sir John Major
and Baroness Thatcher and not inviting their Labour counterparts is
that, as the wedding is not a full state occasion, only PMs who are
Knights of the Garter have been included. (Thatcher will not attend,
due to ill health.)
This does not satisfy the Mail, however, which declares in a leader column that "the more St James's Palace blusters, the clearer it becomes that this was a straightforward, calculated snub".
It continues: "It was also a shabby, divisive and deeply unwise step for the Monarchy, whose bond with the people depends on treating elected leaders without fear or favour."
And star opinion writer Stephen Glover also weighs in, in a
piece titled "I'm no fan of Blair but this is an insult to democracy…"
Pointing out that there were five former PMs at the 1981 wedding of Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer, Glover adds:
"It is … mind-boggling that Messrs Blair and Brown should have had to yield to men such as Gabriel Machinga, Zimbabwean Ambassador to London, a loyal servant of President Robert Mugabe's murderous and kleptomaniac regime.
"Even less defensible are the invitations sent to leaders who have
personally overseen repression. The Crown Prince of Bahrain, who has had more than a hand in the recent crackdown on his own people, has fortunately decided at the last minute not to come."
The Mail's mind is made up and its readers seem equally convinced – but, strangely, in the other direction. A poll on the newspaper's website shows that – as this article was posted – 67 per cent of readers agree that the two Labour PMs should not have been invited. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Frank Poster. You are right. The wedding did not need to be fouled by such people. They should be in the Tower with a place in the racking room prepared for Mr. Cameron.
I used to like Blair...he is part of the same group as the Bushes.
Maybe this generation wants to break away from what their family is...Harry's uniform was more in line with the truth, what he wore to the costume party was the skeleton in the "Windsor??" closet!! Good for Harry for wearing the truth!!!
Bliar and Brown were responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq as well as not reigning in the greedy banks which almost caused the downfall of our economy entirely...so their crimes are in a different league to most tinpot dictators. Anyway, who they invite to their wedding is non of our business, so the Daily Fail and others should shut up and return to the pig sty to where they belong.
Alas, the Royals are desperate to chime with popular sentiment - having so nearly screwed themselves entirely when the self-centred "people's Princess" met her sad end in the company of the Harrod's heir. Our nation of shopkeepers is no longer so sympathetic to the retail calling - though souvenirs are about the only form of cuiture generated by the underwhelming Windsors these days. Of course, Blair and Brown ought to be inside the Abbey for this ludicrously hyped fantasy adventure, with quite a convincing young couple at its heart - if only there were more good taste about the whole thing and less desperation on the part of "the Palace" to register alongside the rich and famous. Blair and Brown represent an effective chunk of the true history of Britain during Her Majesty's rein and they absolutely should have been on the guest-list. But, in a way, not being there is probably much more distinguished. There's almost nobody who actually matters in cultural terms invited at all - despite the assurance we are receiving that the Prince of Wales has tried to communicate his taste for classical music to his future daughter-in-law - and perhaps even some feeling for literature and good painting. This is Britain, after all. What do we expect? Love it for all the massed warts inside and outside the Abbey.
I dislike them both, but consider not inviting them to be stupid - which idiot made the list of invitees , please don't say Vague, sorry, I mean Hague. And why no Sarkozy and Merkel - this turns the wedding into a grand fiasco, which this family of ex-pats will NOT be watching.