And what about the design?

Lord Rogers’s attack on Prince Charles dismissed by one constitutional expert

ernon Bogdanor, Professor of Politics and Government at the University of Oxford, and one of the experts who might be approached for such a panel, said Lord Rogers was mistaken. “The Prince can make what contribution he wishes to public debate, as long as he is not partisan. It would only be unconstitutional if he was taking part in a party political debate, or was doing something that would undermine the position of the Queen, which he would never do. The fact that one does not agree with what he says does not make it unconstitutional.” However, once Prince Charles became King the position would change completely, Professor Bogdanor said. All of his public statements would have to be made on the advice of ministers, who would be able to stop him from saying something if they saw fit.  

But other experts see it differently.

There are also constitutional experts who take a less robust view of the Prince’s right to speak out than Professor Bogdanor. Robert Blackburn, Professor of Constitutional Law at King’s College London and author of King and Country: Monarchy and the Future King Charles III, said: “Before one becomes a constitutional King, one must be a constitutional Prince of Wales — meaning a prince must maintain strict political neutrality and avoid criticism from elected politicians holding public office . . . Once a proactive, interventionist mentality is adopted, he may come to think he can intervene on difficult matters of state where he will hold direct constitutional powers.”