DAILY MAIL COMMENT: The public deserves royal transparency

This has been a distinctly rocky period for the Royal Family.

While not facing an existential threat, as in the days after Princess Diana’s death, there has been a troubling feeling that the monarchy is teetering on the brink of crisis.

The King is being treated for cancer. After Prince William mysteriously withdrew from a memorial service for his godfather, the family was inexplicably led into church by the disgraced Prince Andrew.

Then there is the Princess of Wales. The furore over the lack of any updates on Kate’s health after abdominal surgery has been intensified by her amateurishly doctored Mother’s Day photograph.

In these days of howling social media, the vacuum has inevitably been filled with wild conspiracy theories about her health and ongoing absence from public life.

Yet while storms buffet the House of Windsor – including alleged unscrupulous attempts to access Kate’s medical records – there is a ray of light. As William attended public engagements yesterday, a poll revealed trust in the monarchy remains undimmed.

The proportion of people who said their faith in Kate remained unchanged was two-thirds. For Charles, it was 72 per cent.

But the survey should give the Palace food for thought. More than a third believe it should be more candid about the Princess’s surgery and well being. This is not mere intrusiveness or prurience. People are keen to know that she is recuperating.

There remains an enormous reservoir of goodwill and sympathy towards the Royal Family. That is proved by the throngs that cheer their every engagement.

Even so, we live in a less deferential age. While ‘The Firm’ may sometimes seek to shun intense scrutiny, the public pays vast sums to fund them. The least they expect in return is a little more openness.

Reeves’ ruinous plan

In her desperation to get Labour’s hands on the levers of power, Rachel Reeves yesterday promised a Thatcherite renewal of Britain’s economy if in government.

The UK stands at an ‘inflection point’ like the one faced by Margaret Thatcher when she became prime minister in 1979, says the Shadow Chancellor. So her party would work with business to turbocharge growth.

How could she keep a straight face? Lady Thatcher revived a shattered economy by breaking the stranglehold of the militant unions, making painful but necessary cuts to public spending, lowering taxes and championing a small state.

Giving the Mais Lecture in the City of London, Rachel Reeves promised a Thatcherite renewal of Britain’s economy if in government

This could scarcely be further from Labour’s plan. They have already announced more power to unions, more collective bargaining and an end to zero-hours contracts, which would sabotage business and cost jobs. Damaging tax and spend is in their DNA.

There have been howls of indignation about Ms Reeves’ evocation of Thatcherism from the Labour Left. But they needn’t worry. Whatever her rhetoric, her policies are straight out of their ruinous playbook.

Do the right thing

Liberal-Left peers insist they want to end illegal Channel crossings to save lives and smash the trafficking gangs’ trade.

So why won’t they do the right thing and end their opposition to the Government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda?

An inflatable dinghy carrying migrants pictured crossing the English Channel

The answer is obvious. Even though this is the only viable deterrent, they’d rather signal their virtue and play political games.

The truth is, this isn’t compassionate. The longer the Lords hold up this legislation, the more migrant lives are endangered.