RE: Throne in safe hands (Bill Williams. Adver 21/5/15).

He has missed the whole point about Prince Charles’ letters.

Anyone who opposes Bill Williams’ views are summarily berated, it seems.

For example: “Before the bleating, hate-filled anti-monarchy brigade put pen to paper,” he writes. How immature.

Prince Charles is unelected yet holds a position of considerable prominence.

It is outrageous that he seeks to exercise secretive influence over our political process.

He has no constitutional right to force ministers to respond to his views. It is a cornerstone of the British constitution that the monarch cannot be seen to favour one political party over another.

This is about a senior member of the royal family challenging the policies of elected governments.

That alone makes him unfit to succeed his mother as head of state, when ministers will no doubt find Charles and his lobbying even harder to resist.

What we have just seen is not even a tiny fraction of the hundreds of letters Charles fires off.

Charles is a socially conservative vast landowner (with an annual income of £17m) with a prejudice against allopathic medicine.

In a telling paragraph of their 126-page ruling, the three judges conceded that Charles’ activities are not neutral and in a number of respects have been controversial.

The government has now imposed a blanket ban so that later letters will remain secret.

So much for 21st century open government.

Critical faculties passed down through generations seem to have skipped a generation with Bill Williams.

JEFF ADAMS Bloomsbury, Swindon