After days of speculation, the mystery appears to have been solved as to who is the admirer who bestowed £1m worth of jewels on the Duchess of Cornwall.

And no, it isn't Rod Stewart!

Journalist Richard Kay claims the previously mysterious benefactor who believes the Duchess is "an exceptional woman" is, as previously speculated, a wealthy Arabian Prince.

He is Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, a man whom the Prince of Wales and his wife are said to feel is "a good egg".

Your Name:

Your Email Address:

Your Homepage:


Comment:

BOLD

"QUOTE"

UNDERLINE

Name: M-M

Comment: Donovan wrote ..... Clarence House at the time said that to impement a gift registry at the Wales Household would cost about 50.000.00, due to the sheer number of presents received annually. In 2003 they estimated more than 2300 presents above 50.00 for the POW's household. _______________________ And Imelda Marcos was condemned for doing the same thing ! She was a little more blatently collecting cash from adoring or interested Philipino parties .... but Charles is actually on record as saying it is 'good for people ' to give him gifts Joanne we should have a 'shocked' smilie don't you think ?

Name: Judith

Comment: So where then are all the pens, cups, baseball hats, stuffed animals and other disused gifts given to the Queen over the years she has been on the throne? In some vast vault beneath Buckingham Palace? No, the items of some value were discreetly sold and those with no value given away to hospitals etc. Questions were actually asked (in the mid-1970's actually), but nobobdy of consequence deemed it important enough to make too much out of it and it was dropped. (Plus, who would embarrass the Queen, who might give out certain honours...)? Do you think Charles came up with the idea of selling unwanted gifts? It has been happening for an extremely long time, there is even a reference to Good Old Bess (Queen Elizabeth 1) passing on gifts to her retainers (who sold them on with the profit going back to Bess)! Unfortunately for Charles, his "retainer" wasn't very discreet, and Charles took the blame for a practice which is actually quite accepted and very common among their class.

Name: Donovan

Comment: The ceiling of gifts received without registry is pounds 50,00 as set by the Queen's household, and it applies to all presents received. It specifically says that any presents that are perishable should be consumed, all other presents to be recorded and stored. The presents are property of the Crown.Occasionally presents should be auctioned for charity, given to charity or destroyed. Gifts less than 50.00 can be given to staff. Sir Michael Peat said that Charles had no system in place, and would comply and follow the rules (2003). Clarence House at the time said that to impement a gift registry at the Wales Household would cost about 50.000.00, due to the sheer number of presents received annually. In 2003 they estimated more than 2300 presents above 50.00 for the POW's household.

Name: shelley

Comment: HM The Queen has a much larger household, due to state functions etc. She is the CEO of her household, and yes she is ultimately responsible for that. She is not responsible for her adult children when they behave badly. There have been no inquiries or questions raised regarding the financial honesty of HM's household. As far as I am aware no member of HM's royal household has been caught fencing gifts that were given to HM. Shelley

Name: Judith	Comment: So the Queen, as CEO of the entire British Royal Family and its staff, will also be held completely and utterly responsible for all the gaffe's and mistakes that have occurred over the many years she has been on the throne?

Name: shelley	Comment: Donovan, I totally agree with both of your posts, Prince Charles is and should be responsible for his own household. He is not a child, but an adult man who chooses to give much too much responsibility to his flunkies.(Fawcett et al) As CEO of any other organisation he would be fired.

Name: Muriel	Comment: Then pretty much anything Charles and Camilla ae given would have to be recorded? Okay, I understand that, but what determines whether or not taxes have to be paid on an item, what determines whether or not it's a private gift? If it all has to handled the same, then taxes should be paid on all of, or none of it.

Name: Donovan

Comment: Muriel, Any gift received because of your position in the hiarchy of government must be recorded. Charles is supposed to have a gift registry. The Monetary amount does not matter. I do not know what the ceiling of the unregistered gifts is, but in the USA it is about $20.00. THere are very specific guidelines to follow, and Charles was made aware of the handling of gifts repeatedly, most recently in 2003 with the Fawcett debacle. Secondly, any statement made by the staff of the Prince of Wales is considered having been made by Charles himself. Charles is responsible for ALL statements coming from Clarence House on his behalf. It has been said, repeatedly, that he is a terrible manager of Human Resources, and that his staff is lacking guedelines and procedures. Again, this is Charles' responsibility. If he were a CEO in a private organization, he would surly have been terminated by the board.

Name: Muriel

Comment: I'm confused about something. Is it the dollar amount that determined if a gift is personal or to the nation, or does the one who presents the gift have to say which it is. How is it determined? I've always wondered that about gifts given to our President too, and I think it's dollar amount here unless it's publically announced that the gift is for the nation. Why would a watch be considered a gift to the nation? A necklace I can understand, but a watch is going to eventually wear out, even a Rolex. Does anyone know how it's determined?

Name: Judith

Comment: Sorry MM, I wasn't very clear was I?! What I meant was that those jewels that were specifically hers (like her watch etc) could be passed down or sold if necessary by her immediate descendants, but the other jewellery given as official gifts would revert to the Crown to be worn by other members of the royal family at various times. Regarding the comments on credibility, why once again should Charles bear the brunt of it and be called despicable when it was his staff who made the confused comments? This happens all the time in companies, where staff make mistakes or misinterprete the wishes of their boss who then has to wear the fallouot. I think this is sometimes why they just don't disclose things, because its too easy to have anything and everything misinterpreted in the interests of scandalous headlines.

Name: Donovan

Comment: I seem to remember a Rolex watch presented to Charles by another Saudi. It was an official gift to the Nation, yet Fawcett was caught pandering the watch in a pawnshop in London. At that time an inquiry found that Charles claimed the watch as a "private" gift,that he was " uncertain" about the difference between private and official. Further investigation into the goings on at SJP showed that Michael Fawcett had been pandering unwanted gifts for some time. I guess the Waleses just don't learn form their errors. Perhaps the time has come for another investigation into the Wales household.

Name: M-M

Comment: To quote a few lines from Laurie Hanna THE DUCHESS of Cornwall avoided paying £175,000 tax on her £1million diamond and ruby necklace by declaring it was a "gift to the nation". Hours after Camilla, 59, was seen wearing the dazzling jewellery, staff at Prince Charles' office insisted his wife was wearing a "private" present given on a foreign royal tour last year. But 24 hours later, a spokeswoman for Camilla said: "The necklace was an official gift to the nation so there was no need for tax or import duty to be paid." _________________ Credibility ? Well said Donovan

Name: Donovan

Comment: So now it is official. The necklace is a gift from the Saudis. Why, oh why can't Clarence House be forthcoming? It was initially alluded to be a "Secret Admirer" now it turns out to be an official present. It is unfortunate that the credibility of Charles and Camilla seems to further erode. There must be truth in disclosure. It is exactly these covert statements that make Charles so despicable.

Name: M-M	Comment: Judith Comment: Diana also received tonnes of gorgeous (and expensive) gifts! It would be fascinating to see a catalogue of them, although I presume they are all locked away in a vault for her descendents (those that didn't revert to the Crown, that is). ___________________ Very likely , since Diana's descendants are the very same people as Charles' descendants ! laugh:

Name: Donovan	Comment: The necklace belongs to the Crown, having been received on an official visit. The best thing to do is to break it up into several pieces. Also, Camilla was way too ostentatious with those jewels in the Philadelphia setting. The dress showed too much cleavage, and when she waved she showed off her ill fitting undergarments. All in all she looked ill put together.

Name: Muriel

Comment: I think it would be really great if they put together an exhibition of some of the fabulous pieces in the collections that haven't been seen in years. Maybe did a book/catalog of pictures, and history of the individual pieces. Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary had some unbelievable pieces that haven't seen the light of day for many years. The current jewels, like Diana's, should be included too. It's a shame to just lock all that stuff away, people should be able to enjoy seeing it. There is a book out, I think, but an updated exhibition would be really something.

Name: Carol B.	Comment: Too much cleavage, too much bling for the occasion. Tacky on all counts.

Name: Judith	Comment: Diana also received tonnes of gorgeous (and expensive) gifts! It would be fascinating to see a catalogue of them, although I presume they are all locked away in a vault for her descendents (those that didn't revert to the Crown, that is).

Name: Trudie	Comment: I personally think that necklace if it can be separated would look better as a tiara and necklace set and possibly bracelets. It certainly is big enough!!!

Name: M-M

Comment: Gifts from the Saudi Princes are exceptionally lavish . Judith mentions Farah Diba having worn huge , even barbaric type jewellry when she was Empress of Iran , but even Farah doesn't attempt it in her old age . In those days she looked like Nefertiti , with elongated neck , huge slanted eyes and slender figure . Camilla has a different figure type and is so much older . If the expensive neckpiece can be adapted to form earrings , or bracelet and smaller necklace or tiara it would work a lot better for her IMO . And can I say without intending any offense that she should employ a stylist who could advise against the plunging necklines in future Towards the end of her life , I thought the Princess of Wales' necklines were getting too low as well . With the Duchess of Gloucester for instance (probably much the same age as Camilla ) you are never conscious of her breasts , just her overall impression of elegance

Name: Jacqueline

Comment: Even though the necklace is not to my taste I'm glad the Prince of Wales and Camilla are on friendly terms with a Gulf Nation. Where I would have made a change is with Camilla's dress. I would have placed her in a white empire style dress. That way the rubies really would have stood out more. A empire dress can hide a lot of figure flaws and would suit Camilla better then the form fitting dress she likes to wear.

Name: Muriel

Comment: Yep, bet I could come up with something to wear it with! I can't imagine having that kind of money to be able to give a gift like that to someone who was comng to visit, or receiving a gift like that!! Yes, I remember Rudy Giuliani turning down the money. I suppose it was because most of the bombers were Saudi. An awful time for all of us. I know they plan to rebuild there, but I've always thought a park would be better. One with a large black marble monument in it with the names of all those who were killed on it.

Name: exploora	Comment: Al-Waleed bin Talal is the one whose offered donation after the September 11, 2001 attacks. to New York $10 million was turned down by Rudy Giuliani. I think Di wore a high collared dress with beautiful necklace at least once if not twice.

Name: Lisa	Comment: Muriel- I bet they COULD make one that dressy if need be!LOL! It would just look classier, IMO.

Name: Muriel

Comment: Folks from India wear collar type necklaces too. I have an Indian friend that has a gold collar bigger than that. That is really some necklace though! I thought she looked great myself. I wonder though,if it comes apart into brooches, bracelets and the like. If it did, it would probably be worn, in some form, more frequently. It takes a pretty special occasion to wear it as it is. And, yes, it would really look good with a turtleneck. Do they make turtlenecks that dressy?

Name: Laura	Comment: I think spectacular jewels were designed to be worn by royalty! LOL! It gives them a bit of pizazz!

Name: Judith	Comment: Middle Eastern royals wear such lavish jewels themselves, so I'm sure that they don't think its gaudy or tacky. I recall seeing a similar necklace worn by Farah Dibah (sp) with an equally spectacular result. I liked it personally, hope and to see it worn again sometime. (But then, I'm quite partial to seeing spectacular jewels on royals!).

Name: exploora	Comment: This is a world where gaudy appears to mean power and priviledge. And not being able to pay user fees often means personal failure. Was the gift tax deductable for Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal?

Name: Lisa	Comment: I honestly think it would have looked really good on a turtleneck. It would have shown better and been set off really nicely. Would have made the wearer look like she had a longer neck and torso. Maybe next time!

Name: Sabrina	Comment: When a Royal receives gifts such as Camilla's necklace, do they feel they have an obligation to wear it, no matter how tacky or LARGE it may be so as not to insult the giver? This necklace was just sooo gaudy (IMO), that I'm sorry, even if I were the Queen, I would be embarrassed to wear it. Just my thoughts.

Name: Lisa	Comment: All this says to me is Charles gets other people to buy the missus her bling.