Attempts to gain access to official papers setting out Windsor's meddling have largely failed, with most government departments, ministers and MPs questioned reserving the right to keep communications with the royals private.
An exception is Labour peer Lord Berkeley, who's also Harbour Commissioner for the Cornish port of Fowey. Recently he sponsored a private members' bill on marine navigation. On 6 September he received a letter from the House of Lords bill office. The letter stated: "The marine navigation bill you introduced would affect the Prince of Wales' interests, and so will require the Prince of Wales' consent for its consideration by Parliament.” Berkeley was told it was a matter of "if" not “when” Windsor would grant consent.
Through his position as the Prince of Wales Windsor is the beneficiary of the Duchy of Cornwall, created as a cash-cow for Edward III's eldest son who became Prince of Wales in 1343. Today the Duchy funds Windsor's multi-millionaire lifestyle, and bills affecting its interests, revenue or property must be agreed by him; he's also Duke of Cornwall. The estate’s a hard-nosed business; even during these bleak economic times its portfolio value has increased from £618m in 2006-7, to £712m in 2010-11. Over the same period, Windsor's annual income from the Duchy has risen from £15.2m to £17.8m.
Andrew George, Liberal Democrat MP for St Ives in Cornwall, has urged ministers to reveal the process by which Windsor interferes with the democratic process. When asked about Parliament’s consultation with the Prince on the recent Children's Rights Bill, the Education Minister, Sarah Teather, confirmed it had happened but said: "We don’t disclose the contents of correspondence with members of the royal family." George also enquired whether the Duchy had made any amendments to the draft Coroners and Justice Act; Justice Minister Crispin Blunt repeated the line.
The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, which oversees the drafting of legislation, has declined to reveal under what conditions Windsor can veto proposed legislation, saying its refusal to disclose such information is a matter of "legal professional privilege".