Prince Charles and Boris Johnson met at the opening of the Commonwealth heads of government summit
(Picture: Getty Images)Boris Johnson on Friday appeared to row back on earlier comments that he would urge the Prince of Wales to be open minded about the Government’s plan to send unauthorised migrants to Rwanda.
The Prime Minister was seeing Prince Charles for tea after meeting at the opening of the Commonwealth heads of government summit in the Rwandan capital Kigali this morning — the first time they have met since it was reported that the prince had privately branded the asylum plan “appalling”.
Mr Johnson said on Thursday that he would defend the plan in his meeting with Charles, adding: “The critics need to keep an open mind about the policy. A lot of people can see its obvious merits. So yes, of course, if I am seeing the prince tomorrow, I am going to be making that point.”
But when asked on Friday if he would discuss the matter with Charles, he told broadcasters: “I wouldn’t comment on anything that I say to the Queen or the Queen says to me, nor would I say what the heir to the throne might say to me or what I may say to him.
“Prime ministers never talk about that. What I will say is as people come to Rwanda, like you have today, there are a lot of prejudices about Rwanda that need to be blown away.”
Clarence House refused to comment on the “supposed remarks” reported in the Times, saying the prince was politically neutral and the policy is a matter for the Government.
The immigration policy has been criticised by human rights campaigners and church leaders.
In his opening address to the summit, Charles, who is representing the Queen, highlighted the “strong and enduring connections between the peoples of the Commonwealth” but said it was for individual countries to decide if they still wanted his mother as their head of state.
He said: “The Commonwealth contains within it countries that have had constitutional relationships with my family, some that continue to do so, and increasingly those that have had none. I want to say clearly, as I have said before, that each member’s constitutional arrangement, as republic or monarchy, is purely a matter for each member country to decide.”
