Match Report

Well, the choir sang, Harry didn’t forget the ring, the bride looked lovely and everyone turned up exactly on time as if they had their own personal sergeant-major balling at them (of which more later).

From what I saw and from what we learn from the media the service went perfectly, well designed, beautifully organised. Hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people will have seen how well we do these things. The contadini in my local bar were fascinated.

But – did you feel a tiny ‘but’? I’m sorry to strike a critical note but it seemed to me a display by a nation which wanted you to know its best years were behind it. Somebody, Charles I think, arrived in a car Winston Churchill might have travelled in; so old you weren’t sure it would make it up the Mall. Its suspension was so weakened from years of carrying fattened dictator guests that the back seemed almost to be touching the ground. And after a fly past by planes from the Second World War, his newly married son left the Palace in a 40 year old Aston Martin.

Many of the troops weren’t even motorised, even though the car was invented over 100 years ago, but rode on horseback – in the middle of London! – harking back to the glory days when we went into battle against the fuzzy wuzzies with high visibility red tunics and sabres drawn.

Why? Why is the Royal Family so obsessed with the military, and the military of a century ago? Why did Prince Charles, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward (who is a film director), Prince Michael of Kent and even the octogenarian Prince Philip have to turn up in military uniform? I believe it is because our Head of Sate was born in the 1920s, to parents born in the 19th century (by contrast the Prime Minister is not yet 45 years old, nor are the leaders of the other two main parties). In the Queen’s circle, among her class, elder sons ran the estate and younger ones went into the military or the Church.

Princess Diana (and I confess I didn’t have much time for her) used to complain that while she took her children to concerts and theme parks, Charles used to show them how to kill animals. The Monarchy doesn’t need more light shining on it, as some claim, but the dust swept up before the light is turned on.

Monarchists are claiming that the marriage of William and Kate will breathe new life into the monarchy, but that has to mean something. It doesn’t have to mean the Royal Family living like us (they are not like us, and nor should they necessarily be) but that they have moved a little with the times, that they are on the same planet. And, if they are to represent our country, they must represent a country from the 21st century.

If the couple’s union is blessed there will be, beneath the Queen, three generations waiting in line. I know people are worried about what Prince Charles would be like in the top job, and it probably would be a bit of a roller coaster, but I am certain he ought to start now, so Prince William can become king in his fifties and, with a lot of help, coax Britain into looking like a modern country.

In my opinion they should all go, but at the very least, if the monarchy is to survive, Her Majesty should abdicate on her Diamond Jubilee.

Best wishes

Best wishes to the happy couple. If I could give them a present which would make their lives better and happier, I would. A republic.

Rather than turn up in the uniform of a junior officer in the RAF, it turns out that William is also a colonel in the Guards, so that’s OK.

I’d have been a bit reluctant to take the title Duke of Cambridge. The first one, in 1664, died young and childless. The second one, his brother, did too.

The third Duke became George II, not a great thing to have on your cv; the next was the seventh son of George III, a non-entity, but he did better than the last, his son, who following the titular tradition died childless.

My lack of knowledge of Royal etiquette means I don’t understand why, if he is a prince, and she’s married him, she isn’t a princess. But there, she’s a Duchess, which is good enough to be going on with

Royal Wedding: Those tributes in full

From our man in the Union Jack porkpie hat, accredited to the BBC (No. 31,428)

Prince William : I mean, like, if she won’t agree to obey why should I marry her? Who does obey me anyway?

Mr Middleton: We thought something small and simple, country church, egg sandwiches...

Prince Harry: Will there be enough to drink?

Tony Blair: I never wanted to go anyway

Syrian Ambassador: if Tony Blair isn’t going, I’m not

Gordon Brown: Eh, my government strongly promoted this marriage which is a victory for socialism and the policies... what do you mean, ‘not invited’?

Prince Harry: Hic!

Duke of Edinburgh: seems like an attractive filly, very nice ****

Her Majesty the Queen: to say how delighted we are that whoever he is will be married to whoever she is. I thought she had an annus horribilis..

Prince William: I mean, like, just incredible...

Princess Anne: don’t worry, William, marriage is only for a couple of years

Prince of Wales: She seems... organic, somehow

Duchess of Cornwall: Shut up you gaga old fool and finish your jelly

Foreign and Commonwealth Office: In view of recent disturbances in Berkshire Her Majesty’s Government feel that the presence of Miss K Middleton at the wedding ceremony would not be conducive to the public wellbeing...Bunty, have we got this right?

Royal Wedding: The Runners and Riders (2)

Also tucking in to a square meal will be Gabriel Machinga, the Zimbabwean Ambassador.

This really has been a triumph for the Foreign Office.

Royal Wedding: The Runners and Riders

Among invitees to the Royal Wedding are Margaret Thatcher and John Major, but not Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

In the queue for the complimentary hot dogs will be Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa of Bahrain, whose regime has been accused of imprisoning doctors who were treating protesters.

I never know quite what to make of this sort of thing, save as confirmation of my long held view that the British Foreign Office should be closed down in the national interest.

STOP PRESS: The really good egg can't make it, busy as he is with oppressing the people the disturbances.

The Dress Code

Either the Prime Minister reads this blog, or the Royal Family threatened to treat him as a passing mendicant ('..and don't spend it on drink..'), but he will now be properly attired for the Royal Wedding.

This excerpt has left him looking foolish.

Lesson 1: only fight battles you can win.

Lesson 2: only fight battles where winning would do you some good.

What should I wear?

David Cameron's announcement that he will not wear a tie for the royal wedding could be the right decision. The important thing, for men at least, at these occasions, is to conform, which is why in the military and in school the dress is called a uniform.

So as long as he has confirmed that the Earl Marshall of England will be going in a tracksuit, and the Garter King of Arms will be in jeans and trainers, this blog says 'right on, Dave'.

Failing that it says 'Don't be such a prat.'

Royal Wedding

Politicians just can't resist trying to look generous towards us at our expense. When sometimes they give us back some of our own money they make it look as if it were their money being handed out to the people. Mr Cameron's latest fit of pseudo largesse is to grant everyone in Britain a bank holiday for the royal wedding.

People who carp at the £50m cost of this wedding might care to reflect that each day the UK earns around £3.5 bn. Of course you don't have to give up work for a day but most will do so, and of course we don't earn nothing on days when no one goes into work: my bank will still be earning from me even when it is closed by paying next to nothing on  my money; and since people have to eat on a bank holiday they'll buy more food the day before.

It should also be said that since this 'free' holiday comes between Easter Monday and the communist 1st May holiday, many people will decide to make what Italians call the bridge: you can go away for 11 days at a cost of three days' holiday. Indeed, getting away from the televised schlock this is likely to be seems like a good idea.

One paper estimates the total cost to the economy as £5 bn, which makes the £50m look fairly good value.