Roundup: Prince Charles' "Black Spider" letters to Tony Blair published

A batch of private letters sent by Britain's Prince Charles to former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair and other government ministers were published Wednesday, sparking public scrutiny over whether the heir to the British throne had interfered with government policy-making.

The letters, called "black spider memos" because of Prince Charles' distinct handwriting, were published on the website of British Cabinet Office.

In those published letters, Charles showed his concerns on a range of issues, including school nutrition, summer schools, beef farming, reforms of the European Union's Common Agriculture Policy, problems affecting workers in the dairy sector, resources available for armed forces, among others.

Those letters were sent between Charles and ministers in the last government in 2004 and 2005, when Tony Blair was the prime minister of Britain.

Previous reports of the Guardian said then government ministers, including those responsible for business, innovation and skills; health; children, schools and families; environment, food and rural affairs; culture, media and sport; the Northern Ireland Office and the Cabinet Office, were among the correspondents.

Prince Charles also wrote ministers, inviting them to attend a conference on architecture to give them a perspective on "vital aspects" of urban design, raising concerns over the sea birds and illegal fishing, as well as rebuilding historic buildings in Northern Ireland, according to the published letters.

He also wrote to then Prime Minister Tony Blair in September 2004, expressed his concern over difficulties faced by the military in Iraq, saying "The aim of the Ministry of Defence and the Air Army Corps to deploy this equipment globally is, however, being frustrated by the poor performance of the existing Lynx aircraft in high temperatures."

"Despite this, the procurement of a new aircraft to replace the Lynx is subject to further delays and uncertainty due to significant pressure on the defence budget," the letter read.

Just hours before the publication, British government indicated the publication would risk undermining Prince Charles' position of political neutrality, which he could not easily recover once crowned.

A spokesperson of Clarence House, the official London residence of the prince, said in a statement that "the correspondence published by the Government today shows the range of The Prince of Wales' concerns and interests for this country and the wider world...The Prince of Wales cares deeply about this country, and tries to use his unique position to help others. He has devoted most of his working life to helping individuals and organizations, to make a difference for the better of this country and the world."

"Nonetheless, The Prince of Wales believes, as have successive Governments, that he should have a right to communicate privately. The publication of private letters can only inhibit his ability to express the concerns and suggestions which have been put to him in the course of his travels and meetings," the statement said.

Ministers described the letters as "particularly frank." Charles' letter-writing habit has been criticised as "meddling" by some, but the prince believes it is a legitimate part of his preparations to become king, the Guardian said.

The Guardian said it has fought for ten years to expose the letters of the heir to the throne to public scrutiny.

It was declared unlawful by the Court of Appeal in 2014 to publish the letters, however, the Supreme Court approved its publication in March. The British government reportedly has spent more than 400,000 pounds on legal costs to fight the "battle."

"We fought this case because we believed -- and the most senior judges in the country agreed -- that the royal family should operate to the same degrees of transparency as anyone else trying to make their influence felt in public life," said Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian editor-in-chief.

"The attorney general, in trying to block the letters, said their contents could 'seriously damage' perceptions of the prince's political neutrality. Whatever the rights and wrongs of that assessment, it is shocking that the government wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money trying to prevent their publication. Now, after 10 years, we are pleased to be able to share the contents of his correspondence and let people draw their own conclusions," Rusbridger said. Endit