Sussex Royal - The Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am interested in how this initiative works. It sounds like it could be a niche travel scheme and having read that many tourist sites are becoming more circumscribed, less available to the general public because there is no cohesive policy to protect the sites.

It seems to me that when Harry is on his own, he flys commercial as he just needs three or four seats. Flying with the family multiplies that number, so it seems quite sensible to me. IMO, those continually carping do not seem to care if Harry has changed, grown, matured, learned from his mistakes and from the accumulation of his life experience.

Then again, I am interested in what he has to say so I can understand the nuts and bolts of this new initiative and not merely taking every opportunity to denigrate Harry's very existence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am interested in how this initiative works. It sounds like it could be a niche travel scheme and having read that many tourist sites are becoming more circumscribed, less available to the general public because there is no cohesive policy to protect the sites.

It seems to me that when Harry is on his own, he flys commercial as he just needs three or four seats. Flying with the family multiplies that number, so it seems quite sensible to me. IMO, those continually carping do not seem to care if Harry has changed, grown, matured, learned from his mistakes and from the accumulation of his life experience.

Then again, I am interested in what he has to say so I can understand the nuts and bolts of this new initiative and not merely taking every opportunity to denigrate Harry's very existence.

Who is denigrating Harry's existence?
 
Having Prince Harry promoting these companies sounds like a great deal for them, but I am much less clear what the actual direct benefit to the environment is. These are for-profit companies, correct?

Harry's statement regarding the private jet usage just prolonged the controversy.

Because royals only ever work with non profits???

The point of the initiative is that tourism is causing long lasting negative effects on the environment. And if something is not done to curtail those issues, the environment will not be sustainable. You arent going to make any waves in stopping this by working Against the tourism industry. Instead you work with them. Tourism is not the issue, its the kind of tourism that we are seeing now.

The intention of the initiative is to promote eco-friendly tourism. Allowing people to enjoy the amazing eco systems, but while sustaining them for the future generations to come. And involving the local communities, which also helps stimulate the economy in those areas as well. A charity is not going to run and finance tourism activities, they clearly are going to work with companies like the ones Harry has been paired with.

And for all the people whining once again about 'how he can fly private and still talk about the environment' this initiative is not about Carbon foot print and flying. Well not totally. When it comes to tourism, that is only a tiny portion of the ecological impact that tourists have on the eco system. But of course people can only look past the current 'scandal'.

Teaming with booking.com and other tour companies will help to promote eco friendly tours. Their websites can be used to educate tourists and get them to choose more earth conscious travel destinations.

And if companies are being encouraged to sink some of their profits into helping the local environment all the better.
 
I'm aware that tourism has become a problem in some locations and has placed an undue burden on the environment. I'm less clear how partnering with companies that make money off lots and lots of people using their travel services is a benefit for the environment. That remains to be seen. I'm also interested in how royals promoting those for-profit services will play out in the long run, because I can see the potential downside.
 
Whether what he said was right or not I wish we would go back to the "never complain, never explain" attitude of the past.

There's so much disquiet in the country atm that keeping silent and trying to just get on with things would be best IMO. I'm not saying nag him or he can't talk (and I get he was asked so how he could have avoided it I don't know) but that it would have been better if somehow he hadn't said anything.

Harry's statement regarding the private jet usage just prolonged the controversy.

I have to agree with you both. I think the explanation was inadequate at best, and only helped prolong the story.

The naivety with which Harry appears to be approaching his role recently would almost think he was new to this world. My fear is that even though H&M are not "main line" royals, some of their actions (inadvertent or otherwise) are creating negativity towards them in the public domain and can stick to the broader "Firm". Perhaps the time is coming for Charles to get involved and help guide them a little more than he may have previously.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with you both. I think the explanation was inadequate at best, and only helped prolong the story.

The naivety with which Harry appears to be approaching his role recently would almost think he was new to this world. My fear is that even though H&M are not "main line" royals, some of their actions (inadvertent or otherwise) are creating negativity towards them in the public domain and can stick to the broader "Firm". Perhaps the time is coming for Charles to get involved and help guide them a little more than he may have previously.

The thing is....H&M aren’t the problem. That’s the problem. All they can do is stay focused on their duties for their charities and patronage’s.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with you both. I think the explanation was inadequate at best, and only helped prolong the story.

The naivety with which Harry appears to be approaching his role recently would almost think he was new to this world. My fear is that even though H&M are not "main line" royals, some of their actions (inadvertent or otherwise) are creating negativity towards them in the public domain and can stick to the broader "Firm". Perhaps the time is coming for Charles to get involved and help guide them a little more than he may have previously.

And Charles would advice them to follow his example, right? Which would be to talk A LOT about protecting the environment, I mean for decades, and STILL flying on private jets, when need be. Didn't the recent report on royal spending say that Charles flew on planes, private planes, most out of all the royals.

Imho it's weird to suggest that Sussexes are creating negativity toward the firm, when Andrew's visits were cancelled by the charities and hosts due to the actual controversy hes bringing to the firm.
 
3 September 2019
Buckingham Palace



2nd September, 2019

The Duke of Sussex this morning departed from Heathrow Airport, London, for the Netherlands and was received upon arrival this afternoon at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol by Mr. Timothy Decamp (Deputy Head of Mission, British Embassy in Amsterdam).

3rd September, 2019

The Duke of Sussex this morning attended the launch of the sustainable tourism initiative Travalyst at A'Dam Tower, Amsterdam.

His Royal Highness this evening arrived at Heathrow Airport, London, from the Netherlands.
 
Last edited:
Re: Harry was asked so he answered, the questions any royal will ask and answer at an event like this will be agreed on well in advance. I am not one who had any issue with "private jet gate," but it's not as if he had this question thrown at him from the audience and gave his best answer. It will have been planned to address and answer it at this venue. His response is best analyzed in light of being a strategic decision rather than a "he had to answer" spur-of-the-moment decision.
 
And Charles would advice them to follow his example, right? Which would be to talk A LOT about protecting the environment, I mean for decades, and STILL flying on private jets, when need be. Didn't the recent report on royal spending say that Charles flew on planes, private planes, most out of all the royals.

After the events of Sep 11, Prince Charles was advised by the Home Office to not fly on commercial jets, and has since pretty much only flown on private planes.
 
After the events of Sep 11, Prince Charles was advised by the Home Office to not fly on commercial jets, and has since pretty much only flown on private planes.

So Charles is following the advice of his security team when he flies private, but Harry and Meghan cannot be doing the same?

Charles has preached about the environment for decades and flies private, but he should advice Harry about talking about the environment and flying private?
 
After the events of Sep 11, Prince Charles was advised by the Home Office to not fly on commercial jets, and has since pretty much only flown on private planes.

So what makes people think that Harry (and his family) aren't advised to do the same on occasion (when threats are high). We know that there have been threats to both Harry & Meghan, some serious enough to land people in jail. Think of all the ones we don't know about.

Like Harry said he is trying to find a balance....his family's safety will always come first (like it should be for everyone) and when he does fly by private jet he tries to balance it out with the sources available to him right now. Talking about it may bring even better resources to the table in the future and he is bringing that to the forefront.
 
So Charles is following the advice of his security team when he flies private, but Harry and Meghan cannot be doing the same?

Charles has preached about the environment for decades and flies private, but he should advice Harry about talking about the environment and flying private?

So what makes people think that Harry (and his family) aren't advised to do the same on occasion (when threats are high). We know that there have been threats to both Harry & Meghan, some serious enough to land people in jail. Think of all the ones we don't know about.

Like Harry said he is trying to find a balance....his family's safety will always come first (like it should be for everyone) and when he does fly by private jet he tries to balance it out with the sources available to him right now. Talking about it may bring even better resources to the table in the future and he is bringing that to the forefront.

I don't know if security services have specifically advised Harry to not fly on commercial planes, but if that were indeed be the case:

a) Harry would not have flown on a commercial plane to Amsterdam
b) Harry ought to have worded his explanation on private planes differently.

My own view is that Harry is perfectly entitled to fly on as many private planes as he can afford to fly on, or get others to pay for. However, he just has to be clear if there are any inconsistencies in those flights and the environmental campaigning he undertakes to avoid claim of being hypocritical.
 
So what makes people think that Harry (and his family) aren't advised to do the same on occasion (when threats are high). We know that there have been threats to both Harry & Meghan, some serious enough to land people in jail. Think of all the ones we don't know about.

Like Harry said he is trying to find a balance....his family's safety will always come first (like it should be for everyone) and when he does fly by private jet he tries to balance it out with the sources available to him right now. Talking about it may bring even better resources to the table in the future and he is bringing that to the forefront.

I don't know if security services have specifically advised Harry to not fly on commercial planes, but if that were indeed be the case:

a) Harry would not have flown on a commercial plane to Amsterdam
b) Harry ought to have worded his explanation on private planes differently.

My own view is that Harry is perfectly entitled to fly on as many private planes as he can afford to fly on, or get others to pay for. However, he just has to be clear if there are any inconsistencies in those flights and the environmental campaigning he undertakes to avoid claim of being hypocritical.

My quote said that there may be times when threats are higher and then at those times security may warrant private travel. So there may indeed be times when it is okay for Harry to fly commercial (especially if it is just him).

He didn't need to word his explanation differently....it was very clear he will travel commercial the majority of the time but there are times, especially when it comes to the safety of his family he will need to travel privately. What needs to be clearer in that statement?
 
My quote said that there may be times when threats are higher and then at those times security may warrant private travel. So there may indeed be times when it is okay for Harry to fly commercial (especially if it is just him).

He didn't need to word his explanation differently....it was very clear he will travel commercial the majority of the time but there are times, especially when it comes to the safety of his family he will need to travel privately. What needs to be clearer in that statement?

Yeah, I thought his answer was perfectly clear.

We aren't wary to their security team's decisions, and I'm perfectly fine accepting family safety as a reason for them to fly private.
 
So Charles is following the advice of his security team when he flies private, but Harry and Meghan cannot be doing the same?

Charles has preached about the environment for decades and flies private, but he should advice Harry about talking about the environment and flying private?

Perhaps the royal family should invest in a eco friendly bus that's run on Highgrove wine that's secure to the max much like the "Beast" our President rides around in. They all pile on the bus with their RPOs and the bus goes to different destinations where the different royals have engagements that day.

Something along these lines. If they get stranded, they can always drink the fuel. ?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...ce-Charless-Aston-Martin-is-wine-powered.html
 
Two things. Harry Just should of said from time to time logistics require the use of a private jet and leave it there.

To use security as an ‘excuse’ while also stating he flies commercial 99% of the time is disingenuous and misleading.
 
I don't like to think about it but it wouldn't surprise me if threats were much higher and taken more seriously with Meghan. They may not be published but could be a real concern. If this is the case, Harry and his team will do anything to minimize the risk, as they should. I am all for doing my bit for the planet but I too call short. For example, I could take the train/bus from NY to FL to check on my Dad monthly. However, if I am only going for 2 days that adds another 2 days to trip and that isn't always feasible I can fly in under 3 hours.
 
I don't know if security services have specifically advised Harry to not fly on commercial planes, but if that were indeed be the case:

a) Harry would not have flown on a commercial plane to Amsterdam
b) Harry ought to have worded his explanation on private planes differently.

My own view is that Harry is perfectly entitled to fly on as many private planes as he can afford to fly on, or get others to pay for. However, he just has to be clear if there are any inconsistencies in those flights and the environmental campaigning he undertakes to avoid claim of being hypocritical.

Harry and one (or even two) RPOs flying somewhere is vastly different than Harry, Meghan, Archie and nine RPOs minimum and a nanny flying somewhere.
 
Last edited:
some of the other articles I am reading besides DM are saying that this hire was made to help promote Travelyst. Perhaps I am slow but what is the issue this time?
 
Two things. Harry Just should of said from time to time logistics require the use of a private jet and leave it there.

To use security as an ‘excuse’ while also stating he flies commercial 99% of the time is disingenuous and misleading.
Couldn't agree more!!
 
...
Chris Ship's tweet: re PR firm

"On the @danwootton story that Harry and Meghan have hired American PR firm Sunshine Sachs, the firm has been asked by the Palace to help promote to America the new ecotourism project Prince Harry is launching today.
Travelyst is the first Sussex Royal Foundation project."

some of the other articles I am reading besides DM are saying that this hire was made to help promote Travelyst. Perhaps I am slow but what is the issue this time?

Because some articles are trying to make it be personal for Meghan's "image."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think there is anything he could say really to stop the view that he is being an hypocrite. He is not the only member of the royal family who flies private jet. Does Charles ever fly commercial? There may be times when it is easier to fly private with a baby and wife in tow. He says he offsets the carbon when he flies private. If that is not good enough for some people than that can not be helped at this point. A few private jet rides by one family is not going to undo the damage that has already been done.
 
40% (an inaccurate number of course as Harry also travelled to Amsterdam in May by commercial flight, which isn't included; and there might be other 'known' flights missing) instead of 99% is a big difference; although it could be that he flies much more and therefore his percentage is higher than calculated based on 'known' flights ;)

However, it seems very unlikely that safety alone is the reason for all private jets taken. I assume it's a combination of factors including safety but also convenience.

It seems that so far all flights with Archie have been private, so either that's assessed as a far higher risk or convenience (and/or a desire for privacy) kicks in in those cases as well. Flights to Morocco and Australia/New Zealand were commercially - so, at least previously Meghan could fly commercially as well. Nonetheless, it seems that Harry also flies private when solo at times, so again, it seems that safety/security isn't the only reason that plays in to the decision.

What Harry forgets to mention is the alternative of not travelling that often... There is little reason to travel back and forth to lots of different holiday destinations only days apart; and in some cases other alternatives than flying are readily available. So, even flying commercially is not the best thing to do. [And yes, I am well aware that most of us, including me, also fly - sometimes out of 'necessity' and sometimes for pleasure (vacation/holiday for example) and/or out of convenience (Harry could for example have taken the train from London to Amsterdam).]
 
Last edited:
I don't think there is anything he could say really to stop the view that he is being an hypocrite. He is not the only member of the royal family who flies private jet. Does Charles ever fly commercial? There may be times when it is easier to fly private with a baby and wife in tow. He says he offsets the carbon when he flies private. If that is not good enough for some people than that can not be helped at this point. A few private jet rides by one family is not going to undo the damage that has already been done.

I agree. The only way to satisfy some people is to have the private frequent fliers [and there are many CEOs, millionaires, etc. who do] to prove the amount of money sent to "tree planting charities" to offset and have them document by charity where these trees will be planted. Just to send money to their own Foundation Charity won't cut it. Short and sweet. If they are doing as they claim, not a bit of problem and people will shut up.
 
And Charles would advice them to follow his example, right? Which would be to talk A LOT about protecting the environment, I mean for decades, and STILL flying on private jets, when need be. Didn't the recent report on royal spending say that Charles flew on planes, private planes, most out of all the royals.

Imho it's weird to suggest that Sussexes are creating negativity toward the firm, when Andrew's visits were cancelled by the charities and hosts due to the actual controversy hes bringing to the firm.

Comparing the heir to the throne to any other member of the family is comparing apples to oranges. I know you have rejected my saying that in the past as "an excuse that stinks," but I am surprised that this is even a controversial statement. Charles' position, and what he is and is not able to do, and what people realize he is and is not able to do, and how what he does and does not do is received by the public, is just not comparable to Meghan and Harry (or his own siblings, his elder son, or any other member of his family). This can be my "stinky excuse" all day long, and people can accuse me of just making up excuses for the media's ill treatment of the Sussexes, but the truth of it is borne out every single day.

Some actions are just "ok" (generally accepted by the public) when done by the 70+ years old heir to the British throne and not when done by his 30-something, 6th-in-line son, daughter-in-law, and grandson. Some actions are also "ok" (see definition above) when done by the heir's heir and his family, but not "ok" when done by the other branches of the family. Andrew faced this. My gosh, did Edward face this. Anne. Beatrice. Eugenie. This is people looking at actions in context, and it is not hypocrisy. People who fail to see this are going to be blue in the face trying to "defend" the Sussexes against criticism like this for the rest of the Sussexes' public lives, because it will always happen. People will criticize one, both, or all of them for actions that others take without being criticized, because those people exist and act in different contexts. The great news is, it works the other way too. Because of their own contexts and experiences, the Sussexes will be able to do and be praised for things that, if any family member did them, they would be criticized heavily.
 
I don't think there is anything he could say really to stop the view that he is being an hypocrite. He is not the only member of the royal family who flies private jet. Does Charles ever fly commercial? There may be times when it is easier to fly private with a baby and wife in tow. He says he offsets the carbon when he flies private. If that is not good enough for some people than that can not be helped at this point. A few private jet rides by one family is not going to undo the damage that has already been done.

It was a made up controversy. For months now, everything Harry and Meghan do and say is now considered wrong and a rebel against the Monarchy. Outside forces are controlling the narrative.
 
. Because of their own contexts and experiences, the Sussexes will be able to do and be praised for things that, if any family member did them, they would be criticized heavily.

Could you please give an example of this. Because to my eyes it looks like the Sussexes can't do what other royals do, they get criticism for it, AND if they dared to do something that other royals don't do, they get criticized even more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom