The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020

[texankitcat]

Originally Posted by Elenath

You don't know if Meghan is isolating Harry from his family. You don't have enough facts to decide what's going on in that family. Who's to say they don't get along just fine. We barely have facts and if you read the papers, they all contradict each other. People are really showing their true colors here. If this all turns out to be a storm in a teacup, what will you all do.

And who's Harrison??

I beg your pardon? Everyone here is entitled to voice their opinions on the information we know is true based on the Sussex’s actions and the BRF reactions. They media has been reporting on a breakdown between Harry and William and the growing tension and self isolation from Sussex’s towards the BRF. These reports have born out to be true and confirmed by the Sussex’s themselves with these astounding recent actions.

No one here is required to substantiate every thought or opinion with personally known facts inside the family because of course that isn’t possible. However, with the information that is known based on the actions and reactions of those involved as well as the close observations of the sequence of events leading up to this extraordinary development, we all have a pretty good grasp on the history of it. The question now is what will happen from here, which we are also entitled to discuss and debate to our hearts content, since that is why we are here.

Have a great day!

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by tommy100

Absolutely believe the issue is not their desire to move away, or to continue to represent the Queen or to work for their own foundation. Its the stated aim to be "financially independent" -which could quite potentially cause conflicts on interest- and once again when it comes to H&M, the way it has been done, that is causing issues.

Again, I don't see at all why they had to announce this now, without an agreement from all parties. They can't even say they've given the RF time to sort through it, apparently Harry told Charles on Christmas Eve he definitely wanted to step away. Most people would recognise that over the holiday period is no time to put a plan in place while staff are on holiday etc.

If H&M could have found it in themselves to wait it could have been announced in a joint statement from HM, Charles and Harry with clear answers to these complex issues and, yes of course there would have been major media interest, but the answers to all these speculations would have already been made clear.

On the visa issues etc, is there a way they could stay if they are running their Foundation from there? If the Foundation employs them as CEOs would that count as work/employment? Maybe they have thought this part through and are just going to visit for 5 months at a time?

“Financially independent” are code words for “enhance their brand” which are code words for selling out. H and M want to use the Sussex name for commercial purposes - I can just see them all over my tv, promoting some garbage I’m not interested in. Just for this reason alone I’d love to see their titles stripped, but I’m sure that won’t happen.

The whole leak excise is stupid. Ok, say it leaked - so what ? There would be questions - and those questions would be answered eventually. I agree with everything you said, Tommy. They couldn’t wait because they didn’t want to wait - impulsive, spoiled, children.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

The fact that the income (or the surplus income if you will) goes to William when he becomes heir underlines that it is not private income , but rather income tied to an office or title (Duke of Cornwall). It is not Charles' income then, but the Duke's and the title is tied to being the eldest son of the monarch and the heir apparent. My point was not that there are legal constraints on how Charles can spend the money, but there are , as I made clear in my post, genuine expectations on the part of the public that those who are supported by those funds do public work. And, if it works as the Sovereign Grant as you claim ( I am not sure about that), even more so. Certainly, no one would expect the Sovereign Grant to be used to mantain H&M in Canada and they are rightly giving it up voluntarily (the Sovereign Grant is supposed to support official business of the Crown, mantain the occupied Royal Palaces, etc.)



Also, your proposed poll question would be , in this case, completely misleading. If you asked me if Charles should fund H&M from his private income , I would assume you are referring to private money he inherited (by will or trust funds ) from his parents, grandparents, etc. , not money he derives from the Duchy of Cornwall. Forbes Magazine does not count the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duchy of Cornwall when assessing the Queen's or the PoW's net worth because those are not assets that can be sold, willed, etc. Again they are tied to an office and not owned by the Queen or Charles.

Ok. I see your point here. The thing is that the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster are the only two *royal* duchies in existence and date back centuries. You're seeing a public consensus of income in the 21st century.

"About the Duchy. ​The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established by Edward III in 1337 to provide independence to his son and heir, Prince Edward. A charter ruled that each future Duke of Cornwall would be the eldest surviving son of the Monarch and heir to the throne." It does provide a substantial, "financially independent" income for the holder of the Duke of Cornwall title. Its private income that they can do what they will with it and bequeath a substantial amount of their private income to the "Save the Pet Rock" foundation if they so choose but they cannot touch or change or manipulate or sell the Duchy itself. Charles actually had to talk with and convince the Duchy of Cornwall that purchasing Highgrove was a good move to make. Its its own entity. The duchies themselves are not personal holdings. Their private income from it are personal holdings.

Remember that back when the Duchy of Cornwall was established, there was probably *no* concept of public service to the Crown and duties in mind whatsoever.

You're absolutely right on the fact that Forbes would not count the Duchy of Cornwall's gains and profits as part of Charles' net worth because he doesn't hold the control of the Duchy or how it operates and what it does. He's involved in their management as we have recently seen William get more and more involved as a future Duke of Cornwall.

Perhaps this is a subject best moved to the Royal Wealth and Finance thread? We're kind of detracting away from the subject at hand which is Harry and Meghan and what's going to happen with them but a lot of things have cropped up that does take us on tangents and that YouGov poll got me started. Sorry mods.

[Betsypaige]

On another note, I love how Charles is trying to bind wounds so to speak..

Charles has implored everyone to work together to bring them back into the fold before it is too late, as he realises the benefits they have as a couple and indeed for the popularity of the monarchy across the world.

“The message is clear: the stakes are too high to lose the one of the family’s greatest assets.”

Charles, 71, has a clear vision of how he wants a “slimmed-down” monarchy to operate in future, with Harry and Meghan bringing their star quality to major roles.

But he was disheartened at the couple’s wish to split from The Firm and pursue the prospect of earning millions without the blessing of the extended family

The senior palace source said: “He’s spoken at length with both William and Harry over the last year and outlined his plans, which have all been ratified by the Queen – that William and Kate will be primed and ready to carry on the long-held traditions of the family, while Meghan and Harry will be able to spread their wings and have a far more fluid role.

Both brothers were until recently, it seemed, in complete agreement with the plan and, despite a falling-out over the last year, committed to making it work for all parties.

"But the urgency with which Harry and Meghan have pursued their intentions to break out on their own even more than had been agreed upon has caused great alarm.”

The couple had been warned their plan to break away and split their time between big-money corporations and the Crown would be “wholly unworkable”.

Harry is understood to have told Charles the wheels of change moved too slowly in the palace, prompting the Sussexes to release their bombshell departure statement ahead of time this week.

But the Mirror can reveal that after a meeting between the Queen, Charles, the Cambridges and Sussexes on Thursday, Harry and Meghan have been given “a new range of options” for how their new roles could work.

Charles has made no secret of his admiration for Meghan and is said to be saddened at the prospect of losing her.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...harry-21256979

[Alison H]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Think about it:

The UK is due to leave the political institutions of the EU on January 31

Meanwhile, there is an ongoing crisis with Iran in the Middle East where the
All of the above (and more) notwithstanding, we are told by the BBC that, at a cabinet meeting at No. 10 Downing Street, ministers had to pause their ordinary business to discuss the future arrangements for Harry and Meghan ! I am sure that, on the other side of the Atlantic, the Canadian government (Trudeau is said to be friends with Meghan BTW) is also being asked to join the discussion.

It is ridiculous and certainly gives ammunition to Republic and other anti-monarchist organizations (I'd assume in Canada too).

Yes - exactly. We've already had one of the Labour leadership contenders calling for a referendum on the monarchy. He is a no-hoper who is struggling to get enough nominations to stand, and is just looking for attention, but Harry and Meghan are providing an excuse for comments like that.

Also, many people in the UK have friends and relatives in Australia, also a Commonwealth country, and everyone is very worried and distressed about the fires. Not to mention the fact that over 60 Canadians and 4 Britons have just been killed in the Iranian plane crash. No-one needs to be having to deal with Harry and Meghan's strops. Surely it could have been sorted out properly. Who are they employing, if they can't write anything down for fear it might end up in the papers?

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Denville

The Diplomatic service is part of the Civil service. There are exams and qualifications to get in. They work on behalf of the Queen but they are professional diplomats...

Exactly. I was agreeing with you on your previous point. The royal family *hosts* them to thank them for their dedication and service. The royal family themselves are *not* qualified diplomats in service to the Crown. I seriously doubt Harry could be deemed as on at this point.

[Fem]

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.. see below from Vanity Fair. This is so disturbing to me..build their brands? Become like the Beckhams? This is so tawdry, so cheap. Trademarking “Sussex Royal” ? I’m sorry, it’s ugly and gross...and that’s before getting into how Harry has deeply hurt his grandmother)

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...-queen-fallout

BRF trademarks their stuff - it has to be done to prevent someone else using them for profits.

But this below:

“Building their brand is the most important thing to them right now,” a source told Vanity Fair. “I think it might be more important than their royal titles because they are already so huge, so successful and so popular particularly in the US which is where they see their brand really taking off. Meghan is seriously bright and business savvy and together they have come up with a plan to become the royal version of the Beckhams.”

This is what I'm afraid of. This is what I've been afraid of since the name "Sussex Royal" started to show up everywhere. Because it sounds more like a brand than a name for a royal foundation. So I'm trying to give them the benefit of a doubt here, but this doesn't look good.

Originally Posted by wyevale

Imagine if the gender roles were switched and it was Max Markle doing this to Princess Harriet.
Everyone would be crying controlling and isolating partner. “She’s not the fun loving person she used to be” etc.

Ouch. That's the first time I thought of it like that and oh wow

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Exactly. I was agreeing with you on your previous point. The royal family *hosts* them to thank them for their dedication and service. The royal family themselves are *not* qualified diplomats in service to the Crown. I seriously doubt Harry could be deemed as on at this point.

The diplomatic reception is NOT for British diplomats.

It is for the diplomats from other countries posted to the UK.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Exactly. I was agreeing with you on your previous point. The royal family *hosts* them to thank them for their dedication and service. The royal family themselves are *not* qualified diplomats in service to the Crown. I seriously doubt Harry could be deemed as on at this point.

Of course he is not. He and Meghan would be unlikely to have any reason to get permanet residence in Canada. She had temporary work permits because of her job in Suits. I doubt if the Can Govt is going to tweak the rules to let them stay..

[moby]

Originally Posted by Denville

So it is not for the British diplomatis at all?

No. British diplomats would be assigned abroad

“Diplomatic corps” means foreign ones assigned and accredited in the Host government, in this case the UK.

Checking Canada’s diplomatic visas and the last category says “special cases”. Maybe he qualifies under that. It would still be best for him to have diplomatic status so he has immunity. If he gets any type of work permit, he would be subjected to taxes, scrutiny over their dealings which means they better be prepared.

Those saying “financial independence” are quick to point out that perhaps this refers to raising income for their charitable endeavors. However on their website they also mentioned how the current structure prevents them from having “professional income” so clearly financial independence also means their own.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Fem

BRF trademarks their stuff - it has to be done to prevent someone else using them for profits.

But this below:
This is what I'm afraid of. This is what I've been afraid of since the name "Sussex Royal" started to show up everywhere. Because it sounds more like a brand than a name for a royal foundation. So I'm trying to give them the benefit of a doubt here, but this doesn't look good.


Ouch. That's the first time I thought of it like that and oh wow

Fem, thanks for reminding me of that, though of course H and M acting as their own entity separate from BRF so that they can make a profit off of their title is a horse of a different color.

[tommy100]

In terms of Frogmore Cottage the answer seems simple, do the same as for Edward and Andrew. Ask the Crown Estate to work out a fair rate of rent and charge them that. They could even (though not sure its fair) look at the renovations paid for by the Sovereign Grant in the same way those by Andrew and Edward were and use this to reduce the rent slightly but ultimately the end outcome is they need to charge them some rent.

[Hallo girl]

Great points , the royals try and control announcements so as not to deflect attention from national events.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by tommy100

In terms of Frogmore Cottage the answer seems simple, do the same as for Edward and Andrew. Ask the Crown Estate to work out a fair rate of rent and charge them that. They could even (though not sure its fair) look at the renovations paid for by the Sovereign Grant in the same way those by Andrew and Edward were and use this to reduce the rent slightly but ultimately the end outcome is they need to charge them some rent.

I would bet my last Mounds bar that Harry and Meghan have already sat down with the Crown Estate and worked out the terms of their lease on Frogmore Cottage long before they moved in. They were given permission to live there not only by the Queen but also probably contracted with the Crown Estates much like Andrew and Edward have done. They weren't "gifted" Frogmore Cottage free and clear as their own personal property but allowed the *use* of it.

[Hallo girl]

Ok I obviously mis understood, I would be happy for you to clarify the point.

[poppy7]

Dominating press again today but the mood is shifting. After shock of the announcement and about how it was so unfair to the Queen. Comments have changed to. Well,fine. It is probably best anyway. They just don't fit what the monarchy needs to be. In fact it is all a bit. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I just wonder if this was the response Harry and Meghan was expecting? Or just a rather healthy acknowledgement that this was not working out and they didn't settle in well. I mean it would happen in the real world of work. They really are completely replaceable and in the end actually it seems people think well good. This wasn't working for any of us. I can see massive coverage over what they do next but after that first flush they just being let be and no one having much interest. Which I don't think will actually make them happy either. Kind of like Sarah Fergusion. Diana too if she had lived would now be largely forgotten. All very sad. And even without trying it seems the Windsor will win. Harry and Meghan were the architects of this and just never really got it. Sad.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by moby

No. British diplomats would be assigned abroad

“Diplomatic corps” means foreign ones assigned and accredited in the Host government, in this case the UK.

Checking Canada’s diplomatic visas and the last category says “special cases”. Maybe he qualifies under that. It would still be best for him to have diplomatic status so he has immunity. If he gets any type of work permit, he would be subjected to taxes, scrutiny over their dealings which means they better be prepared.

Those saying “financial independence” are quick to point out that perhaps this refers to raising income for their charitable endeavors. However on their website they also mentioned how the current structure prevents them from having “professional income” so clearly financial independence also means their own.

I think it is all very much slippery slope. It will be claimed that they are raisign most of the money for charity, but they need to raise a sufficient income for themselves.

[Nico]

The prospect of Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of Majesty Magazine :

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens...more-1.5420972

[wyevale]

Comments have changed to. Well,fine. It is probably best anyway.

I detect that shift too..but no change in the universally held opinion that making money [for personal gain] using Royal Titles or links to the BRF is absolutely unacceptable, with a strong strain of 'make them solely Mr & Mrs H Mountbatten-Windsor...

I was looking at the local Sussex Newspaper 'Letters column's' yesterday, and the denizens of that fine County seem extremely upset at the prospect of 'their' County name being used in so disreputable a manner..

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Nico

The prospect of Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of Majesty Magazine :

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens...more-1.5420972

I’m not a fan of Ingrid Seward since she tried to browbeat Meghan into seeing her awful father, but I can’t disagree with anything she’s said here.