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

[Fem]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7874687/Friends-Meghan-Markle-open-DAVID-JONES-Megxit.html
'It's always her way or the highway - she flees when things get heavy' - no surprise Meghan jumped the royal ship

I think it becomes more clear everyday that this was carefully planned and that Meghan's decision to quit royal duties did not come overnight.
Maybe it was already clear to her when she did the tearful interview in Africa and people did not fall for her emotional outburst.

I don't know what to think about all of this. On one hand, the theories that are being run in the newspapers and tabloids right now vary from weird to crazy, everyone has a source that says something completely different and it looks like there are two camps at war that are trying to push their agenda. On the other hand, there's Meghan and Harry's official website and even in their own words (well, not their own, but you know what I mean) this sounds like a mess - it's a fairytale and not well-thought proposition, it looks like a starting point in negotiations, not the ready product. There's the fact that it was published before coming to an agreement with BP. The conflict in the BRF that came out of nowhere last year - or was it even before that?

You don't have to read and belive tabloids to see it's a huge mess that was caused by Meghan and Harry publishing their plan way to soon. If it was all negotiated with HMQ, Prince Charles and Prince William, everything agreed upon, it would look completely different. And I don't believe the possible leak was enough reason to give this information for the public when the solution and compromise wasn't figured out yet.

I won't blame solely Meghan for that - the sacrifices she had to make coming to the UK and marrying into the BRF were not little or unimportant and the press she had to survive was awful - but this whole situation seems like a combination of both Meghan and Harry. Harry always wanted peace and quiet and if they were able to hike and walk with Archie in Canada for weeks without one picture taken, I can understand how he wouldn't even want to leave. Meghan (and I do want to say it's not a bad thing in general - just not really possible while being member of the BRF) was loud and outspoken and she wanted to have a voice, that was taken away from her basically the moment she had that ring on her finger. She's smart, she knows how this all work, she sees possibilities of collaboration that could be very profitable for their charity work, and also maybe for them, but they're not allowed to do that. So they are trying to come up with a plan that would not mean abandoning their duties as members of BRF but would give them more freedom in professional and private life. So yes, I do believe they want to have the cake and eat the cake, but I don't think it's coming from a bad place. Just as usually with this couple, the strategy they come up with is making a bigger mess than it should.

 

[Kataryn]

The poster below is absolutely correct. You can't just up and move to Canada permanently. It's very difficult to immigrate here currently as our government has closed off the point system for independent class immigrants and business class immigrants. Harry especially would not be eligible.

You can if you hold a diplomat's passport. Every country allows diplomatic staff to stay permanently. Like King Constantine and Queen Anne Marie lived in London using Danish diplomat's passports. I guess even Meghan has a British diplomat's passport or even an US-American.

 

[Helen.CH]

A US A-1 kind of visa is limited to State Department-accredited diplomats or diplomats traveling to the US for work, as well as Ministers.. if Canada has something like this, Harry would not qualify unless he is accredited and you’d be right, diplomatic status would be yet another restriction on their aim to do their own thing. On the other hand because of his passport, he can easily enter and stay in Canada for 180 days under ETA vs 90 days in the US (anyone feel free to correct me). As most expats know, in these situations one just needs to get out of the country once in a while. Harry can surely manage getting out of Canada at least once every 5 months. The only issue is, he shouldn’t be working with a temporary visa, so I wonder how that’ll work out.

I did not read all the posts concerning the visa question, but how did Meghan live in Canada when being an actress. Maybe it is possible because she is Us and Harry is now married to her? By the way I don't think the Canadian Gov, will hesitate to wellcome them at any status if knly they choose to live there ?

 

[King of the Jungle]

I looked up - How to immigrate to Canada as a Farmer - and that could be a possible.
What if a business sponsored Harry as their employee? Firms do shift staff about the World.

 

[TRCRoyal]

To repeat myself and other Canadians here NO THEY CAN'T. They aren't Canadian citizens and can't become Canadian citizens. Canadian citizenship is a process that takes years to acquire and neither of them qualify. You can't become a citizen just because you want to - all countries set up laws and rules that have to be followed. In Canada NO ONE is exempt from following our laws and rules, "the problem" is suggesting that someone is entitled to flout our laws or get an exception because of who they are.

it.

I didn’t say they were entitled. I’m saying they can find a way. Just because you think they can’t qualify for any of the immigration programs, doesn’t mean they can’t prove that they do.

Harry might be able to claim his time at the army as work experience, Meghan can claim 7 years of working in Canada. They both would most probably nail the IELTS. If Harry can speak French he can take the French language exam as well. They could both easily get LMIA job offers here with their connections and bam! They more than qualify for the Federal Skilled Worker Program. Saying that they could never qualify is just wrong.

 

[Muhler]

I'm not talking about H&M becoming Canadian citizens. I'm talking about H&M living on a permanent, or at least semi-permanent basis in Canada.

Another thing: H&M are not normal people, they cannot be compared to normal immigrants.
Apart from that, they are close relatives of your head of state.

I'm talking about the Canadian government allowing H&M to live in Canada. And if British (armed) protection officers can't operate in Canada, Canada is ultimately responsible for their safety. Especially as they are high profile and there are specific threats against them.

It's no different from if they were allowed to settle in my country. The law prohibits foreign police from operating here. Nor are armed bodyguards allowed, so it's down to the Danish police to protect them and that means I, as a taxpayer, foot the bill.
If a Canadian for whatever reason is under a specific threat, say a controversial politician or a Salman Rushdie, is allowed to live in DK it's the job of the Danish police to protect them And the taxpayers pay the bill.
I can huff and puff all I want, if my government has allowed them to enter my country and stay, that's it.

Right now H&M are staying in Canada, and seemingly with an intention to stay at least for longer periods. So what is Canada going to do about it? Allowing them to stay or kick them out? Will Canada refuse residence permit to the grandson and great-grandson of your head of state?

Okay, then Britain can foot the bill, right? But if Britain is going to pay, they will want a say. So if British government says: If we have to pay, it will be our protection officers who will take over, they will be armed and have a mandate to operate on Canadian soil.
Would that be acceptable?

To repeat myself and other Canadians here NO THEY CAN'T. They aren't Canadian citizens and can't become Canadian citizens. Canadian citizenship is a process that takes years to acquire and neither of them qualify. You can't become a citizen just because you want to - all countries set up laws and rules that have to be followed. In Canada NO ONE is exempt from following our laws and rules, "the problem" is suggesting that someone is entitled to flout our laws or get an exception because of who they are.


There are many, many deserving people who want to come here and can't. Many of them can support themselves and pay taxes. If the Canadian government no longer allows investor/business class immigrants (very wealthy people who want to start companies here and employ many Canadians) why would we allow a British prince to bypass the rules? We are a separate independent country from the UK with our own laws and rules. The days of us being a mere colony are long over. They are welcome to visit here but they have no more entitlement to live here than other people. Just because Harry is royalty doesn't mean they they have the right to circumvent the rules that all our other immigrants have followed.


If Harry is given some special diplomatic role by the British government, it is possible that terms can be negotiated for him to remain although he doesn't strike me as qualified in that area.


For someone who lives in Denmark ,you hold very strong opinions about our government and aren't listening to the Canadians here who said it won't fly here. Our current federal government is a minority one and holding onto power with a very narrow margin (they were nearly defeated in the last election). In our system, the government can fall at any time especially when they have a narrow minority. All it takes is the opposition passing a nonconfidence motion which passes (the opposition parties combined greatly outnumber the ruling party), the government falls and an election is triggered and defeat usually results (often the new government undoes the action that caused the defeat of the previous government. This has happened in the past.) Trudeau and the Liberals will avoid antagonizing the voters (the majority who are taxpayers) with an unpopular decision that could lead to a fast defeat.


I repeat they are welcome to visit here but they don't get to bypass our laws and rules and we don't want to pay for their security because they are not coming as a royal tour but privately. Canada only provides this type of security for visting heads of state and royals on official tours. When Harry's been here before privately or doing charity work like the Invictus Games, our government has NOT paid for it. Visiting celebrities pay for private security THEMSELVES. BTW NO Canadian citizen is entitled to tax payer paid individual protection. If you need bodyguards or personal security YOU or someone else on your behalf pays for it, NOT our government. That is NOT a service provided for by our police to ANYONE here including Canadian citizens (which they are NOT and CANNOT become). People who need that here pay for it themselves. Yes Harry and Meghan will need security but we are NOT paying for it.

 

[Purrs]

You can if you hold a diplomat's passport. Every country allows diplomatic staff to stay permanently. Like King Constantine and Queen Anne Marie lived in London using Danish diplomat's passports. I guess even Meghan has a British diplomat's passport or even an US-American.

That is only possible exception I can see. However, I honestly don't think Harry is particularly qualified as a diplomat (although that's for the British government to decide). I assumed Meghan was in the UK on a spousal/fiancee sponsorship program since she was engaged and then soon married to Harry. I'd be surprised if they issued her diplomatic passport when she could be sponsored sinc she was marrying a British citizen.

 

[Iluvbertie]

A note if I may about the titles:

1. The Queen gives titles but ...

2. It is parliament who has to pass the legislation to strip peers of their titles. The last time they stripped a 'peer of the realm' of their title was 1914 when they passed the Titles Deprivation Act to remove the titles Duke of Cumberland and Duke of Albany from two men who had joined the German Army and were fighting against Britain (basically had committed treason although they were never charged or convicted as such). They didn't lose their place in the line of succession however ... and their descendants are still in that list today.

3. There have been a number of 'senior royals' who have 'stepped back' from royal duties in the past 80 or so years: a) Edward VIII - can't get more senior than the King. When he was about to be introduced by the BBC they said they were going to introduce him as Mr Edward Windsor but George VI said 'no, he is still the son of a monarch and so is HRH The Prince Edward'. That is how he was introduced. Some months later George VI gave him a dukedom.
b) The Duke of Edinburgh - consort of the monarch - retired from public duties after a life time but no one considered asking for him to lose his titles because he didn't want to do the work anymore (and nor they should, in my opinion ... I am pointing out facts)
c) The Duke of York - another second son, stepped back after an appalling interview and some allegations (not allegations but no charges or convictions of a crime ... that may come but so far there doesn't seem to be any interest in charging him with a crime anywhere).

4. Under the law Harry can't renounce the title. He had to do that within a year of gaining the title. Until 1963 it wasn't even possible to do that but now it is ... for the title-holder only and only if done within the first year of gaining the title.

HM could use LPs to strip Harry of HRH but on what grounds? He is still a male-line grandchild of the monarch so she would have to basically rescind the LPs she issued in 2012 and remove HRH from all children, male-line grandchildren and great-grandchildren of a monarch except the eldest son/child in each generation. You can't strip HRH from the second son of Charles without removing it from the second son of The Queen and the second child of William. It would be unreasonable for Andrew and Charlotte to lose it because of a decision to remove HRH from the second son/child and then let the third/fourth keep that title.

Harry will remain HRH The Duke of Sussex.

I suspect there were be very strong limitations on using the title Sussex, or any of his other titles, for commercial gain for themselves.

I think they will keep Frogmore Cottage but have to pay rent for it.

The biggest sticking point will be the security issue. The Metropolitan Police budget will increase massively if they are in Canada ... or anywhere else for any length of time. It is the responsibility of the Met to provide security for the BRF - just as it is the secret service for the US President wherever he is in the world.

I do hope they are able to work something out so that Harry and Meghan are happy but aren't going to damage the monarchy in any way.

I do hope Harry isn't so naive that he thinks that going away will stop the British media - it won't. It will still run the stories ... whether true or not is irrelevant. They are a rabid bunch and they have brought down two princes now in less than two months and will be baying for more.

 

[christinacg]

Its occurred to me that many are seeing all of this as Harry and Meghan walking away from royal duties and the royal family. That's exaggeration. Its no where near what is actually happening. No where is it said that they will not ever do any royal duties or engagements. They're not being exiled out of the family at all or giving the Queen the British equivalent of the Bronx cheer.



They want to live part time in Canada. How much different is that from the Queen living for a few months at Balmoral or at Sandringham for her private time? Only difference I see is that the Queen's private times away are on her estates in the UK whereas Harry and Meghan's would be in a Commonwealth country. The muss and fuss about who's going to finance this or that will be sorted out and come to an agreement. I don't see it costing the British taxpayer a dime anywhere. All of this is where it takes time to work things out and be feasible from all angles and the pertinent people are the ones that are consulting and trying to come up with solutions and they're definitely not running to the media and TV stations and telling us what's what.



I think the main "break" here seems to be that they wish to differentiate between their "royal duties and engagements" and their philanthropic work through their foundation. This is shown by them stating that their foundation would not receive funding from the Sovereign Grant. It gives them more freedom on how to run their foundation. They're not going to, all of a sudden, drop the patronages that the Queen has asked them to take on at all. They're not going to become avid "red carpet strutters" as they've never been that way even during their courtship, engagement period and after their wedding.



I honestly don't see them doing this for personal fame and fortune and bright lights but rather changing and adapting just how they do things in a different manner that perhaps would be more successful for everything they choose to back as an incentive or an organization or a cause.



Until we actually know without a doubt what is fact away from the media stories and the reporter's points of view and everyone else's opinion, I'm going to give these two the benefit of the doubt that what they're trying to accomplish is for the good and not because of mental health issues, or ego stroking or any of the bazillion thoughts floating around these days around these two people.



Yeps... I do hope the clear heads prevail. [emoji3]

Yes, that’s because that’s the narrative the tabloids are pushing to create controversy and make money off of this. And the average person is buying it, not realizing the Daily Mail for example aren’t credible sources.

 

[wartenberg7]

That is only possible exception I can see. However, I honestly don't think Harry is particularly qualified as a diplomat (although that's for the British government to decide). I assumed Meghan was in the UK on a spousal/fiancee sponsorship program since she was engaged and then soon married to Harry. I'd be surprised if they issued her diplomatic passport when she could be sponsored sinc she was marrying a British citizen.

I admit I am pretty much surprised to read that the grandson of the british Queen, who is the Head of State of Canada, in theory would be unable to become a canadian citizen...!

Please go back and read my last sentence: "The fact that members of the BRF aren't supposed to act like one of us completely escaped her."

Whether they are just like us or not, members of the BRF represent the UK. They do NOT represent themselves, as celebrities such as movie stars or rock musicians do. Because of that there is an expectation that they act in a dignified manner, at least in public, which Sarah did not always do.

For example,the members of the BRF cannot do a lot of things celebrities often do: voice their opinions on politcal issues, argue in public, attack their boy/girl friend's ex-wife/husband, pose nude or even scantily clad, the list goes on and on.

Furthermore, members of the BRF do NOT simply cut ribbons here and make appearances there and perform ornamental work (and please show me where the Sussexes have stated this is what they are walking out on).

And at her coronation the Queen swore an oath before God, so yes, there is something "holy or special."

But there is one things royals DO have in common with the rest of us. If they don't like their job they don't get to ignore their supervisor's wishes (in this case the Queen), rewrite their job description, and then announce it to the public, a fact Harry and Meghan have ignored.

I understand that Harry and Meghan are very unhappy and I believe they have valid reasons for being so. But that does NOT excuse the way they have behaved. It is very self-centered and completely disrespectful to the Queen.

I can nothing but agree on every word you say, Garwin!

 

[evolvingdoors]

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.

This!! Every single word!

And this is what scares me about this situation and the future for both Harry and young Harrison.
Harry went from having at least some form of a relationship with his family to what appears to be essentially non in the course of less than two years!!

 

[carlota]

I admit I am pretty much surprised to read that the grandson of the british Queen, who is the Head of State of Canada, in theory would be unable to become a canadian citizen...!

How is that difficult to understand? HMQ as head of state giving her fleeing grandson a passport for Canada “just because” would be equivalent to becoming a corrupt almost dictatorial state. And Britain is a democratic state with a mostly clean record in public administration, thank goodness. That may be the way things go in certain (corrupt) parts of the world, but not in the UK.

 

[Elenath]

This!! Every single word!

And this is what scares me about this situation and the future for both Harry and young Harrison.
Harry went from having at least some form of a relationship with his family to what appears to be essentially non in the course of less than two years!!

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.

And who's Harrison??

 

[wartenberg7]

How is that difficult to understand? HMQ as head of state giving her fleeing grandson a passport for Canada “just because” would be equivalent to becoming a corrupt almost dictatorial state. And Britain is a democratic state with a mostly clean record in public administration, thank goodness. That may be the way things go in certain (corrupt) parts of the world, but not in the UK.

Because, in my naivity, I thought british people, different from other people in the world, could have easier access to Canada as Canada is a Commonwealth country (the other way around as well, of course) and they have a common Head of State.

 

[Purrs]

The process here is to remain in Canada legally after 5 months, you apply to be a permanent resident (that's the legal term) first. Citizenship follows after a number of years of permanent residency and is not required to remain in Canada (it is for voting). However to stay in Canada more than 5 months consecutively, you HAVE to be a legal permanent resident. Neither of them qualify to apply to be permanent residents. You can ONLY live here permanently IF you have permanent residency or what once called "landed status" or a "landed immigrant" They can't live here permanently. The only ways currently to get permanent residency are a spousal sponsorship by a Canadian citizen (Meghan is an American) or being a refugee who's deemed to be legitimate (there's a process for this) or a family sponsorship from relatives who are Canadian citizens (there are long waiting lists). There are a very small number of provincial nominees but that requires at least a Master's degree and competition is very fierce for those spots. Neither of them have that level of degree. My son-in-law was a spousal sponsorship (he got his permanent residency after over 3 years of waiting - you are allowed to stay while it is process. He doesn't have his citizenship yet but will be eligible to apply soon. If my daughter's application for spousal sponsorship had been denied (they had to prove their marriage was legitimate and not for convenience), he would had to leave or be deported.


The other ways of staying here temporarily are are a work permit (which Meghan had previously, a lot of TV productions are filmed here and that is encouraged because it brings jobs to Canada. When the job ends, the work permit expires.) The other exceptions are a student visa for studying at a registered institution (which is how my son-in-law came here) or a specialized permit for very specialized technical/high demand job frequently used in the oil industry. Canada no longer allows independent immigrants based on the old points system or business class immigration.


Harry and Meghan don't qualify for any of the paths to permanent residency. They can't live here permanently. My daughter worked for an immigration lawyer and helped with the applications in addition to sponsoring her husband so I do know quite a bit about the process.


Semi permanent might be possible if they leave every 5 months (they can't stay longer than 5 months). I don't know how long the period outside of Canada has to be but they cannot stay over 5 months consecutively at a time. However, there are restrictions on visitors - they can't make money here unless they apply for a work permit (possible for Meghan as she was on a Canadian filmed TV show, less likely for Harry.)


I happen to believe that NO ONE including royalty is entitled to flout our laws. The majority of Canadians are immigrants or descendants of immigrants who followed the rules and laws to get here. Yes, Harry is the grandson of our symbolic head of state, the Queen. That family relationship doesn't give him a free pass to bypass the laws the rest of us must follow. He is not the Queen (who would never suggest such a thing and does not actively personally intervene and try to bend our laws. If she did, she would not remain our symbolic head of state.)


Your government made its own choice with Salman Rushdie, you cannot extrapolate that to what my government would do.


I doubt our government would 'kick them' out but I'm sure they would be told that they have to follow the rules like everyone else. They can move to the US as Meghan is an American citizen who could sponsor him although opens up a big can of worms because he'd be subject to American taxes (most countries tax by residency, the US is about the only one who taxes by citizenship - I have one American parent who immigrated here when they married.)


As for as paying for personal security, Harry has some money he inherited and his father has considerably more. Is it enough? I don't know although probably not. I personally think that the personal security costs is one of the reasons that their plan is not well considered or realistic. The rumours about them wanting to make money with commercial endeavors are partially based on the realization their life as presently living including the need for security will be very expensive.

I'm not talking about H&M becoming Canadian citizens. I'm talking about H&M living on a permanent, or at least semi-permanent basis in Canada.

Another thing: H&M are not normal people, they cannot be compared to normal immigrants.
Apart from that, they are close relatives of your head of state.

I'm talking about the Canadian government allowing H&M to live in Canada. And if British (armed) protection officers can't operate in Canada, Canada is ultimately responsible for their safety. Especially as they are high profile and there are specific threats against them.

It's no different from if they were allowed to settle in my country. The law prohibits foreign police from operating here. Nor are armed bodyguards allowed, so it's down to the Danish police to protect them and that means I, as a taxpayer, foot the bill.
If a Canadian for whatever reason is under a specific threat, say a controversial politician or a Salman Rushdie, is allowed to live in DK it's the job of the Danish police to protect them And the taxpayers pay the bill.
I can huff and puff all I want, if my government has allowed them to enter my country and stay, that's it.

Right now H&M are staying in Canada, and seemingly with an intention to stay at least for longer periods. So what is Canada going to do about it? Allowing them to stay or kick them out? Will Canada refuse residence permit to the grandson and great-grandson of your head of state?

Okay, then Britain can foot the bill, right? But if Britain is going to pay, they will want a say. So if British government says: If we have to pay, it will be our protection officers who will take over, they will be armed and have a mandate to operate on Canadian soil.
Would that be acceptable?

 

[Lee-Z]

...
I do hope Harry isn't so naive that he thinks that going away will stop the British media - it won't. It will still run the stories ... whether true or not is irrelevant. They are a rabid bunch and they have brought down two princes now in less than two months and will be baying for more.

I'm not going to comment on the situation itself, because the few facts we have (their website, the initial public reaction by the BRF) have been discussed by others in this thread much better than I could, but I do agree with above comment..

I indeed hope H&M don't think they can control the UK media, because if that is their intention. this is imo not the way to do it.
Maybe they would like some agreement with the media like the dutch RF has managed (only public events, no private pics etc etc) but I doubt that will happen in the UK (or elsewhere for that matter, I'm still a bit surprised it works in the NL).

 

[Elenath]

The Sussexes said on their website: “Britain’s royal correspondents are regarded internationally as credible sources of both the work of members of The Royal Family as well as of their private lives. This misconception propels coverage that is often carried by other outlets around the world, amplifying frequent misreporting.

“Regrettably, stories that may have been filed accurately by royal correspondents are, also, often edited or rewritten by media editorial teams to present false impressions.”

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-to-restrict-media-access-in-snub-to-tabloids

They do want more control, but not in the way some people think.

 

[Tarlita]

I am surprised the family are supposed to be discussing this by telephone. I would have expected the family to sit down with the Queen and at least nut out a blue print that would suit all parties. The Queen, Charles, William and Harry all sitting around a conference table together.

I am also disappointed that Harry and Meghan have not given their roles as Duke and Duchess more time to develope despite the nasty press and bullying.
Even though Charles is wanting a slimmed down version of working royals that could still be some time away.
But I guess there is only so much bullying one can take. And that is very sad that it happens at all in this era of antibullying campaigns.

 

[Denville]

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.

And who's Harrison??

Its much bigger than a storm in a teacup. and Harrison is Arche's second name..

 

[Denville]

I looked up - How to immigrate to Canada as a Farmer - and that could be a possible.
What if a business sponsored Harry as their employee? Firms do shift staff about the World.

Why would a firm take on someone with no business experience? Harry does not have skills that are needed in Canada, and they have no investors permission any more or he could go there with his money and with the help of advisers he could set up a business.

 

[Purrs]

Because, in my naivity, I thought british people, different from other people in the world, could have easier access to Canada as Canada is a Commonwealth country (the other way around as well, of course) and they have a common Head of State.

No that's not the case anymore, It once was but that changed in the 1960s under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau (Justin's father). That policy was changed because it was considered to be unfair to people from other countries. (Canada used to favour British people, then northern Europeans, then southern and eastern Europeans. People from Asia, the Middle East and Africa were generally not permitted to come here.

 

[Muhler]

So Canada cannot by law grant residence permit to H&M because they don't qualify?
It's gonna be interesting to see how the Canadian government is going to get around that one, if H&M insists on staying. ?

So that means if say Bill Gates wanted to settle in Canada, but not become a Canadian citizen, nor to work there, nor open a business there, then he would get a no? Even though he could more than pay for his own upkeep not to mention the taxes he would pay... Simply because he doesn't qualify for the specific rules?
Permit me to think the rules would be bend in his case.

The rules can always be "interpreted" in the desired direction.

(Salman Rushdie BTW was a most unwelcome guest to DK those couple of times he has come visiting. It was expensive to protect him and it potentially could ruin the export of cheese to Iran.)

The process here is to remain in Canada legally, you apply to be a permanent resident (that's the legal term) first. Citizenship follows after a number of years of permanent residency and is not required to remain in Canada (it is for voting). However to stay in Canada more than 5 months consecutively, you HAVE to be a legal permanent resident. Neither of them qualify to apply to be permanent residents. You can ONLY live here permanently IF you have permanent residency or what once called "landed status" or a "landed immigrant" They can't live here permanently. The only ways currently to get permanent residency are a spousal sponsorship by a Canadian citizen (Meghan is an American) or being a refugee who's deemed to be legitimate (there's a process for this) or a family sponsorship from relatives who are Canadian citizens (there are long waiting lists). My son-in-law was a spousal sponsorship (he got his permanent residency after over 3 years of waiting - you are allowed to stay while it is process. He doesn't have his citizenship yet but will be eligible to apply soon. If my daughter's application for spousal sponsorship had been denied (they had to prove their marriage was legitimate and not for convenience), he would had to leave or be deported.


The other ways of staying here temporarily are are a work permit (which Meghan had previously, a lot of TV productions are filmed here and that is encouraged because it brings jobs to Canada. When the job ends, the work permit expires.) The other exceptions are a student visa for studying at a registered institution (which my son-in-law came here) or a specialized permit for very specialized technical/high demand job frequently used in the oil industry. Canada no longer allows independent immigrants based on the old points system or business class immigration.


Harry and Meghan don't qualify for any of the paths to permanent residency. They can't live here permanently. My daughter worked for an immigration lawyer and helped with the applications in addition to sponsoring her husband so I do know quite a bit about the process.


Semi permanent might be possible if they leave every 5 months (they can't stay longer than 5 months). I don't know how long the period has to be but they cannot stay over 5 months at a time. However, there are restrictions on visitors - they can't make money here unless they get a work permit (possible


I happen to believe that NO ONE including royalty is entitled to flout our laws. The majority of Canadians are immigrants or descendants of immigrants who followed the rules and laws to get here. Yes, Harry is the grandson of our symbolic head of state, the Queen. That family relationship doesn't give him a free pass to bypass the laws the rest of us must follow. He is not the Queen (who would never suggest such a thing and does not actively personally intervene and try to bend our laws. If she did, she would not remain our symbolic head of state.)


Your government made its own choice with Salman Rushdie, you cannot extrapolate that to what my government would do.


I doubt our government would 'kick them' out but I'm sure they would be told that they have to follow the rules like everyone else. They can move to the US as Meghan is an American citizen who could sponsor him although opens up a big can of worms because he'd be subject to American taxes (most countries tax by residency, the US is about the only one who taxes by citizenship - I have one American parent who immigrated here when they married.)


As for as paying for personal security, Harry has some money he inherited and his father has considerably more. Is it enough? I don't know although probably not. I personally think that the personal security costs is one of the reasons that their plan is not well considered or realistic. The rumours about them wanting to make money with commercial endeavors are partially based on the realization their life as presently living including the need for security will be very expensive.

 

[Denville]

It would hardly look good if rules were betn for harry. Meghan has been applying for british Citizenship when she moved to the UK and ti was said she would make the normal application and it would not be fast tracked or tweaked.

 

[Purrs]

I did not read all the posts concerning the visa question, but how did Meghan live in Canada when being an actress. Maybe it is possible because she is Us and Harry is now married to her? By the way I don't think the Canadian Gov, will hesitate to wellcome them at any status if knly they choose to live there ��

She had a work permit because she worked on Suits, a TV series filmed in Canada. Our government encourages film/TV production will issue work permits for that because it brings more jobs for Canadians (crew and other cast). Therefore our government issues work permits for people employed by the TV shows and movies filmed in Canada. (Visitors are not allowed to earn money here.) She could stay here only as long as that job existed (not permanently). It had absolutely nothing to do with her being American.

If you read the other messages, you see that they are welcome to visit up to 5 consecutive months at a time but neither of them qualify for permanent residency which is required if you wish to live here permanently.

 

[Hallo girl]

I am surprised the family are supposed to be discussing this by telephone. I would have expected the family to sit down with the Queen and at least nut out a blue print that would suit all parties. The Queen, Charles, William and Harry all sitting around a conference table together.

I am also disappointed that Harry and Meghan have not given their roles as Duke and Duchess more time to develope despite the nasty press and bullying.
Even though Charles is wanting a slimmed down version of working royals that could still be some time away.
But I guess there is only so much bullying one can take. And that is very sad that it happens at all in this era of antibullying campaigns.

Harry knows that the queen stays at Sandringham until February ( the date of her fathers death and she became queen) his father is in Scotland in early January.
He brought out the statement and the website when they were away, so he knew what he was doing. If he had kept it at the statement it might have been better, the website made it clear what the intentions were also the arrogance of stating what they wanted from all this.
They could have came home at new year and spent time with the family at sandringham and thrashed out what was to happen next. They chose to leave their son in Canada, came home, and issued the statement,
I know the argument is that there hand was forced by the newspaper leak, but they were already here ,with Archie still in Canada, so there is something about that ,that just does not tally.
That leak was quite convenient for them, it meant they had to come out with their plans.....

 

[Muhler]

It would hardly look good if rules were betn for harry. Meghan has been applying for british Citizenship when she moved to the UK and ti was said she would make the normal application and it would not be fast tracked or tweaked.

The difference is that it was expected that Meghan would be around for decades to come - so the BRF could easily allow itself to conform to formalities. The end result was guaranteed anyway. And there was no way Meghan would have been kicked out.

But do you think Meghan would have been turned away and not allowed to marry Harry (in the UK) just because some rules would have been in the way?
Or do you think those rules would have been "interpreted?"

 

[Mbruno]

She had a work permit because she worked on Suits, a TV series filmed in Canada. Our government encourages film/TV production will issue work permits for that because it brings more jobs for Canadians (crew and other cast). Therefore our government issues work permits for people employed by the TV shows and movies filmed in Canada. (Visitors are not allowed to earn money here.) She could stay here only as long as that job existed (not permanently). It had absolutely nothing to do with her being American.

If you read the other messages, you see that they are welcome to visit up to 5 consecutive months at a time but neither of them qualify for permanent residency which is required if you wish to live here permanently.

I haven't been following the entire thread, but, as I said a couple of pages before, Harry could stay indefinitely in Canada on a diplomatic visa if the UK made him an accredited diplomat in that country. However, he couldn't work (outside whatever diplomatic job he had) and much less run a business that would guarantee him "financial independence".

 

[Hallo girl]

The more I think about it, my conclusion is that Meghan’s desire to live in North America could have been accommodated if the couple had approached Prince Charles ( the designated future head of the Commonwealth) to discuss with the relevant parties ( the UK Foreign Office, the.Canadian government, etc.) the possibility of setting up a new Commonwealth agency in Canada covering the entire Western Hemisphere including the Caribbean. Harry could have been appointed to that agency then in an official capacity as a British representative with costs paid under the FCO budget.

The problem seems to be that the couple was not satisfied simply with living overseas. They wanted “ financial independence” ( in terms) , which means actually the possibility to pursue their. “ progressive” agenda independently and monetize the Sussex brand. And they wanted to be outside the chain of command and not under Prince Charies or the Cambridges. That is where things get tricky and, perhaps, unworkable.

An excellent summary of the situation.
Choosing to reduce the royal duties in itself is not the problem, but they claim to want to continue with the charity projects. So lets ask ourselves what is the difference between doing that under the royal fold and doing it the way they want.?

 

[Elenath]

Its much bigger than a storm in a teacup. and Harrison is Arche's second name..

No, people are once again making it much bigger than it needs to be and all based on rumors in papers. None what is currently reported are facts. H&M at this point prefer to be part time royals and would like to focus a large part of their time on their own foundation. Far too many people here are acting like they are completely quitting the BRF and moving to Canada and getting a job somewhere at a local McD.

People here are judging H&M based on the notion that they were the ones who were the first to publish a statement, BP the issued a statement saying talks were in early stages and the BBC said BP knew nothing. After that it was said they knew a little and it was just announced, then they knew during H&M 6 week break, and then it was months ago.. So opinion here depends on whether BP and CH knew depends on your liking of H&M mostly since there are no facts.

H&M are judged for they shoddy statement and how it's a stab in the back of her majesty and Prince Charles. But BP statement is equally shoddy. And whether it's a stab in the back depends mostly on.. well see above.

And yes I know Harrison is Archie's middle name. But calling him that is like calling prince Harry David, Or calling Prince William Arthur. It's not his name.

 

[Hallo girl]

I haven't been following the entire thread, but, as I said a couple of pages before, Harry could stay indefinitely in Canada on a diplomatic visa if the UK made him an accredited diplomat in that country. However, he couldn't work (outside whatever diplomatic job he had) and much less run a business that would guarantee him "financial independence".

"financial independence".

That is the key phrase, this is where the conflict lies.

There is nothing to stop them doing less royal events and more charitable work.
They are very good at it.