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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Immigration is a very sensitive political topic everywhere at the moment. I can't believe that Trudeau will risk a row by making such a high profile exception to the rules.


We've been told that Meghan isn't even being fast-tracked for British citizenship, although she is entitled to live here as the spouse of a British citizen.


Has this just not occurred to Harry and Meghan?! Surely they cannot be that thoughtless?
 
Should Harry & Meghan continue to receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall?

Should 13%
Should not 63%
Don’t know 24%

YouGov Jan 9
 
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.

THE BRF usually announce things once everything is in place, basically any questions are answered within the statement.
It has been claimed that the family knew he wanted to move away from royal duties, but he had not told them the statement was going out when it did until it was too late to stop it. . That is the difference.

If a statement had been issued by the queen saying they wanted to make changes in their lives and the following steps were going to happen, there would have been a bit of sensation but everything would have been in place.
All questions would have been answered.

It is the unanswered questions that are causing the headlines. Also their assumption on the website of how they saw things going forward,
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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?
 
Last edited:
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.


Harry is the son and Meghan is the daughterin-law of the future king. A couple who has visited foreign countries as representatives of said kingdom. Of course they qualify as diplomats.
 
THE BRF usually announce things once everything is in place, basically any questions are answered within the statement.
It has been claimed that the family knew he wanted to move away from royal duties, but he had not told them the statement was going out when it did until it was too late to stop it. . That is the difference.

If a statement had been issued by the queen saying they wanted to make changes in their lives and the following steps were going to happen, there would have been a bit of sensation but everything would have been in place.
All questions would have been answered.

It is the unanswered questions that are causing the headlines. Also their assumption on the website of how they saw things going forward,

I know all of this and that's not my point.
 
Really,the fuzz and nonsense over this nausiating couple is beyond believe!!Sickening lot!


Think about it:



The UK is due to leave the political institutions of the EU on January 31 and then start tense negotiations with Brussels on a new relationship that will have an impact on the country's future for decades possibly. And there are tensions in Northern Ireland and Scotland that have resurfaced with Brexit and have to be dealt with.

Meanwhile, there is an ongoing crisis with Iran in the Middle East where the UK has hundreds of diplomatic and service personnel on the ground. Right now, UK military assets are being deployed to evacuate UK citizens or staff if needed and to protect UK installations and interests (for example, escort ships in the Persian Gulf, etc.).

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).
 
Last edited:
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.


As I understood it, the courtiers around his father asked him to put down his ideas in writing. He refused because he feared leaks. Then he was forced to write it down and it leaked. So he went public with the original ideas (on the website), probably to prevent his ideas from being watered down and changed in the details. As it had happened to Meghan's letter.


Problem that their ideas sound like demands and that the papers made the whole world crazy over what now seem to be an unhappy couple (with Meghan being as she is and Harry supporting her) trying to get rid of all "taxpayer"-arguments and move to Canada or the US while still trying to be helpful to Her Majesty and Charles.


IMHO it was the papers' fault to create such an "abdication"-drama! As it is neither HM nor Charles are enraged but supportive and understanding of H&M's wish, only the details have to be arranged and agreed upon and now there is pressure on them.



Because someone leaked the whole thing to the papers! Only because of that everything happened. And Harry knew it but had to comply.
 
Harry is the son and Meghan is the daughterin-law of the future king. A couple who has visited foreign countries as representatives of said kingdom. Of course they qualify as diplomats.



I really don’t see how they qualify as diplomats, when to me they’ve made it quite clear that when they’re outside of the UK they won’t be representing that country. They will be in Canada for their own business ventures and charitable organisations. Therefore not representing anyone bar themselves. Representing a country in another country is the key to being a diplomat.
 
Should Harry & Meghan continue to receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall?

Should 13%
Should not 63%
Don’t know 24%

YouGov Jan 9

Can I ask why this was even a legitimate question to ask in a poll? Harry and Meghan do *not* receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall. Harry's father does and its his own personal income that he pays taxes on. Charles *chooses* to fund the Duchess of Cornwall, the Sussexes and the Cambridges from his income.

Shouldn't the question be "Should Charles continue to fund his son and his wife from his own personal income?"

"This summary describes how the official and private activities of The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall are financed. The majority of staff and official and charitable activities, including the official offices of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex activity, are paid for from His Royal Highness’s private income from the Duchy of Cornwall."

https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/annual-review/2018-2019/income-expenditure-and-staff
 
Last edited:
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.

Well diplomats are usually very restricted in what they say publically since they represent the government so....our couple seems to actually be not really wanting that situation for themselves :lol:

They are not a duty first/personal comfort second kind of couple---and really don't have to be if they work out an arrangement with BP. When they pulled out a big ole cartoon-sized shotgun and aimed it at their feet earlier this week they made working out that arrangement very problematic.

God bless HM, PC and PW as they try to straighten out this mess.
 
Immigration is a very sensitive political topic everywhere at the moment. I can't believe that Trudeau will risk a row by making such a high profile exception to the rules.


We've been told that Meghan isn't even being fast-tracked for British citizenship, although she is entitled to live here as the spouse of a British citizen.


Has this just not occurred to Harry and Meghan?! Surely they cannot be that thoughtless?

No.

It hasn't occurred to them at all.

I don't believe the thought that they might not be that welcome as permanent residents in another country has crossed their minds.
Nor have they considered that a wish to move and settle in another country (because that's de facto what they are doing) may cause embarrassment for the government in that country - seemingly Canada.

Nor have they contemplated that the government of Britain - and again, seemingly Canada as well - may have other things on their minds than solving their self-imposed problems.

We can debate endlessly why, but right now H&M are living in a reality of their own. :ermm:
 
Can I ask why this was even a legitimate question to ask in a poll? Harry and Meghan do *not* receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall. Harry's father does and its his own personal income that he pays taxes on. Charles *chooses* to fund the Duchess of Cornwall, the Sussexes and the Cambridges from his income.

Shouldn't the question be "Should Charles continue to fund his son and his wife from his own personal income?"




The question of the duchies is tricky and I am sure there are more knowledgeable experts here who can comment in greater depth.



The way I see it though is that, yes, it is a source of private income for the PoW and his family even if the duchy itself has some characteristics that resemble a public trust. However, it is not a private income for Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor as a private citizen, but for the Prince in his public role as heir to the throne. The moment William becomes the heir, the income goes to him showing that it is tied to the office or the title of Duke of Cornwall, right ?


Could Charles support his family with that income ? Absolutely, but I suppose most Britons understand that his family being supported implies some kind of underlying contract where they are supposed to give something back in terms of full-time service to the nation, the Queen and the heir. Harry and Meghan said they want to be part-timers and live a significant part of the year in Canada , which is a foreign country (the Commonwealth is no longer the cohesive imperial unity that it once was in the early 20th century). I don't blame the 60 % who said 'No' in that poll for saying that.
 
Last edited:
Well diplomats are usually very restricted in what they say publically since they represent the government so....our couple seems to actually be not really wanting that situation for themselves :lol:

They are not a duty first/personal comfort second kind of couple---and really don't have to be if they work out an arrangement with BP. When they pulled out a big ole cartoon-sized shotgun and aimed it at their feet earlier this week they made working out that arrangement very problematic.

God bless HM, PC and PW as they try to straighten out this mess.

William and the Middletons have not come under much scrutiny. Harry is jettisoning his birthright and role while his brother is embracing it. [...] The brothers seemed close so is it the old story of being driven apart once married - and the fragmenting results?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No.

It hasn't occurred to them at all.

I don't believe the thought that they might not be that welcome as permanent residents in another country has crossed their minds.
Nor have they considered that a wish to move and settle in another country (because that's de facto what they are doing) may cause embarrassment for the government in that country - seemingly Canada.

Nor have they contemplated that the government of Britain - and again, seemingly Canada as well - may have other things on their minds than solving their self-imposed problems.

We can debate endlessly why, but right now H&M are living in a reality of their own. :ermm:

As far as I can tell immigration is not even on the table. This is what you want not what they want. The fact that they want to split their time between the UK and North America doesn't mean they will immigrate. Why is this even a discussion?

We now plan to balance our time between the United Kingdom and North America, continuing to honour our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages.
 
Can I ask why this was even a legitimate question to ask in a poll?

Because [regardless of the facts, you describe] the Public sees that Prince Charles' income IS 'Duchy money', so [albeit indirectly] this couple are funded by that estate.

I really posted this as an indication of the markededly reduced Public appetite for maintaining this couple in the 'style to which they've become accustomed', regardless of the minutiaie of the source of the money.
 
The question of the duchies is tricky and I am sure there are more knowledgeable experts here who can comment in greater depth.



The way I see it though is that, yes, it is a source of private income for the PoW and his family even if the duchy itself has some characteristics that resemble a public trust. However, it is not a private income for Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor as a private citizen, but for the Prince of Wales in his public role as heir to the throne. Could he support his family with that income ? Absolutely, but I suppose most Britons understand that his family being supported implies some kind of underlying contract with the nation where they are supposed to give something back in terms of full-time service to the nation, the Queen and the heir. Harry an Meghan said they want to be part-timers and live a significant part of the year in Canada , which is a foreign country (the Commonwealth is no longer the cohesive imperial unity that it once was in the early 20th century). I don't blame the 60 % who said 'No' in that poll for saying that.

Actually, its the private income for the Duke of Cornwall. When Charles becomes King, William as the eldest son and heir apparent will inherit the Duchy of Cornwall and the private income that it provides and he'll do with it as Charles did. Support his wife and children and their eventual spouses.

Mind you, the income provided changes each year depending on the *surplus* or the profits that the Duchy of Cornwall earns. It is its own entity in and of itself and actually owns Highgrove. Its my understanding that Charles' private income works in much the same way as the Sovereign Grant does from the Crown Estates. Its the *profits* earned by the Crown Estates, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster (the Queen's private income aka the Privy Purse) that determines the amount of "income" received. All of the above entities are subject to the Treasury of the UK. Charles and the Queen *voluntarily* pay taxes on income that is not used for official purposes. The Queen investing in the colonization of Mars would be "personal" and taxable. The Queen donating from the Privy Purse to the Royal Collection Trust anonymously would be "official".

There's no riders attached to working for the "Firm" or representing the Crown and country but the difference in the itemizing for tax purposes would perhaps remove Harry and Meghan's funding from being "official business" to "personal expenditures" just as funding the Duchess of Cornwall's wardrobe for her public appearances would be "official" and buying her a sweet new pearl choker for an anniversary would be listed as a "personal expenditure" and we know Charles isn't stingy when it comes to stuff like that.

There's a lot of misconception around the incomes and the expenditures of the BRF that abound and I probably even got a whole lot of things mixed up but one thing I do know is that Harry and Meghan do *not* receive funding from the Duchy of Cornwall itself. ?

Because [regardless of the facts, you describe] the Public sees that Prince Charles' income IS 'Duchy money', so [albeit indirectly] this couple are funded by that estate.

I really posted this as an indication of the markededly reduced Public appetite for maintaining this couple in the 'style to which they've become accustomed', regardless of the minutiaie of the source of the money.

Good point and I see your reasoning. Public opinion *does* matter in the long run.
 
Last edited:
Harry is the son and Meghan is the daughterin-law of the future king. A couple who has visited foreign countries as representatives of said kingdom. Of course they qualify as diplomats.
Being the son of a Royal does not qualify you as a diplomat. Diplomats are trained civil servants.
 
Being realistic of course Charles will pay them some money from the Duchy as that is his private income. Although it is his private income it is in some ways more public than a private salary for say, the Prime Minister so I can see why the public are having an opinion on it.

What Charles does next will depend on what route the Sussex's take.

If they go down the route of "financial independence" then Charles should cut their income form his down to a smaller (yet still 6 figure) personal allowance. The millions they get know is taking into account the fact they undertake duties for the Crown.

If they opt to stay more inside the royal fold without financial independence the funding from Charles can keep going as before but with, I would expect, reduced expenditure as I would say Harry and Meghan can afford to fund their Canadian adventures themselves from their private funds and Charles can continue to fund the UK side. Thus Charles' expenditure would be cut down as Charles would only be funding their time in the UK.

Who knows, I guess it depends what the Sussex's really want from this.
 
Being realistic of course Charles will pay them some money from the Duchy as that is his private income. Although it is his private income it is in some ways more public than a private salary for say, the Prime Minister so I can see why the public are having an opinion on it.

What Charles does next will depend on what route the Sussex's take.

If they go down the route of "financial independence" then Charles should cut their income form his down to a smaller (yet still 6 figure) personal allowance. The millions they get know is taking into account the fact they undertake duties for the Crown.

If they opt to stay more inside the royal fold without financial independence the funding from Charles can keep going as before but with, I would expect, reduced expenditure as I would say Harry and Meghan can afford to fund their Canadian adventures themselves from their private funds and Charles can continue to fund the UK side. Thus Charles' expenditure would be cut down as Charles would only be funding their time in the UK.

Who knows, I guess it depends what the Sussex's really want from this.

It is Charles' private income but yes, there are restrictions on it.. And he has paid a high figure out to H and Meg on the assumption that they are working for the Crown. If they are not going to do that properly and if they want "to make tehir own money" then C's money IMO should go elsewhere. He has other relatives who have done a lifetimes service ot the Crown and who will need some financial support in their old age. He has charities he supports. if Meg and Harry want to make their own money why do they expect Charles to help theM?
 
Question, can H&M use the Canadian Police as protection, with them being payed by the BRF? As opposed to using the British PO's.
 
Actually, its the private income for the Duke of Cornwall. When Charles becomes King, William as the eldest son and heir apparent will inherit the Duchy of Cornwall and the private income that it provides and he'll do with it as Charles did. Support his wife and children and their eventual spouses.

Mind you, the income provided changes each year depending on the *surplus* or the profits that the Duchy of Cornwall earns. It is its own entity in and of itself and actually owns Highgrove. Its my understanding that Charles' private income works in much the same way as the Sovereign Grant does from the Crown Estates. Its the *profits* earned by the Crown Estates, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster (the Queen's private income aka the Privy Purse) that determines the amount of "income" received. All of the above entities are subject to the Treasury of the UK. Charles and the Queen *voluntarily* pay taxes on income that is not used for official purposes. The Queen investing in the colonization of Mars would be "personal" and taxable. The Queen donating from the Privy Purse to the Royal Collection Trust anonymously would be "official".

There's no riders attached to working for the "Firm" or representing the Crown and country but the difference in the itemizing for tax purposes would perhaps remove Harry and Meghan's funding from being "official business" to "personal expenditures" just as funding the Duchess of Cornwall's wardrobe for her public appearances would be "official" and buying her a sweet new pearl choker for an anniversary would be listed as a "personal expenditure" and we know Charles isn't stingy when it comes to stuff like that.

There's a lot of misconception around the incomes and the expenditures of the BRF that abound and I probably even got a whole lot of things mixed up but one thing I do know is that Harry and Meghan do *not* receive funding from the Duchy of Cornwall itself. ?




The fact that the income (or the surplus income if you will) goes to William when he becomes heir underlines that it is not personal 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 are personal property. Again they are tied to an office and not owned by the Queen or Charles.
 
Last edited:
The question of the duchies is tricky and I am sure there are more knowledgeable experts here who can comment in greater depth.



The way I see it though is that, yes, it is a source of private income for the PoW and his family even if the duchy itself has some characteristics that resemble a public trust. However, it is not a private income for Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor as a private citizen, but for the Prince in his public role as heir to the throne. The moment William becomes the heir, the income goes to him showing that it is tied to the office or the title of Duke of Cornwall, right ?


Could Charles support his family with that income ? Absolutely, but I suppose most Britons understand that his family being supported implies some kind of underlying contract where they are supposed to give something back in terms of full-time service to the nation, the Queen and the heir. Harry and Meghan said they want to be part-timers and live a significant part of the year in Canada , which is a foreign country (the Commonwealth is no longer the cohesive imperial unity that it once was in the early 20th century). I don't blame the 60 % who said 'No' in that poll for saying that.


Charles uses this money to pay the guy who put toothpaste on his toothbrush every night. That is okay but funding his son is not? Maybe his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales even understands that a second son wants to flee the British media attention and live in the quiet for half a year with his wife and son and want to support it from the immense riches he personally possesses or is going to possess. Just like Queen Beatrix supported her son Friso and her daughter-in-law Mabel In London, king Harald his daughter Märtha in the US, king Carl Gustav his daughter Madeleine in whereever she now lives and queen Margarethe (and the Danish state!) prince Joachim and princess Marie in Paris.
 
Being the son of a Royal does not qualify you as a diplomat. Diplomats are trained civil servants.

Perhaps that is why the British royal family are *hosts* to the Diplomatic Corps for a white tie sit down dinner each year as a way of recognizing them for their service to Crown and Country. Makes sense to me. ?
 
Question, can H&M use the Canadian Police as protection, with them being payed by the BRF? As opposed to using the British PO's.

I would imagine it would be up to the Canadian Govt and Police forces.. if they wished to go this route... if the BRF are prepared ot pay for this, why not just use private security...

Charles uses this money to pay the guy who put toothpaste on his toothbrush every night. That is okay but funding his son is not? Maybe his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales even understands that a second son wants to flee the British media attention and live in the quiet for half a year with his wife and son and want to support it from the immense riches he personally possesses or is going to possess. Just like Queen Beatrix supported her son Friso and her daughter-in-law Mabel In London, king Harald his daughter Märtha in the US, king Carl Gustav his daughter Madeleine in whereever she now lives and queen Margarethe (and the Danish state!) prince Joachim and princess Marie in Paris.

Why should Chales fund Harry, if Harry "wants to live in the quiet" AND make his own money? If he wants a quiet life, he and Meghan have an adequate fortune to do that. If they want to make their own money, then they should not need funding from H's father.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So the newest story is that Meghan signed and followed through on a voiceover deal with Disney. The work was performed before they left for Canada in November and was in exchange for a donation to Elephants Without Borders. However, the fact that nothing was said about it, even though it was done for a donation to a very worthwhile organization, speaks volumes. It also lends credence to the snippets coming out over the last couple of days about suspicions that they’re already making commercial deals. Now, it is the DM so who really knows but this does seem very much like a real possibility...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Disney-return-donation-elephant-charity.html

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)


There is genuine concern at the palace that if the couple seek to embark on commercial ventures which seems likely given they have registered Sussex Royal as a trademark, their work could conflict with their royal role.

Last night a source close to Prince Harry said that a major reason for the couple standing down from the Royal Family is so that they can build their own Sussex brand. The couple will launch their own charitable foundation later this year and “Sussex Royal” could potentially earn them millions.

“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.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/01/harry-meghan-the-queen-fallout
 
Perhaps that is why the British royal family are *hosts* to the Diplomatic Corps for a white tie sit down dinner each year as a way of recognizing them for their service to Crown and Country. Makes sense to me. ?

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...
 
Perhaps that is why the British royal family are *hosts* to the Diplomatic Corps for a white tie sit down dinner each year as a way of recognizing them for their service to Crown and Country. Makes sense to me. ?

Except that the Diplomatic Corps isn't the British diplomats but foreign diplomats posted to London - Ambassadors and High Commissioners from outside the UK. That means the people who attend the Diplomatic Reception aren't British but foreigners who are in Britain to serve their own countries and not the British Crown.

The British Ambassador to the US doesn't attend but the US Ambassador to the UK does.
 
Last edited:
As far as I can tell immigration is not even on the table. This is what you want not what they want. The fact that they want to split their time between the UK and North America doesn't mean they will immigrate. Why is this even a discussion?

I'm not talking about immigration. I'm talking about H&M setting up their day-to-day home in North America and gradually end up spending most of their time there - more than the five months Purrs explained us about.

As it is now, we have to consider that:
A) H&M are opting all out of the BRF and taking up main residence in North America.
B) That the whole thing ends in a deadlock and H&M are basically exiled to North America.
C) That the idea of splitting their time between North America and Britain - for various reasons - won't work. And H&M choose North America.
D) Both H&M feel very much at home in North America and as such spend more and more time there - not least when Archie reach school age.
E) (Fill in with whatever you can come up with.)
 
Except that the Diplomatic Corps isn't the British diplomats but foreign diplomats posted to London - Ambassadors and High Commissioners from outside the UK.

The British Ambassador to the US doesn't attend but the US Ambassador to the UK does.

So it is not for the British diplomatis at all?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom