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

[moby]

However, I am curious whether it is possible that Meghan's work visa is still active or did it expire when she left Suits?

Can't be absolutely certain about Canadian work visas but for most countries, work visas are tied to a sponsor or employer. When you leave that job, your work visa should no longer be valid. If you change jobs, then your new employer processes a new permit for you.

 

[Somebody]

The statement sounds like the couple is quitting the family, not the work. So personal and not at all officious. The “my family” emphasis sounds like a plea to understand that this is a family issue as much as an official one.

I am curious about the period of transition referred to though. Transition to what? A life divided successfully between two continents? Living in Canada? Out of royal life? Seems like that’s leading to something big and final.

I'm not sure that I understand you completely: to me it seems they are quiting the 'royal work' but of course will remain 'valued members of my family' (just like her other grandchildren who don't work for the firm).

And I am glad that the statement confirmed that (as all evidence so far pointed out) they were indeed expected to remain full-time working members of the royal family.

In addition, it confirms that of the two options I shared earlier: Harry and Meghan's priority clearly lies with the 'earning an independent income' and not with 'continuing the work of the royal family while sharing some time abroad'.

I assume the transition period is needed to sort things like security etc out. Once all has been sorted out they might be on their own.

What do you all make of the queen addressing Harry and Meghan by their first names and not by their titles? Is it just to make it more personal or could it be an indication of what is to come?

 

[Purrs]

Yes, I don't understand the parlimentary system or the Canadian government well enough to get how it works either. Isn't it possible that like Theresa May Trudeau might not last a full term? So his promise might be pretty hollow.

In any case Trudeau is a great friend so I'm sure as long as he is in power they'll get special treatment. She snubbed Trump and he has a thin skin so he won't do anything for them. Probably why they won't come until he's out of office. But the next person might be the same way.

Yes, it's very possible his tenure as prime minister will not last very long.

(The situation in the UK was different, Teresa May resigned as leader of her party, Boris Johnson is from the same party and was chosen as the party's new leader and therefore, the new prime minister. In a parliamentary system, the leader of the party in power is the prime minister). For Trudeau, the issue is not within his own party but will they keep support of parliament in general? A no confidence motion from the opposition parties that passes would trigger a new election and probably another party in power. There aren't fixed terms in the parliamentary system like the American system.

As Trudeau is the leader of a party in a minority government because they won with a narrow margin of victory, it is unlikely they will last more than 2 years before another election at most (history has shown this). Minority governments can fall at any time with the passage of a no confidence motion.

At any time, an opposition party can bring forward a no confidence motion, having the other opposition parties support it so it passes. If it passes, the Prime Minister asks the governor general to formally call a new election within 50 days. The ruling party then is almost always defeated in the following election. No confidence motions can be called at any time although they are used strategically, they are called when the opposition parties agree to support it and think they will win the next election (or get concessions in a future government from the party they support). As well, they will propose no confidence motion only when they feel most voters are in agreement with them and they are likely to win the next election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_of_no_confidence#Canada

Our last federal election was October 2019. His party only won 36 seats more than the next party, they won 157 seats out of a possible 338.

The only thing that Trudeau and the Liberals have going for them is that the current leader of the Conservative party (the largest opposition party) is not popular within his own party.

Historically minority governments in Canada only last 2 years at most, some have been less. In contrast to majority governments are much longer lived. They can last more than 4 years, sometimes to close to 5 years. In a majority government, the ruling party decides the time to calling a new election is usually based on favourable polls.) No confidence motions are not an issue when a party wins a majority government because there is no point of proposing them then.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don't think they'd apply for Canadian Citizenship. For one I don't think Meghan can be a citizen of three countries - someone else can correct me if I'm wrong. And Harry was always more interested in moving to somewhere in Africa - this whole "Canada/LA" thing sounds like Meghan's idea. What happens if they get divorced which sort of seems likely? Harry will have a citizenship he doesn't want. Plus they will have to pay taxes in two countries. Their finances will be a matter of public record.


No I think they'd go the "work visa" route. And really what sort of work is Harry going to do? He's never held a job. Meghan will be the one working.

If Meghan is living in Canada half the year, she probably won't be in Britain enough to fulfill residency citizenship requirements there.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Did you even read the article? Not that you have to but it would maybe help...

And there is no point in rehashing the who had it worse. But again, I've been a royal watcher for way too long including during the early Kate years. What I've seen Meghan go through has been shocking even to me and I am pretty hard nosed and jaded about the media.

Of course I read the article. But it's ridiculous to say that Kate somehow got favorable treatment when they did all of that to her. I'd say it was the same as the others. Did you read my comment on what they did to the others? Bill Maher once did a "New Rules" about burning the American flag and he pointed out the British are much crueler to their royals and they're actual people. Remember squidgygate? That was before the internet.



And it goes back centuries - Anne Boleyn was called the "google-eyed whore" when she got married. For every negative headline about Meghan you pull up I can pull up one about Kate. Or the York sisters. I can pull up two or three about Camilla - for her wedding day to Charles they were selling t-shirts of Charles riding a horse with Camilla's face.


That's not to say Meghan should endure it. But she can't have looked very far into the royal family if she's surprised by all of this.


Anyway my guess is now she will get it worse not better. They should have waited and quietly left. I don't know whose advising them but they need better advisors.

 

[Curbside]

This is a good article to read.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ton-double-standards-royal?scrlybrkr=7992c02e

I would say to a one, all my African-American friends who have expressed an opinion on this is supportive of Meghan and Harry. It's hard for me to call them selfish when they've had to put up with such double standards and people accept fake news as the gospel. Why should they sign up for another few decades of the kind of toxicity they've been subjected to?

I'm glad for them.

 

[Betsypaige]

Historian Robert Lacey told the BBC Radio 4's PM programme the Queen's statement following the meeting was unusually personal, with several references to "my family" and "my grandson".

"It is remarkably hands-on. I mean it may have been processed through officials but this is the Queen, speaking to her people and speaking about her family, and I think coming right through it is the concern she feels," he said.

Instead of using the formal titles of the couple - the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - the Queen simply called them "Harry and Meghan".

Penny Junor, an author of books about the royals, said that the statement "read to me like a grandmother talking about the family", adding that it would "take the pressure off" the duke and duchess.

"I think they're in a very vulnerable state at the moment. I think they're unhappy, they feel isolated and unloved, unappreciated and they needed careful handling," she said.

"My reading from that statement is that the family has been sensitive to their vulnerability."

Queen agrees 'transition' to new role for Harry and Meghan

She "would have preferred" them to remain full-time working royals but backs their search for a new role.

www.bbc.com

I couldn’t agree more....

 

[Mbruno]

I think you are mistaken. Yes, historically the Conservative party is pro monarchy (they complained in the 1960s about the new Canadian flag not having an Union Jack in it). However, this isn't much of a factor anymore. They are fiscally conservative (they criticize the other parties for spending too much money when in power) Their party favours even tighter regulation of immigration to Canada and it was under their government that business and independent immigration categories were cancelled. I'd be surprised if they supported this move.

I believe IF they thought there was enough anger from Canadian voters and had the popular support from the public, they would not hesitate to bring a nonconfidence motion and bring down the government. Both of the other two parties, the Bloc Quebecois or the NDP would probably back this motion.

So I do think the current government has to tread very carefully in this area.

You make valid points. I just said that the party is still thought to be strongly monarchist because the last Conservative PM , Stephen Harper, restored for example the label "Royal" to the Canadian Navy and the Canadian Air Force, among other things.

I would say to a one, all my African-American friends who have expressed an opinion on this is supportive of Meghan and Harry. It's hard for me to call them selfish when they've had to put up with such double standards and people accept fake news as the gospel. Why should they sign up for another few decades of the kind of toxicity they've been subjected to?

I'm glad for them.

The UK Home Secretary, who is of Ugandan-Indian (?) descent BTW, categorically denied today accusations of media racism against the Duchess of Sussex. And Piers Morgan accused Meghan of libel against Britain for her insinuations of institutional racism.

 

[_Heather_]

Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan.

We have absolutely no idea what goes on behind closed doors and while we all like to speculate and draw our own conclusions based on the things we do know, there's a lot that we don't known and never will. This constant argument that the family didn't show her enough support really is completely subjective.

First, we have no idea what kind of support she was given behind closed doors. We can speculate but we don't know.

Second, support is something given when respect is earned. As humans we typically don't go out of our way to show support to someone who hasn't earned our respect and hasn't shown themselves to be a team player. We simply don't know what the feelings are behind the scenes regarding Meghan and her attitudes and behaviors. It could be that the family was cold and distant and that's that. It could be that Meghan made it pretty clear she had no intention of being a team player, constantly went on and on about "single-handedly modernizing the monarchy," and basically spat on the expectations of her and they decided that maybe they didn't need to issue statements on her behalf if that was the way she wanted to behave. We really just simply don't know.

And third, as for the arguments about her treatment during pregnancy and post-partum, well, she was pregnant and post-partum, not in the throes of a terminal illness. Yes it's unpleasant to read unpleasant headlines and stories about yourself, particularly when you're in a hormonal state but pregnancy and being post-partum don't really entitle you to be treated with kid gloves by everyone around you, particularly as a public figure.

I really don't think I'll ever understand this constant shouting that the family never publicly supported her, they should have issued loads of statements rushing to her defense, etc. when we simply don't know what was happening behind closed doors and we don't know if she had earned the goodwill necessary for them to speak out on her behalf. Respect must be earned and while yes, there is basic human respect that should be given to each and every human by each and every human, that's vastly different than publicly coming to the defense of someone who has shown a lack of understanding of your organization and family and shown that she doesn't really want to operate on the usual terms of her position.

 

[Betsypaige]

What do you all make of the queen addressing Harry and Meghan by their first names and not by their titles? Is it just to make it more personal or could it be an indication of what is to come?

To me it’s more about making it personal because ultimately this is about family. Harry is HM’s grandson before he’s the Duke of Sussex...

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

I agree that calling someone vulgar is inappropriate. However, Catherine was not living in London during her first pregnancy or she would have been hounded a lot more.

My disagreement with you, however, is the idea that criticizing Harry and Meghan for using private planes and helicopters is off limits. I understand that sometimes private transportation is necessary for them due to security concerns, but if someone is going to lecture me on reducing my carbon footprint (perfectly reasonable), then they should walk the walk themselves- and I feel the same way about Charles and William.

 

[texankitcat]

Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?

Huh? Who has hair extensions and Botox? William? Prince Charles? Certainly not Kate since she needs neither. Who compared Archie to a monkey? Never saw that. Perhaps you can provide the link. As for the rest....never mind.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Huh? Who has hair extensions and Botox? William? Prince Charles? Certainly not Kate since she needs neither. Who compared Archie to a monkey? Never saw that. Perhaps you can provide the link. As for the rest....never mind.

A BBC reported was fired for referring to Archie has a monkey. I believe that William once called George a little monkey when he was a toddler, but Archie was just a newborn and it is reasonable to infer racial overtones.

 

[moby]

I'm not sure that I understand you completely: to me it seems they are quiting the 'royal work' but of course will remain 'valued members of my family' (just like her other grandchildren who don't work for the firm).

Only that the general tone of the statement, and in particular this "create a new life as a young family" and "we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family" makes it sound like they want to separate from everyone else in the family and the "valued part" is a unilateral assurance that despite these wishes of the Sussexes, they will always be valued family members.

They devote a whole paragraph that focuses on what sounds like Harry and Meghan breaking away from the family, and no reference to the new work models that the Sussexes supposedly want to do. That's just me.

What I find appealing about the Queen's statement though is the lack of pretension, vs. "carve out a progressive new role within this institution" kind of language. The use of first names to me is an appeal to understanding that these are foremost her family members going through something. Perhaps this will go down as one of the "rawest" statements publicly made by the Queen? Not that I am familiar with all her press releases, but judging from the reaction of longtime royal watchers, seems to be so.

 

[Pranter]

I liked the statement. It was personal, supportive and gave the basic framework for what is going on with the promise of more info in a few days. The door is open for them to come back into full time work if they want..and maybe down the road it will happen, who knows.

I don't know that they are going to spend a solid 6 months in Canada then a solid 6 months in the UK. Might be more of 30 days or 60 days in Canada then back over to the UK for whatever engagements for a few weeks then back to Canada. Will be interesting to see how that works out.



LaRae

 

[PrincessRoyalist]

Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?

I would never say Meghan had it easy but I have followed Kate from the time it was revealed she was dating William until now. I remember when Camilla and Charles got married and the things said about her though I’m too young for the years they dated. Honestly, I’m tired of everyone forgetting how hard the tabloids where for them. I’m also tired of everyone forgetting the statement William released in support of Meghan when she and Harry were dating or how Harry and Meghan said themselves the Kate was a great source of support for Meghan and for them both. Or that Prince Charles walked Meghan done the aisle when her father wasn’t there. I remember Camilla referring to her as ‘a Star’ and how highly everyone spoke of her on the family. I remember Mike Tindall talking about how they all kept in contact, I remember Meghan giving Kate a bracelet just like her other close friends on her wedding day.

I’m frustrated that everyone feels the need to drag the rest of the family because Meghan has had a hard time adjusting to the media attention brutality and because she didn’t get to be royal on her terms. Honestly, it’s Harry’s fault. It’s obvious he didn’t explain we’ll enough what being royal really was. It’s obvious that she didn’t get to enough time to get used to the UK, it’s culture, it’s people and that she hasn’t gotten things they way she envisioned them. It’s also obvious that Harry is a bit of a spoiled brat. He hasn’t had to really deal with the repercussions of his actions throughout his life and that he can be selfish and childish and unrealistic. Also, neither of them is very pragmatic or realistic because they both seemed to think this is the method necessary to get the life they want. Between the two of them, neither thinks things through nor keeps a very steady head. They both come off to mean as overly emotional, petty, childish and unstable.

And other than maybe two times, when did Harry speak out against all the hate and brutality that Kate got especially when her and William were dating or even after other than to say it was horrible and sad or something vague and useless.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?

It is for the queen - she did things for Meghan she didn't do for the others. Kate didn't get special treatment like that. And Kate was called trashy for sunbathing topless and getting her picture taken. AND Kate was picked on horribly for skipping out on events for having Hyperemesis gravidarum. Plus they did complain about their travels. And as I said earlier when Charles got married they sold t-shirts out front of Charles riding a horse with Camilla's face on it.



My guess is you only started caring about them and their treatment when Meghan showed up. You didn't like Kate so you didn't care that they were mean to her.


True that Meghan shouldn't have to put up with it - I actually like her much better than Chelsy Davy. Though I wasn't allowed to say anything negative about Chelsy Davy here because she was so popular.


She actually got a lot of protection from the media as it goes for the royals - if she thought the media was mean before she's in for a whole lot of "you ain't seen nothing yet". The British media is awful to everyone. They're famous for it - have been for years.


My guess is if Diana were still alive she would have cautioned Megan about all of this. And Meghan would have done better dating Harry longer and seeing what the royal family life was really like.

 

[sndral]

Did you even read the article? Not that you have to but it would maybe help...

And there is no point in rehashing the who had it worse. But again, I've been a royal watcher for way too long including during the early Kate years. What I've seen Meghan go through has been shocking even to me and I am pretty hard nosed and jaded about the media.

I agree, the attacks on Meghan have been far worse and contain more vitriol than any I read against Catherine, Chelsey, and Cressida.
Cressida was actually treated fairly well by the media - which I attributed to her being considered aristocratic v. middle class Catherine. I don’t recall too much negativity about Chelsey either - she was a hard partying type, but so was Harry when he was dating her.
I truly hope Harry and Meghan are able to find their happily ever after, and I hope the Queen will in time be able to feel the same sentiment towards Harry and his wife that she expressed on the occasion of Charles’ marriage to Camilla “they have overcome Becher’s Brook and The Chair and all kinds of other terrible obstacles. They have come through and I’m very proud and wish them well. My [grand]son is home and dry with the woman he loves.”
I think too many forget that the Queen has seen first hand the very real trauma being Royal causes. She watched it happen to her sister, her sons and their wives, and now her grandchildren. I assume she has insight, empathy, and compassion for all members of her family and as a deeply religious woman I suspect her faith gives her optimism that with patience Harry and Meghan will find a path that works for them and for the country Harry was born to serve and for the commonwealth the Queen and Charles care so deeply about.

 

[moby]

I honestly think that if Meghan just took more time to understand the media, the social environment, etc., she could have done so much more with her issues with the media. I wonder if she ever thought to take a step back, objectively assessed the situation, and thought of shining a spotlight on the issues she encountered—racism, responsible journalism, cyberbullying, heck even social integration— and made them her advocacies. Kind of like how the brothers made their mental health advocacy personal and related it to their own experiences. Those are still very progressive issues and she still would have rocked the boat, if that’s what she wanted. Again, I can’t imagine what it’s like to be in her shoes but if she, a Duchess and extremely privileged person, already genuinely felt that way, how much more worse for the thousands of immigrants, young people throughout the UK ones without actual support?

I think these would have been more constructive approaches.

 

[Lumutqueen]

A BBC reported was fired for referring to Archie has a monkey. I believe that William once called George a little monkey when he was a toddler, but Archie was just a newborn and it is reasonable to infer racial overtones.

Just so we're clear and factual, Danny Baker was not a BBC reporter. He was Radio 5 presenter, who tweeted a picture of a monkey swaddled in cloth with the comment "Royal Baby leaves hospital".

 

[Lemon Lyman]

I think something is going on with titles. The use of Harry and Meghan and Sussexes isn’t like the Queen. I’ve always been baffled by Archie’s lack of curtsey title given he will eventually inherit a title from his dad. Maybe it has something to do with that? Edward’s kids may not have HRH but they do have titles.

 

[texankitcat]

I

I’m frustrated that everyone feels the need to drag the rest of the family because Meghan has had a hard time adjusting to the media attention brutality and because she didn’t get to be royal on her terms. Honestly, it’s Harry’s fault. It’s obvious he didn’t explain we’ll enough what being royal really was. It’s obvious that she didn’t get to enough time to get used to the UK, it’s culture, it’s people and that she hasn’t gotten things they way she envisioned them. It’s also obvious that Harry is a bit of a spoiled brat. He hasn’t had to really deal with the repercussions of his actions throughout his life and that he can be selfish and childish and unrealistic. Also, neither of them is very pragmatic or realistic because they both seemed to think this is the method necessary to get the life they want. Between the two of them, neither thinks things through nor keeps a very steady head. They both come off to mean as overly emotional, petty, childish and unstable.

And other than maybe two times, when did Harry speak out against all the hate and brutality that Kate got especially when her and William were dating or even after other than to say it was horrible and sad or something vague and useless.

That is exactly how they are coming off to many. I have never seen Harry behave this way (prior to Meghan) , so i must have missed his behavior previously. It's all quite disturbing.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I think something is going on with titles. The use of Harry and Meghan and Sussexes isn’t like the Queen. I’ve always been baffled by Archie’s lack of curtsey title given he will eventually inherit a title from his dad. Maybe it has something to do with that? Edward’s kids may not have HRH but they do have titles.

The lack of courtesy title for Archie is because his parents wished him to grow up as a private citizen. What they hadn't perhaps taken into account is that as no LPs were issued, when Charles becomes King, Archie is automatically a Prince and is entitled to his HRH.

Louise and James' situation is slightly different, as they are entitled to HRHs but are styled as the son and daughter of an Earl. Unlike in Archie's situation, The Queen expressed her will that this should be the case.

 

[Waika]

This is the image.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1126408674119958529

 

[wyevale]

Lemon Lyman - I think it has more to do with the illiterate nature of whoever phrased the statement.. 'Family' used repeatedly.. a newbie 'staffer' at a provincial, local Paper could compose a more sophisticated paragraph..

 

[texankitcat]

^ I think it has more to do with the illiterate nature of whoever phrased the statement.. 'Family' used repeatedly.. a newbie 'staffer' at a provincial, local Paper could compose a more sophisticated paragraph..

I don't think any statement by the Queen would be written by a "staffer"

 

[PrincessRoyalist]

I did think that a lot of the wording in The Queen’s statement were very deliberate. My interpretation was that they are transitioning from the UK and will not be allow to be independent and have their own agenda but also remain royals. It seems like their list of demands was rejected. I believe they will now longer be working royals and will eventually live in Canada full-time with some time in the UK. I don’t think they will be receiving money from the Duchy as they proposed. I also am sure they will no longer receive taxpayer funded security. I suspect that they will lose the HRH status but I’m not as sure about that.

What does interest me is whether Princess Eugene and Beatrice will be asked to step up to part-time royals. I think William especially will need their support during his reign but also Charles may have to call on them as his siblings age. The Wessexes and Anne will not be enough. What’s the public opinion on that in the UK?

 

[Mademoiselle Lilo]

Emotional statement and too personel even;this is only shiw how Queen felt:hurt..wich is sad
On other note good to hear they are making progress in the Sussex exit discussion..i hope this mess end soon

 

[Alison H]

I agree - they said some awful things about Kate and Camilla. And Sarah Ferguson - I know she behaved badly, but she got all that "Duchess of Pork" stuff because she struggled with her weight. Then there was that nasty "sting" with the "fake Sheikh" and Sophie. I'd love to be naturally slim like Kate and Meghan are, but unfortunately a lot of us are not that lucky! Other famous people get it too. The things that were said about David Beckham after the 1998 World Cup were diabolical: someone even hanged an effigy of him from a tree. What about the comments about Brad Pitt leaving Jennifer Aniston for Angelina Jolie? And the things that are written about politicians are even worse. The press can be horrible, but it is nothing to do with racism and it is not personal to Meghan. It goes back years - Princess Margaret used to get all sort of criticism too.

 

[King of the Jungle]

It's a sadness or regret that is evident to me in the Queen's announcement, and also that she speaks for the rest of her family who were around the table.
They love Harry and will miss him working with them and living close by.
However exactly the new situation for Harry and Meghan will be worked out the BRF will be understanding, polite and generous.