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.
I said this in my first full comment. This escapism isn’t new, Henry hasn’t ever wanted to be a royal that’s quite clear. The issue for me is the way it’s been handled and the abruptness of it. Meghan and Henry could have done such wonderful things as senior royals, for causes close to their heart. I personally don’t feel they had to choose this route to do what they wanted.




Hit the nail on the head. This situation wasn’t given a chance. I think that’s where Meghan comes in, whilst we’ve always known Henry didn’t like his role he was solid with his brother and sister in law. Comments from a couple of years ago were how Henry was looking forward to living next to his siblings. I personally believe Meghan’s gone, well it’s not working for me, now you have to choose.




Couldn’t agree more! It’s so clear, not only from Charles being the head of the family but he’s also firstly Henry’s father.

In regards to the bolded: the things is, when Harry spoke about life outside the royal cage it was about going and living in Africa, that was where he felt most at peace and a sense of belonging; never did that life included selling his status, playing the life of the rich and famous with cameras and Instagram influencer life style blog existence of high fashion and expensive drinks and hobnobbing with famous people who would never give you the time of day of you didn’t have an HRH before your name- that’s Meghan idea of living but that’s the life style he dislikes and which causes him so much stress and agony (by his own admission!

This life he will now have, is imo not gonna be much different to his old one, and a far cry from the Africa life he always had.

Obviously, as can be read between the lines in Harry saying in the documentary that Cape Town was not the right place for them (translation: not the place my wife wants to live, read above why). and now by their action; For Meghan Africa is a place to do basic chick feel good photo op to post on Instagram (as she did prior to Harry) so you can claim “i’m A woke humanitarian”

I have find it very telling about a person personality and honest life desires which Disney movie is their favorite. Harry’s is The Lion King (must admit mine too), while hers is The little Mermaid.
 
Good.

Charles has made it clear that he will not be writing his son a blank cheque as he and his wife embark on a new life after relinquishing their roles as senior members of the royal family.

The warning came as doubts were raised about how the couple intend to become “financially independent” as they carve themselves a “progressive new role”, splitting their time between Britain and North America.

While he is unlikely to leave them without a penny, Charles has made it clear that any agreement over money depends on the details of their future role and will not be settled until that has been decided. Negotiations between Harry and his father have been going on since Christmas, which the couple spent with Archie and Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mother, on Vancouver Island.

So, yeah, they have completely rejected Harry’s family ....

When Harry tried to have a meeting with the Queen on his return, to keep her up to date with what was happening, she initially agreed but the meeting was blocked by courtiers. Harry, 35, was said to be angry and upset at the rebuff. It is thought that palace aides feared that he would use it to recruit the Queen, 93, to his cause and then use that as a negotiating tactic with his father.

The courtiers have significant power...wow.

The ITV News at Ten anchor Tom Bradby, who knows Harry well and interviewed him in Africa, said that the couple made their decision because they were not part of Charles’s plans for a slimmed-down monarchy. Bradby said: “The couple’s view was they came back and wanted to talk to the family about their plans. It had been made clear to them in their absence there was going to be a slimmed-down monarchy and they weren’t really a part of it.”

This just reflects SO poorly on Harry. He doesn’t really want to be a Royal, but then he stamps his feet and whines when it turns out he may get his wish (in terms of being asked to do less) ? He and Meghan did talk to the family, and the family wanted to help them come up with a viable solution, but they just got impatient and acted rashly to say the least.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/charles-threatens-to-halt-harry-and-meghans-cash-k3b58zq6l
 
Plus: we are all believing that man is born free and has the right of choice how to lead his life. But where is Harry's choice? He has the right to step down as a Royal, try to finance his life independantly and live where he wants to. Or not?

And if he does it is the right of his father and his grandmother to let him keep the titles he was born with or which he did acquire in his life. And pay him an apanage from the family money. But he has to accept as well if the souverain takes his titles and if his grandmother and his father keep him from the family money apart from his part of the inheritance after both his grandmother's and father's death. That's their decision and has nothing to do with him.
Oh, Harry and Meghan have a choice. No one here would bat an eye at "We're unhappy, we want to live as private citizens and not be senior royals" - their life is not half as glamorous as it looks like, the press is vile, everyone would understand. The problem people see here is that being royal half the time, representing your country and HMQ and being a celebrity that gets paid for commercial stuff the other half is not something that's really possible.

But it's theirs to negociate and fix in some sort of contract. That's what they do at the moment - with the added presence of the governments of the states Harry could chose to live, as he only has the right to stay in the UK without limits.
Again, you're right - and I think I speak for more people than myself that we'd all be much happier if they concluded the negotations in a calm and reasonable manner, working out the solution and then presenting it to the public, without using the public and the press to put pressure on HMQ, Prince Charles and Prince William to work faster.

Harry is a British citizen - he is free to live his life the way he can afford it and he can already afford to live in comfort without doing anything or just working for charities. I am sure he has a contract about his Cottage in Windsor Home Park, so if it is his according to the basic rules, he can live there. Or somewhere else where they allow a Briton and husband of an US citizen to live.
I see this argument in so many places - that Meghan and Harry have the money, so they can do whatever they choose - and I don't think people understand what kind of money you have to have to support a lifestyle like theirs. Solely security costs would blow through their fortunes in no time. Not to mention housing. As far as Frogmore Cottage goes (which is not a cottage, more like a huge house), unless the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working royals, they'd have to pay commercial rent for that property. It's not his, it couldn't have been given to him, because the Queen doesn't own Frogmore Estate - it's part of Crown Estate, so only a lease is available. The non-working royals, like Pricess Eugenie, have to pay their rent - in her case, I think it was reported her father was paying for her cottage in Kensington Palace.
 
Last edited:
I’ve been reading and some posters believe Meghan was vilified by the press.
While I have no doubt that she was often written about not so flatteringly, it wasn’t bad initially. But when she started doing things her way is when the press went ballistic.
Meghan isn’t the first royal to be vilified by the press. The duchess of Cambridge was t spared either. In fact I’d say she had it worse. Are we forgetting ‘waity katey’ or the news on how Carole pushed Kate to follow William or how the Middletons we’re cashing in on their royal relations.
It’s part of the deal when you date/marry a royal, and once you settle in, it stops. We don’t see negative press for Catherine anymore.
 
I really have a problem with the things that are reported right now - apart from their "intent" to step down and what is written on their webpage, I have yet to hear anything from the "mouth". And I don't trust the media at all.


Plus: we are all believing that man is born free and has the right of choice how to lead his life. But where is Harry's choice? He has the right to step down as a Royal, try to finance his life independantly and live where he wants to. Or not?

And if he does it is the right of his father and his grandmother to let him keep the titles he was born with or which he did acquire in his life. And pay him an apanage from the family money. But he has to accept as well if the souverain takes his titles and if his grandmother and his father keep him from the family money apart from his part of the inheritance after both his grandmother's and father's death. That's their decision and has nothing to do with him.

But it's theirs to negociate and fix in some sort of contract. That's what they do at the moment - with the added presence of the governments of the states Harry could chose to live, as he only has the right to stay in the UK without limits.

All other people have IMHO nothing to add but their own opinion.

So I am sitting here and wait for more info from the source. And if there is none, I'll accept that, for it is Harrys life, not mine.

The whole media spectacle we see at the moment, all those people offering opinions and their own biased "information" do not help anyone but muddy the waters.

Harry is a British citizen - he is free to live his life the way he can afford it and he can already afford to live in comfort without doing anything or just working for charities. I am sure he has a contract about his Cottage in Windsor Home Park, so if it is his according to the basic rules, he can live there. Or somewhere else where they allow a Briton and husband of an US citizen to live.

So all is settled or in the process of being settled. That's enough for me.
And if Meghan wants to stay with Archie in Canada till Harry has settled his affairs or flew over to fetch the boy back to the Uk means nothing to me because I should not have an opinion about things I know nothing about. For I don't know Meghan and Harry.
But: as a trained journalist I can say that I am deeply ashamed to see how other journalists use their craft to write influencing pieces and lies about them for people who don't know them either, but believe they get to know them through reading.

It has been pointed out several times on this thread that the problem is not Harry and Meghan wanting out, but rather wanting “ half in, half out” and dictating terms the way they did as if their wish list had already been agreed to. Many posters also have an issue with H&M using the royal label to develop their brand commercially and with the possible negative effects on the political neutrality of the Crown if they are let loose as free agents in their “new progressive role within the institution “ .

I think the couple’s statement speaks for itself and that their breach of or contempt for the RF’s hierarchy was evident. This is not just tabloid gossip and I think the reporting from the British press, including the BBC, has been accurate and fair.
 
I think youve missed the point I dont think they want to be royals but they cant get entirely away from it because it is what Harry was born into its his family its a part of Archie as well and they cant just get rid of it so from what Ive read into the situation is that they dont want to do it fulltime they want control over their lives that is perfectly acceptable and I think having security provided and paid for is also acceptable because when you read some of the comments from the nut jobs you can imagine how bad it could get and obvious the need for protection is because they are part of the BRF.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:previous: I think they very much have control over their lives but what they really want and will never have is control over the media and public opinion... When they fully accept that they can't control that, they will be much, much happier.
 
It's not the fact that at some point the monarchy needs to be slimmed down and "other" heirs should earn their own income (a la The Netherlands). It's not the fact that, perhaps, she is going through some type of post-partnum depression. It's not the fact that, she misses calling the shots in her life. It's not the fact that she was old enough to understand that marrying a royal would be a seismic shift in her life. It's not the fact that she may have faced racism and anti-Americanism. It's not the fact that life in the royal fishbowl is more intense than life in the Hollywood fishbow.

Bottom line -- it's the premeditated method in which they announced this without allowing the Queen to know before they informed the designers of their website. That's the issue. Total disrespect!
 
In regards to the bolded: the things is, when Harry spoke about life outside the royal cage it was about going and living in Africa, that was where he felt most at peace and a sense of belonging; never did that life included selling his status, playing the life of the rich and famous with cameras and Instagram influencer life style blog existence of high fashion and expensive drinks and hobnobbing with famous people who would never give you the time of day of you didn’t have an HRH before your name- that’s Meghan idea of living but that’s the life style he dislikes and which causes him so much stress and agony (by his own admission!

T have find it very telling about a person personality and honest life desires which Disney movie is their favorite. Harry’s is The Lion King (must admit mine too), while hers is The little Mermaid.

Probably Harry's dream of life in Africa wasn't all that realistic.. (livng is different to visiting).. but yes it IS different to the life that seems to be what they are now aiming at. Living in Canada/ N America, making money, mixing with the Rich and Famous Popping back to England to do royal dtuties.. And I think you're right that this is Meg's dream, not Harry's..and is even less likely to go well than if Harry walked away and went to Africa. Because He is not going to really want the cameras and the schmoozing.. (at least he has given the impression he finds the camera following him lifestyle stressful). and he and Meg may end up pulling against each other.
 
I think deep down they knew.

Of COURSE 'they knew'.. they've been holed up abroad plotting this for SEVEN weeks..[and on her part, FAR LONGER}

I expect them to end up as 'ex-Royals', and soon - Still Duke & Duchess, but not Royal Highnesses, and not in receipt of Duchy of Cornwall monies.. in fact any BRF monies, beyond what Harry inherited from his mother & QEQM -
Their ability to monestise their link to the Crown will be severely constricted by the Queen's and UK Govt lawyers..

As for what remains of their personal relationship with his family, I imagine they are 'shot to pieces', and since the Duchess likes things that way, I can't see and 'bridges being built'.

They can live where they chose, and 'good riddance'..
 
Last edited:
I just saw this and was about to post it. I’m not sure what to think about it, but the fact they say to become “financially independent” struck me as odd. Sounds like they’re wanting to commercialize all things Sussex related which just makes me think they only want to be royal if they can make money off of it.

It is odd, I agree. In one sentence they say, step back but still support......what does that mean???
They just want to make it a big thing like always 🙄 if they really wanted to step back, it would mean no more duties, titles, merchandising....

I would appreciate if they really stepped back with all consequences, but doubt it.

When they are launching of a hollywood-style life and in their sense better thing would be a too big contrast to what monarchy is meant to be, I hope the BP will tell them off immediately and things calm down.

No one needs Meghan, british monarchy is good the way it is and the idea if a smaller group of members as working royals is the best way for the future as many other european monarchies have proofed before.
 
There is a picture of the Room where HM received important Visitors. It was shown a Picture of the past where on a little table right of the Queen was a picture of Harry and Meghan and later for another Visitor no picture anymore.
The Queen knew but I don't think this senario ?
 
I'm sorry but there is no such person as "Princess Meghan" - she is the Duchess of Sussex.


Now comes the old answer to that: she has all of Harry's titles in the female form, so she is a princess of the Uk. But the title of a Royal Duchess is higher than the simple princess, so she goes by Duchess and she would not be known as "Princess Meghan" anywhere, though she is HRH The Duchess of Sussex (a lot of other titles like The Countess of Dumbarton and then:) Princess of the Uk.



So it's part of her name, she used it as profession on Archie's birth registration but she does not use it as a title.
 
Now comes the old answer to that: she has all of Harry's titles in the female form, so she is a princess of the Uk. But the title of a Royal Duchess is higher than the simple princess, so she goes by Duchess and she would not be known as "Princess Meghan" anywhere, though she is HRH The Duchess of Sussex (a lot of other titles like The Countess of Dumbarton and then:) Princess of the Uk.



So it's part of her name, she used it as profession on Archie's birth registration but she does not use it as a title.
Nope. True, she has Harry's all titles and she is a Princess of the UK, but the correct form is not "Princess Meghan", it's "Princess Henry".
 
I see this argument in so many places - that Meghan and Harry have the money, so they can do whatever they choose - and I don't think people understand what kind of money you have to have to support a lifestyle like theirs. Solely security costs would blow through their fortunes in no time. Not to mention housing. As far as Frogmore Cottage goes (which is not a cottage, more like a huge house), unless the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working royals, they'd have to pay commercial rent for that property. It's not his, it couldn't have been given to him, because the Queen doesn't own Frogmore Estate - it's part of Crown Estate, so only a lease is available. The non-working royals, like Pricess Eugenie, have to pay their rent - in her case, I think it was reported her father was paying for her cottage in Kensington Palace.


Question is if they needed so much security when they lived quietly someplace in the country as they seem to prefer. Anyone who is rich is a potential victim, but only as a member of the RF or a politician in office you can be made a victim for the state. So once they resign, they'd not need so much security anyway. Harry is a former soldier - I doubt criminals would just try to enter his house to burglar it when he's in.



As for Frogmore Cottage: we don't know how long the queen as her gift to Harry and Meghan payed for the rent already. When the politics on Grace and Favour-homes was changed and rent was asked (while before it was in the gift of the queen), actually not much changed. Then the queen received part of the earnings of the Crown Estate of rent in form of apartments and houses to grant to family and servants. Now she pays the rent to the Crown Estate for any property she want to give to someone and receives it back through the Souverain Grant. So I guess it's all clear when it comes to Frogmore Cottage. And it is not the taxpayer who payed for the modernizations to make Frogmore Cottage into a house you could rent out after it was neglected for so long, it was the Crown Estate who invested in their property portfolio. Only the winnings of the Crown Estate are shared between the taxpayer and the queen, but what is needed for the upkeep of their property is money that belongs to the Estate, not the taxpayer.
 
Now comes the old answer to that: she has all of Harry's titles in the female form, so she is a princess of the Uk. But the title of a Royal Duchess is higher than the simple princess, so she goes by Duchess and she would not be known as "Princess Meghan" anywhere, though she is HRH The Duchess of Sussex (a lot of other titles like The Countess of Dumbarton and then:) Princess of the Uk.



So it's part of her name, she used it as profession on Archie's birth registration but she does not use it as a title.

The issue is not with the use of the title ‘Princess’, but rather with the use of ‘ Princess Meghan’. Under British convention, she could be called ‘Princess Henry’ , but not ‘Princess Meghan’ as she is not a princess in her own right and takes her titles from her husband.

The OP, however, was , I believe, an American and probably a casual observer of the royal scene who dropped in just for this thread. Americans often refer to ‘Princess Kate’ or ‘ Princess Diana’ , so I don’t think there is a need to be picky about it, even though it is technically wrong. Besides, this discussion is off- topic for this forum.
 
Last edited:
I never said that.

Sorry , Yes I agree you didn't, I need to write longer posts and explain myself better.

The posters who support them are saying certain reporters have the correct story and everything else is lies. So the two I named are favoured reporters and if they say it , then it must be right. The fact that H & M might want to spin their own story doesn't appear to come in to it.
 
Nope. True, she has Harry's all titles and she is a Princess of the UK, but the correct form is not "Princess Meghan", it's "Princess Henry".


He is not just "Prince Henry" because you are either "The Prince Henry" as the son of the king (which he isn't yet) or "Prince Henry of Wales" as a grandson of the monarch. But I'm not sure how they use that in the title once he has a Royal duchy conferred to him??? I only know that Prince XXX without the "The" or the destination of the father's title is not in use in the Uk, so it cant be just "Prince Henry" without anything else. Maybe it's Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex, shortened to HRH The Duke of Sussex? I just don't know. But if he is not Prince Henry, she can't be Princess Henry either.
 
It's not the fact that at some point the monarchy needs to be slimmed down and "other" heirs should earn their own income (a la The Netherlands). It's not the fact that, perhaps, she is going through some type of post-partnum depression. It's not the fact that, she misses calling the shots in her life. It's not the fact that she was old enough to understand that marrying a royal would be a seismic shift in her life. It's not the fact that she may have faced racism and anti-Americanism. It's not the fact that life in the royal fishbowl is more intense than life in the Hollywood fishbow.

Bottom line -- it's the premeditated method in which they announced this without allowing the Queen to know before they informed the designers of their website. That's the issue. Total disrespect!
we have no way of knowing who knew what but I cannot imagine that this was not put out there as a possibility Im sure they talked about it with family. There is no way of knowing the circumstances dont believe what you read in papers
 
Question is if they needed so much security when they lived quietly someplace in the country as they seem to prefer. Anyone who is rich is a potential victim, but only as a member of the RF or a politician in office you can be made a victim for the state. So once they resign, they'd not need so much security anyway. Harry is a former soldier - I doubt criminals would just try to enter his house to burglar it when he's in.
I have no idea where you came up with the "living quietly someplace in the country" - look at their website, see what they've written there. There's no quiet living there. And once again, they don't want to resign, they don't want to give up anything, they still want the HRH, the Dukedom, they just want to be free to do whatever they want and make money freely out of their fame. As the burglars part, I won't even comment on that, we all know the security - paid for by the UK taxpayers - is not because someone could steal something from them.

As for Frogmore Cottage: we don't know how long the queen as her gift to Harry and Meghan payed for the rent already. When the politics on Grace and Favour-homes was changed and rent was asked (while before it was in the gift of the queen), actually not much changed. Then the queen received part of the earnings of the Crown Estate of rent in form of apartments and houses to grant to family and servants. Now she pays the rent to the Crown Estate for any property she want to give to someone and receives it back through the Souverain Grant. So I guess it's all clear when it comes to Frogmore Cottage. And it is not the taxpayer who payed for the modernizations to make Frogmore Cottage into a house you could rent out after it was neglected for so long, it was the Crown Estate who invested in their property portfolio. Only the winnings of the Crown Estate are shared between the taxpayer and the queen, but what is needed for the upkeep of their property is money that belongs to the Estate, not the taxpayer.
Actually, nothing is clear when it comes to Frogmore Cottage. This is not a situation that has a precedence, no one ever wanted to be half-royal and half-whatever. Harry and Meghan can live rent-free in Frogmore Cottage only if they work on behalf of HMQ and how they want to do that while being celebrities in North America is anybody's guess. The Queen could want them to live there for free, but they can't - that means, Prince Charles would have to pick up the rent out of his income, like Prince Andrew did for Eugenie (and probably Beatrice? I'm not sure where she lives).
 
Now comes the old answer to that: she has all of Harry's titles in the female form, so she is a princess of the Uk. But the title of a Royal Duchess is higher than the simple princess, so she goes by Duchess and she would not be known as "Princess Meghan" anywhere, though she is HRH The Duchess of Sussex (a lot of other titles like The Countess of Dumbarton and then:) Princess of the Uk.



So it's part of her name, she used it as profession on Archie's birth registration but she does not use it as a title.

Going back on topic, it is nice that you reminded us that Meghan’s occupation was listed as. “ Princess of the United Kingdom” on Archie’s birth certificate. Apparently she never understood what her job was or she now wants a career change,.
 
If that’s his thinking, he should think again. Everyone in the family has made sacrifices - the Queen’s father paid the heaviest price, but she herself also. Then there’s Charles, his siblings (forget Andrew for now) and other Royals, past and present; It’s not like Harry has been asked to carry this lonesome burden. If this is his thinking, he just sounds like a child to me. No one is sidetracking him - but yes, there are heirs and heirs to be and he’s not one of them. It doesn’t mean he’s not loved or valued as much as his brother - or anyone else. As to making a difference in people’s lives, that’s rubbish - of course he can; what does he think his family - past and present - has been doing? Does Harry think that his father, uncles/aunts, etc... work has been useless because most of them aren’t heirs to the throne? If so, he needs to get his royal head out of his behind.
But its understandable look at Prince Andrew and Edward it is no fun being a spare. He doesnt want it and I dont think using other peoples sacrifice and suffering as a reason that he should endure the same is rational. It doesnt make it sense why does he have to suffer like the rest of the BRF who gave sacrificed did?
 
we have no way of knowing who knew what but I cannot imagine that this was not put out there as a possibility Im sure they talked about it with family. There is no way of knowing the circumstances dont believe what you read in papers



The BP statement pretty much summed it up for me - these things are complicated and take time. H&M pushes the envelope. You don’t put up a website like that overnight.

I’d like to be sympathetic, but sorry, I just can’t. JMHO. They both sound like self indulgent, entitled spoiled children. JMHO.

The Queen, the Crown, the POW — all deserved much more respect.
 
Don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail or any other tabloid. They aim for sensationalism not accuracy.

You are right the gloves are off.

I struggle to believe that this was all triggered by a photograph, it was basically an historical document.

Harry knows his place in the succession, he was probably delighted everytime another child was born moving him further down.

I also do not think he was told he would not be part of the future. It is more likely the fact that they did not want him to leave is the reason they were trying to hold the story back.

The new web site was not set up overnight, it was all part of the bigger plan,

He is still an important part of the succession and the process, George is young, we are about 12 years until he would be able to take the crown.

If for any reason William becomes King before George is 18 a proposed regency has to be put in place.

It is also ironic that previously on other threads I had commented about Charless plans for a slimmer monarchy also using Buckingham Palace as a place of work rather than a home and I was shot down asking for proof etc, now posters are saying it is the truth and Harry is to be heaved because of it.
 
I have no idea where you came up with the "living quietly someplace in the country" - look at their website, see what they've written there. There's no quiet living there. And once again, they don't want to resign, they don't want to give up anything, they still want the HRH, the Dukedom, they just want to be free to do whatever they want and make money freely out of their fame. As the burglars part, I won't even comment on that, we all know the security - paid for by the UK taxpayers - is not because someone could steal something from them.


Actually, nothing is clear when it comes to Frogmore Cottage. This is not a situation that has a precedence, no one ever wanted to be half-royal and half-whatever. Harry and Meghan can live rent-free in Frogmore Cottage only if they work on behalf of HMQ and how they want to do that while being celebrities in North America is anybody's guess. The Queen could want them to live there for free, but they can't - that means, Prince Charles would have to pick up the rent out of his income, like Prince Andrew did for Eugenie (and probably Beatrice? I'm not sure where she lives).

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.
 
To me what's said about Queen Elizabeth wanting Harry to discuss things over with Charles before reporting what they've agreed upon to her, shows that Charles is now the head of the family and as the future king the one who decides on matters that affects the future of both the family and the monarchy as a whole.
Naturally the Queen has to sign off on everything but both the handling of Andrew and now the Sussexes makes it look like she's delegated the decision making process & the implementation of it to Charles who by the looks of it includes William more and more.

Yes, it makes perfect sense and is the right plan of action. All the current events affecting the BRF directly affects his not so far off reign. Not to mention that this is his son. William’s future role will also be affected, so he should be involved as well.
 
If they wanted to step down from royal duties completely, and live their own lives, as Princess Margaret’s children and Princess Anne’s children do, then I think people would be very disappointed but there couldn’t really be any objection: it would be their choice. Or if they wanted to do what Beatrice and Eugenie do – get jobs and not carry out royal engagements or receive any public money, but still act as patrons for charities, that would probably work OK, with all the talk of a “slimmed down monarchy”.

What they can’t do is expect either the taxpayer or Prince Charles to fund their lifestyle and security if they’re giving nothing back, or to cash in on the royal name.

Having said which, I can't see how there can be any way to stop them, legally, if they wanted to do a book deal, or accept money to go on talk shows, or give after dinner speeches. It would be very embarrassing for the Royal Family, and I would sincerely hope that Harry would have enough respect for the Queen not to do that, but I don't think there'd be any way of stopping them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I feel very sad about this latest development - sad for all of them.

Harry has had a tough life in many ways & unlike William, he didn't have the good fortune to meet someone at a young age with a family that could provide emotional security & a degree of normality. It's been clear for years that he craved family life and he floundered a bit to find his role. He's been open about his struggles with mental health & how the trauma of losing his mother has affected his ability to deal with the press & public events.

I think falling in love with Meghan has healed him somewhat & he now has the family he always wanted but the negative press around Meghan & how that's affecting her has driven him to seek ways to exert more control of his situation. Perhaps he also fears for his son's wellbeing growing up in an environment where vitriolic attacks on his mother are frequent & deemed acceptable.

However, I think Harry & Meghan haven't always helped the situation & in hindsight I think it was a mistake for Meghan to start her own initiatives so soon into the marriage. A lower profile & activities in a supporting role would have served them both better & helped to establish them as part of the BRF firm rather than a satellite operating in isolation, which it has often looked like.

What is 'the firm' these days though? I question whether it is operating as well as it might because it appears to be a disparate group of people all doing their own thing rather than a cohesive team supporting the monarchy. That situation has a long & complex history, which I won't elaborate on in this thread but the relative 'freedom to do their own thing' has resulted in some members being successful & others floundering or failing. Which brings me back to Harry, who appears lost & unsure of his worth to the firm or his role within it.

Marrying into the BRF is more monumental than most people outside could ever envisage. You're marrying an institution & if you've suddenly become a working royal, I wonder how conducive that is to happiness if you have your own goals & a pace of work that doesn't match. I think you have to accept some loss of personal autonomy & perhaps that would be easier if you have a clear understanding of your place within that institution & feel that you're a valued part of it. It doesn't look to me as though Harry or Meghan have that clarity or feel as supported & valued as they need to be.

I'm concerned that in this vulnerable state, they will seek & take advice from people who tell them what they want to hear in the short term & end up dividing them from the BRF, rather than people who might be able to find a longer term solution to their unhappiness & keep them within it.
 
But its understandable look at Prince Andrew and Edward it is no fun being a spare. He doesnt want it and I dont think using other peoples sacrifice and suffering as a reason that he should endure the same is rational. It doesnt make it sense why does he have to suffer like the rest of the BRF who gave sacrificed did?

Sorry, I don’t understand your point. How is being the second son of a monarch ( or a future monarch) in any way equivalent to ‘ suffering’ or something unbearable ?

Incidentally, Harry is not the spare. Right now, Charles is the heir and William is the spare. And, after that, George will be the heir and Charlotte will be the spare. Harry is only 6th in line although he sees himself as a “ senior royal”. Technically, an argument can be made that his uncles, despite being lower in the line of succession, actually have higher precedence as long as the Queen is alive because they are the Queen’s sons and Harry is only a grandson.
 
It's been interesting to read the opinion on this thread.

My own view is that Meghan and Harry have obviously been very unhappy for some time. From a humanitarian perspective, its cruel to keep someone in a situation in which they are so obviously unhappy. From a practical point of view people unhappy in their job are generally not going to be effective in that job.

For these reasons I don't have a problem with the Sussex's decision. I do have a problem with how it happened. As many others have said, springing the public announcement on the family was unnecessary and showed no respect for the Queen, Charles or William.

Now that it has happened, I agree with those who have said it must be a clean break rather than the half in/half out version on their web page. I have no problem with them going to live quietly in Canada or the US. I do have a problem with them setting up some sort of rival Court.

Likewise, if they are not working for the Crown then no public funding including from the Duchy, no protection paid for by British (or Canadian) tax payers and commercial rent paid for on Frogmore.

I am also uncomfortable with them using their royal titles for commercial purposes if the income is not going 100% to charity. If they want to endorse products or take speaking engagements and live off the proceeds - even a small amount of those proceeds - then do it as Harry and Meghan Mountbatten Windsor, not as Their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

I'm sorry it has come to this and I hope they will be happy in their new life but I can't see that happening, the British Media is not going to be any less intrusive than they are now.

I think Meghan was reaching for Melinda Gates status but only had the internal stuff to get to a Real Housewives of Pick a City place. I hope that the cashing in will also include some significant outflow for the public good or it will not end well for them. Americans can be every bit tenacious as the Brits at following the money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom