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

[Gawin]

I'm afraid l differ from you on this : Sussex failed a] to adequately convey to his Girlfriend/Fiance quite the restrictive nature of the life she was considering, and how vicious the Press could be here and b] failed to allow enough time for her to acclimatise to the UK, the role she CHOSE to undertake c] IF he saw her as an 'escape route' he led his family, this Nation, indeed the World 'up the garden path', when he could [at the outset] chosen another way

- refuse the Dukedom, the vast panoply of Wedding/Frogmore/Commonwealth role etc. etc..and 'retired' to live a secluded life using his large inheritances, and whatever monies his wife could generate.

#1
Please do not quote me out of context. This the statement I made with the part you left out highlighted: "I don't agree with what Harry's done but I sympathize with the reason for his unhappiness."

#2
Please go back and read the article I was responding to: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle

#3
I suggest you read this one as well: https://bylinetimes.com/2019/11/19/...ish-journalism-and-journalists-are-in-denial/

#4
I agree with the Queen. I do NOT approve of what Harry and Meghan have done and (as I have stated before) I think they should have found a way to deal with the media but... "I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years."

Yes, Harry and Meghan deserve the blame for this sorry mess. But that does NOT mean the tabloids and the irresponsible part they play - not only in this affair but in British public life as a whole - should be excused or ignored.

 

[Lumutqueen]

A couple of people have bought up the money Charles has outside of the Duchy of Cornwall. A few points about that: it forms a small portion of his wealth and he cannot pay 4-5 million a year for Harry in perpetuity on it.

I don't think this arrangement is going to be in perpetuity, he certainly cannot do it when he is King.

What I believe is going to happen, Charles will support them until they're earning enough money to support themselves and then they'll release that shackle from themselves as well.

Why should he live it to the specifications and expectations of others?

I have no issues with Henry and Meghan living their life as they want. Absolutely none whatsoever. My issues with this whole situation have been the way it has been handled, and announced to the world.

From my point of view, their initial announcement (pre-empted by a leak or not) very clearly showed that they wanted the best of both worlds. Which for me begs the question, if they both hated the royal way of life so much, why ask to remain in it for part of the year? If the response to that is that they wanted to give something in return for remaining out for part the year, why bother? I don't want someone representing my country, who doesn't want to be there.

I've said since the initial announcement, I would have had no issues with Henry and Meghan bowing out, if they'd done it properly and renounced their titles to begin with.

 

[Durham]

It has probably already been mentioned previously (I haven't read the entire thread. it is rather long) but if a member of the royal family wants to be a private individual they can renounce their style in the manner of Patricia of Connaught.

If they also have a peerage they don't have to use it.

 

[Elenath]

Yes, Harry and Meghan deserve the blame for this sorry mess. But that does NOT mean the tabloids and the irresponsible part they play - not only in this affair but in British public life as a whole - should be excused or ignored.

I don't think I'd say they are to blame, I might say they are partly responsible. They could have made different choices, but there are other players in this circus who are equally involved. If you say the Sussexes are to blame, then you do ignore or excuses the media.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Tthe long suffering public do not want to pay any more for a bunch of younger royals. And Charles does not want to undertake expenses for younger royals if he can avoid it because then He will be stuck with paying them for the rest of his life.
He wanted the 2 sons to work, WIlliam as future King, Harry to take on a commonwealth role and any other stuff that cropped up. Bbut in the next generation I think the public will be saying " we don't want ot pay for Charlotte to cut ribbons for the rest of her life.. or do some made up job to keep her on the payroll... " They will remember how Andrew messed up and used his job to make dubious money, and they will remember how Harry walked out on the job of second royal supporter. So the public will be very hostile IMO to the idea of more than the heir working..

And you could also end up like Norway with one healthy adult working.

 

[Ista]

I have no issues with Henry and Meghan living their life as they want. Absolutely none whatsoever. My issues with this whole situation have been the way it has been handled, and announced to the world.

(...)
I've said since the initial announcement, I would have had no issues with Henry and Meghan bowing out, if they'd done it properly and renounced their titles to begin with.

Agreed.

I have said numerous times that if they are so unhappy with royal life, that they should be allowed to draw back from it. I have read almost no commentary, either here or in print media that indicates the vast majority of people have a problem with Meghan and Harry moving away from royal life and making their own way. Virtually all the criticism here and elsewhere has come from how they chose to handle it, and the perception, based on their own website, that they were willing to do the fun stuff--tours and the occasional cherry picked engagements--but wanted to control press access, and also that their desired financial independence really means that Prince Charles will pick up the tab until they can monetize their brand. Those are the things that are being criticized or questioned, not their desire to bow out of the royal rigamarole.

 

[Kataryn]

There has to be a lot of truth to this... His military appointments were not in even in public discussion and the statement basically bought about a discussion of it. I don't believe the BRF would have seemingly gone out of their way to bring this into the public limelight unless they were forced to.

For me taking him out of any active relationship with the military means he is less likely to stay a target that he has been as a working Royal and former soldier now representative of the British armed forces. Maybe that was the try to bring the necessary security down. Because the taxpayer seem to be okay with the sovereign grant (though it's the Crown who earned the money and only 25% is spend by the Crown, the rest goes into the state's budget, the public considers (or is repeatedly told by the media) the whole income by the Crown Estate to be "taxpayer's money" which it isn't.



I read an interesting article about the Royal family from William the Conqueror (England)/Macbeth (Scotland) as kings (yes, those two were living in the same time) down to the current queen and her family. Especially interesting the titles and why they were given and the financial aspects behind it! A lot of kings, but especially the "early" Georges were trying to impregnant their wifes in the hope for healthy boys but got many girls instead and knew they had to marry them off or let them stay with their own court once they were adults and that cost enormous amounts of money! And when they had boys, they had heirs, but those who survived besides the eldest were bound to marry, have children and these cost money as well because you had to outfit them in the most luxurious style according to their elevated rank in the kingdom with soo many rich nobles. Or give the princesses dowries to make them attractive for other Royals to marry.


Oh, those problems! (Still think it was about the cost of security/security at all for Harry & Maghan that he was stripped of his military positions.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Harry seems to never forgotten all this in his haste to label everything about the monarchy and BRF as toxic. Meghan never cared to know.

This is the aspect that troubles me, for many reasons. First, when young people get into this phase (and stay in it) through their 30's, it's an issue. In this case, I think it means that Harry probably should have sought psychotherapy in his teens and twenties. Sure, the situation feels toxic to him but not to others in the family or outside of it, so it deserves objective exploration with a neutral party.

Because the labeling of all uncomfortable situations as "toxic" and therefore to be legitimately avoided (by everyone, like the plague) is not a good adult defense strategy. If he really intends to live and work in North America, he will find situations of hierarchy that trigger him (to use the local phrase).

It's interesting that if your analysis is correct, that now the newlywed couple has declared both of their families "toxic." I hope they realize that as children of two "toxic" family systems, their own system is likely to reflect that - they should be concerned about actually getting away from the toxicity (which is going to take inner courage and personal change, if they believe it's really true).

 

[Lilyflo]

Harry seems to never forgotten all this in his haste to label everything about the monarchy and BRF as toxic. Meghan never cared to know.

I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?

 

[Erin9]

I agree with thinking why on earth did HM choose them for such an important thing( I suppose it to be compared to other wirk) like the CW? Did nobody realize what was going on, their immaturity......

I think she expected that when 2 adults in their mid to late 30s made a commitment to something, they’d keep it. Not unreasonable imo. This seems to be something they really wanted- then and now: This was one of the royal jobs they still wanted when they were cherry picking which parts of being royal they wanted to keep.

For all the flack William and Kate got for the length of time they spent dating, there was a reason for it. I get why Harry and Meghan rushed into it, but they did rush into it, made commitments they couldn’t keep, threw a public temper tantrum and left- and left a mess in their wake.

It’s too bad they didn’t take the time to figure out what they wanted before committing, and much worse, making a public mess out of their desire for a different life.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

For me taking him out of any active relationship with the military means he is less likely to stay a target that he has been as a working Royal and former soldier now representative of the British armed forces. Maybe that was the try to bring the necessary security down. Because the taxpayer seem to be okay with the sovereign grant (though it's the Crown who earned the money and only 25% is spend by the Crown, the rest goes into the state's budget, the public considers (or is repeatedly told by the media) the whole income by the Crown Estate to be "taxpayer's money" which it isn't.



I read an interesting article about the Royal family from William the Conqueror (England)/Macbeth (Scotland) as kings (yes, those two were living in the same time) down to the current queen and her family. Especially interesting the titles and why they were given and the financial aspects behind it! A lot of kings, but especially the "early" Georges were trying to impregnant their wifes in the hope for healthy boys but got many girls instead and knew they had to marry them off or let them stay with their own court once they were adults and that cost enormous amounts of money! And when they had boys, they had heirs, but those who survived besides the eldest were bound to marry, have children and these cost money as well because you had to outfit them in the most luxurious style according to their elevated rank in the kingdom with soo many rich nobles. Or give the princesses dowries to make them attractive for other Royals to marry.


Oh, those problems! (Still think it was about the cost of security/security at all for Harry & Meghan that he was stripped of his military positions.

I would love to know the name of that article!

 

[Eskimo]

And you could also end up like Norway with one healthy adult working.

I think that this is where it is somewhat headed....The same formula as most countries that have a ceremonial head of state (President) and a backup (Vice-President) if the head of state cannot do their job.

So, by the time William comes to the throne, I expect royal duties will be limited to him, Kate and George and the others will have to go fend for themselves off the public purse.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?

He didn't use those words, to my knowledge, but what he has said points in that direction (and his desire to move as far away as possible is a clear signal).

His situation is complicated because his family is also his occupation, but he is rejecting both publicly. Meghan has done the same. The emphasis on wanting to raise Archie without involvement in the "family system" is (at least in many parts of North America) code for "my family is a mess/is toxic."

Toxic really translates as "avoid! do not go near unless necessary!" and that's how both Meghan and Harry seem to be regarding their families. The problem is that good research shows that, barring some sort of psychological miracle, these two are still the children of their families and will always need to be aware of it. One cannot run from "toxicity" due to paparazzi and family position without recognizing one's need to change not just the role but one's self.

Perhaps Meghan feels that her relationship to her friends and "the public" is more healthy; Harry has yet to experience working in the real world. All kinds of systems resemble family systems, he may well be triggered again, but will not have the system to blame/escape from.

 

[Kataryn]

But what are they going to do? If they went away and lived quietly as private people, complaints would fade away. If they are still in the public eye and tyring to make money they will still get noticed. That's inevitable.

Yes, that is the question. I understand that Harry wants a more quiet life for his wife, his son and himself. But Meghan?? Will she be comfortable with that? She had it partly in the UK with Frogmore being secluded, the use of the beautiful gardens without any visitors for most days, the possibilities for long walks etc. Then turn up at charitable events and other Royal engagements, then back home. With enough money to spend and no sorrows on thinking of the future.



That was not what Meghan wanted. Obviously not what Harry wanted, too. I read their home page and , well, they didn't get what they dreamt off and will now have to do something to earn the big bucks if they want to stay on millionaires' row within their agreed upon restrictions. I'm not sure their "Royal" restrictions were that bad, honestly. As longa s they didn't care about the media. But they did and Harry probably did for his whole life, being raised by Diana.



I honestly don't see how they can achieve what they set out to do. But we'll see.

 

[Betsypaige]

This is the aspect that troubles me, for many reasons. First, when young people get into this phase (and stay in it) through their 30's, it's an issue. In this case, I think it means that Harry probably should have sought psychotherapy in his teens and twenties. Sure, the situation feels toxic to him but not to others in the family or outside of it, so it deserves objective exploration with a neutral party.

Because the labeling of all uncomfortable situations as "toxic" and therefore to be legitimately avoided (by everyone, like the plague) is not a good adult defense strategy. If he really intends to live and work in North America, he will find situations of hierarchy that trigger him (to use the local phrase).

It's interesting that if your analysis is correct, that now the newlywed couple has declared both of their families "toxic." I hope they realize that as children of two "toxic" family systems, their own system is likely to reflect that - they should be concerned about actually getting away from the toxicity (which is going to take inner courage and personal change, if they believe it's really true).

I think they feel like they did escape it, and now they’ll be fine...except in escaping, Harry has rejected his entire family. I have a hard time understanding that. Now, if his relationship with his father is a good one, I’m sure he’ll visit from time to time, and of course there’s Skype, etc. If, however, their relationship is iffy, then how will it - or his with William- ever be repaired?


Interesting article...They’ve got the freedom,, but they also have no family - or at least they’ve rejected it. Hopefully I’m wrong and relationships will be mended

They hoped for solutions within "days," and, somewhat miraculously, they found some. The outcome? Harry and Meghan did not get exactly what they wanted, but it is very clear where their priorities lie. In a new model which will take effect this spring, the couple are giving up the use of their HRH titles and their roles as working royals. Harry will lose his official military appointments and his recently-announced role as Commonwealth Youth Ambassador. They will not receive Sovereign Grant funds and will pay back £2.4 million of public money already spent renovating Frogmore Cottage, their home in Windsor. They will retain their private patronages. But they have got the one thing that clearly matters most to them: their freedom.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's New Arrangement Gives Them What They Want Most: Freedom.

The Sussexes have made it clear where their priorities lie.

www.townandcountrymag.com

 

[Kataryn]

I would love to know the name of that article!

Here's the one about the titles and styles of Prince/Royal Highness


https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/prince_highness.htm


About the history of England and Scotland up to today:
https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/royalstyle_uk.htm



More reading: https://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/uk.htm
Plus the whole site offers titbitds here and there, so just look around. It is a very factual sire with lots of sources.

 

[Alison H]

They went into the military and stayed there - the Grand Old Duke of York! - or were found paid jobs.


George III had 15 children, but that was very unusual. The Tudors and the Stuarts struggled to produce any children at all ... although the Plantagenets and the Hanoverians had a lot! Queen Victoria's father was the Governor of Gibraltar for a while. The future William IV was the Ranger of one of the London parks. They didn't rush to get married and have legitimate children - most of the Hanoverian princes had mistresses instead. George III's sons only rushed to get married when Princess Charlotte died and there was no direct heir.


Back in the days of the Plantagenets, princes were often married off to rich heiresses or to foreign princess with dowries, to provide for them that way.


George I only had two legitimate children. He fell out with his wife and locked her up! It's only really been George II, George III, Edward III and Henry II who've had very long families.

 

[Betsypaige]

I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?

From various media outlets, but first from People

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Felt Their 'Hand Was Forced' to Leave Royal Family Amid 'Bad Blood'

A source says "things would have been different" had Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's relationships with the royal family been better

people.com

On another note, good...I’m glad the Queen is angry...though I’m so sorry for her.

The Queen’s brief but surprisingly warm statement disguised her true sadness and anger at being forced to dissolve her beloved grandson’s royal status.

Duty in the way Her Majesty understands it clearly means little to her grandson.

She gave up everything for duty, to be Queen.

....

Freedom at the price of giving up everything he has known for the last 35 years will not be easy, but it is what he wants or thinks he wants.

The Queen has put her supportive arm around both him and Meghan. I hope he does not live to regret it.

 

[Betsypaige]

He didn't use those words, to my knowledge, but what he has said points in that direction (and his desire to move as far away as possible is a clear signal).

His situation is complicated because his family is also his occupation, but he is rejecting both publicly. Meghan has done the same. The emphasis on wanting to raise Archie without involvement in the "family system" is (at least in many parts of North America) code for "my family is a mess/is toxic."

Toxic really translates as "avoid! do not go near unless necessary!" and that's how both Meghan and Harry seem to be regarding their families. The problem is that good research shows that, barring some sort of psychological miracle, these two are still the children of their families and will always need to be aware of it. One cannot run from "toxicity" due to paparazzi and family position without recognizing one's need to change not just the role but one's self.

Perhaps Meghan feels that her relationship to her friends and "the public" is more healthy; Harry has yet to experience working in the real world. All kinds of systems resemble family systems, he may well be triggered again, but will not have the system to blame/escape from.

Maybe the system isn’t workable for him, but I’m sickened by the implication that people who love him, who have done their best for him, are toxic and to be avoided. His father? His brother? If we’re wrong, then he needs to show it, because right now it looks like an utter rejection of everyone and everything he knows.

 

[Queen Claude]

I read somewhere recently that Charles found botht sons rather volatile.. taking after Diana in that respect. But WIliam seems to have calmed and become stable and postivlely dull. Harry has gone more volatile IMO. I never thought he would walk out on royal life.. I thought maybe Meghan might htough it wasn't all that likely. never thought the 2 of them would go.

Charles himself is volatile, there are stories of him flying into rages, I remember a story where he threw a small object at one of his staffers. IIRC the distinction made was that Charles would have a fit of temper and then get over it but Diana held grudges.

As a Canadian here is my opinion, which is shared by a lot of other Canadians as evidenced by the comments on Canadian new sites:

Even if I had the compassion for them (and I don't*) I do not want my tax monies used to pay for their security as private citizens. I do not mind paying for them when they come for a short visit representing my head of state but not if they want to live as a VISITOR in Canada in a private capacity.

*- I lost all compassion for them when they had the audacity to complain about "existing not living" and no one had asked "how they were doing" in a documentary that was meant to highlight the plight of some of the most disadvantaged people on the face of the planet.

Yes it's been made abundantly clear that the Canadians do not want to pay for the Sussexes security, and I don't think that it is even on the table that taxpayers in Canada, the UK or any other country will pick up the full cost of the Sussexes security.

I think that direct security for the Sussexes should be privately paid if only to preempt media and individuals from complaining about taxpayers paying absorbing the cost of their security. By direct security I mean personal bodyguards, security that patrol their residence and the like. However there are other levels of security like intelligence gathering, threat assessment and planning that I think should be headed by the Metropolitan Police, the body that is tasked with protecting the royal family with cooperation from the national and local authorities of wherever the Sussexes are based or visiting. I don't think that security at that level should be privately funded and if Canada or any other country wants to be bill for / be reimbursed for being part of that aspect of the Sussexes security then IMO they should just refuse them entry.

 

[Denville]

I think that this is where it is somewhat headed....The same formula as most countries that have a ceremonial head of state (President) and a backup (Vice-President) if the head of state cannot do their job.

So, by the time William comes to the throne, I expect royal duties will be limited to him, Kate and George and the others will have to go fend for themselves off the public purse.

That is certainly the way things are going for RF's to be reduced to a very small number of working members.
Usually in a royal family there will be SOMEONE who can help out in cases of illness, at least on a temporary basis. In Norway there is Princess Martha Louise who would in bygone days have probably been drafted in, now that poor Mette Marit is in bad health and the king and queen are elderly.. but she's been acting pretty eccentric, and has had to be avoided as a royal helper. If Say William got ill when George was a young man still doing his college or military years, there are still Charlotte and Louis who could help for a bit...

 

[Betsypaige]

Charles himself is volatile, there are stories of him flying into rages, I remember a story where he threw a small object at one of his staffers. IIRC the distinction made was that Charles would have a fit of temper and then get over it but Diana held grudges.

Yes. Charles is like his grandfather, Bertie. He explodes and then it’s over. William is apparently like his mum - and it seems Harry is also - in that way

 

[Missjersey]

Self-absorbed? Absolutely. I call them immature because of the way they threw a proverbial temper tantrum and posted on their website, deliberately defying the Queen and Charles. I call them immature because Harry can't figure out if he hates the Royal life or wants to be part of it - OR if he's just jealous of William. Mercurial is definitely the right description for him - and I've seen that several times in the media.

I want to be fair to them also - I supported Meghan up until now as my posts here will attest to, and of course I loved Harry. It's hard for me to be kind to them when I feel they've been unfair to Charles (not just now), especially, but also of course the Queen and William. I also adore the UK - I've been several times, including last year and the year before, and I'll be visiting again in June.



His wife definitely won.......and Harry thinks he's won, though he's lost. Archie has lost.

I agree, especially last sentences. What in heavens name went wrong. Little things I wonder about...

They fell in love so quickly or at least Harry thinks he did. The engagement interview he seemed so starry eyed with such a strong vibrant woman. And of course we debated what some thought was an over the top dress for the pics at Frogmore let alone the celebrity pose outside KP pics. Walkabouts so touchy/feels, we’re they warned? Seemed so silly yet, I saw someone who doesn’t follow the rules. I
don’t believe everything the media says, really, who would tell the Queen that St. George’s Chapel needs air
fresheners or that they want a big tiara? Did Charles really intervene another time denying her request to wear a tiara? I don’t think Harry wanted his own court but someone did. If it’s true Harry said whatever Meghan wants...we end up here with the Sussex hokey pokey, you put one foot in (UK), you put one foot out (Canada) all for the woman I love.

Yes, she’s won. And by time time she’s finished with him all the kings horses and all the kings men couldn’t...

 

[Erin9]

Yes. Charles is like his grandfather, Bertie. He explodes and then it’s over. William is apparently like his mum - and it seems Harry is also - in that way

I hope not. That is very unhealthy- to hold grudges. And, it will certainly be difficult to mend their relationship if that’s both of their mindsets.

 

[Denville]

Yes. Charles is like his grandfather, Bertie. He explodes and then it’s over. William is apparently like his mum - and it seems Harry is also - in that way

I don't think that "volatity" refered to hot temper. The volatility was more on the lines that Charles never quite knew what to expect from his wife and that the boys had something of the same quality. And that was true of Diana, she veered around a lot in her attitudes. William seems pretty solid these days and does not seem to chop and change in his attitudes. But harry? well yes I think that he is volatile in that snese. He undertook the Royal role, full time.. seemed enthusiastic, got married and then he seemed to get suddnely fed up with it all and want out of it... and to admit to having mental helath issues. Also, he seems to me very different these days to what he was like as a younger man. In the army, he seemed a hearty, good natured young man who enjoyed life and fit in with the drinking and having fun culture. now he is taking life very seriously.. complaining about depression, falling in with Meghan's ways a lot.

 

[Helen.CH]

Maybe the system isn’t workable for him, but I’m sickened by the implication that people who love him, who have done their best for him, are toxic and to be avoided. His father? His brother? If we’re wrong, then he needs to show it, because right now it looks like an utter rejection of everyone and everything he knows.

H&M did not say it's toxic, only tablouds used that word, makes a difference.

 

[Lilyflo]

From various media outlets, but first from People

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-forced-to-leave-royal-family-amid-bad-blood/

There's no quote in that article from Harry where he "labels everything about the monarchy and BRF as toxic".

If he did say that, it would be incredibly shocking so I think we should establish if & where he made this dreadful accusation about his own family.

The article contains something from an un-named 'family friend' who says “There is so much bad blood in that family — it’s toxic.” Those aren't Harry's words though.

On another note, good...I’m glad the Queen is angry...though I’m so sorry for her.

How do you know the Queen is angry?

 

[Erin9]

Maybe the system isn’t workable for him, but I’m sickened by the implication that people who love him, who have done their best for him, are toxic and to be avoided. His father? His brother? If we’re wrong, then he needs to show it, because right now it looks like an utter rejection of everyone and everything he knows.

I’m disregarding the word toxic. It’s not coming out of their mouths directly. It’s from a source.

Toxic is a popular buzzword. It’s meant to get sympathy. In order for me to take that seriously- I’d have to know what exactly was toxic by their definition out of their own mouths. Otherwise it’s a just word used to get attention and sympathy at a time when they’ve caused a lot of hurt in a public stage.

Given that Meghan almost certainly disregarded some of the advice she was given because it wasn’t what she wanted to hear, it’s hard to say what’s toxic or unsupportive.

I’d say ignoring the media was advice she was likely given by someone, good advice imo, that she disregarded- and now everyone is unsupportive because the response she’s given isn’t what she wants. (I’m not saying that’s how she felt. I don’t know. It’s just a possibility.)

what did she get vs what did she want? What was her expectation? It could have been a culture clash. That’s highly likely based on her comments about British stiff upper lips. Maybe her idea of support was getting to personally argue about every single unfair article. Maybe she wanted the BRF to issue a supportive statement every time someone was mean to her. Who knows.

I don’t know what happened behind closed doors, but “sources” making blanket statements using buzz words does nothing for me. It doesn’t make me sympathetic. I was sympathetic- right up until the interview and everything that followed.

For all I know, all of this is just damage control- IF in fact this is even the story Harry and Meghan want to sell to the public anyway. Which isn’t clear. They’d have to say it themselves.

 

[Pranter]

I read somewhere recently that Charles found botht sons rather volatile.. taking after Diana in that respect. But WIliam seems to have calmed and become stable and postivlely dull. Harry has gone more volatile IMO. I never thought he would walk out on royal life.. I thought maybe Meghan might htough it wasn't all that likely. never thought the 2 of them would go.

Charles is known to have quite a hot temper himself. It's not all Diana with their tempers.

You never thought Harry would leave...have you missed the times he's said in interviews he's thought of leaving etc?



LaRae

 

[Countessmeout]

I think that this is where it is somewhat headed....The same formula as most countries that have a ceremonial head of state (President) and a backup (Vice-President) if the head of state cannot do their job.

So, by the time William comes to the throne, I expect royal duties will be limited to him, Kate and George and the others will have to go fend for themselves off the public purse.

What public purse??? Only the queen gets funding in the form of the sovereigns grant. No other royal is on the public purse. Any funding for the other royals comes from the queen or Charles.

I think the public will be giddy about fewer royals until realization sets in.

-less royals don't mean less money. The dive reigns grant continues as is
-less royals means significantly less work. So paying as much money for not even 1/4 of the old work.

In reality republicans already think there is little value to them. And many people think royals are lazy. Anyone seriously think saying we want all the money but you get less of us, is going to make the public happy??? Yeah no.

The reality is the royals need to be Seen and seen working to be relevant to the public. Being Royal is more then the ceremonial roles. It's supporting charities and the businesses in the country.

The Uk also has the commonwealth, the queen being queen 16 countries. The U.K. Had very different needs then the likes of Norway or Sweden.


Honestly Beatrice and Eugenie would be the perfect royals to take on. The perfect example of the modernized royal family.

-they continue their jobs and support themselves
-like the wessexes give them security only when on official duties
-if they need some help a bit of compensation for an assistant from SG


And it woukd be the model for the next generation. Louis and Charlotte woukd be expected to do as the York girls. They woukd know from the start so they woukd get education and jobs. But they woukd also have a royal role, with patronages and be at certain events but not as a full time job.

It works in the Netherlands. The Kings brothers knew they would not be working royals so their education and career choices reflected that.


As for Archie if he remains in Canada, he wouldn't be the first peer living in Canada. And there is no saying he wouldn't choose to call UK home. He will have dual citizenship. And the family is planning on being in the Uk every year for good amount of time. It's not like he will forget he is British.