Harry and Meghan what they’ll do next

[PelicanPie]

Let’s strive to keep on topic and not engage with posts designed to disrupt.

@ByGaslight
Your post is very thoughtful, insightful and spot on! I agree with your comments

Quote

Everything they have done, from using the African tour as a platform to announce they were suing the press, to issuing that infamous statement all about their progressive new role and working to be financially independant, to having a go at the queen and pointing out Harry is still sixth in line to the throne, even to the stupid leaks, setting up charities, Meghan says, etc, it’s all the worst pr disaster ever, every single step.

It’s late and I’m tired and I’ve completely forgotten why Harry is suing the press.
Is that over Megan’s topless pics? I remember william did that over kate.

No i don't think there were topless pics of Meghan. It was to do with the letters she wrote to her father they printed in the mail on Sunday. The printed extracts and I think she's claiming breach of copyright and also something about them being taken out of context. But her father is prepared to defend the mail on Sunday as her friends had already discussed the letters in public.

That's the gist of it that I got anyway!

Is that over Megan’s topless pics? I remember william did that over kate.

What topless pics?

I still can't understand why it's been so poorly executed, and why there are still so many unanswered questions.

I think the answer to this is very simple.

HaM (H and M, or H, Archie and M, take your pick) decided to do something that they wanted to do, and they did it. And because they wanted to do it, they did it now. They’re not used to delayed gratification or playing the long game.

They didn’t think about the repercussions on the RF, the public’s perceptions or the tax payer purse strings. They just wanted what they wanted.

I think they’re extremely selfish and entitled and not very smart in some ways.

As for the RF. I think they’ve been bamboozled somewhat and know they have to play it carefully so as not to look like they’re treating HaM badly. They’re probably scared of what HaM might say. They’re also just a bit useless and also very entitled so probably haven’t thought that the security issue may be such a big deal.

It’s all just very reactive at the moment, and perhaps that’s always been the RF’s way.

The thing about them paying back the tax payers for Frogmore was said in response to public grumbling. The Queen changed her mind on paying for the Windsor fire repairs after public outcry.

The statement said that taxpayers would pay for their security. I think they, HaM & the RF will partially go back on that in response to public opinion.

New blind: blindgossip.com/begging-for-a-big-briefcase-of-cash/

Is it not rather a contradiction to state that you are humanitarians who want freedom to support your own charities and then spend eye watering sums of money on charity?

It’s like those Gap Yah kids who proudly declare that they spent €10k on a trip to an African village to build a wall when the €10k would have built a whole village if it was given directly.

Eye watering sums in security!! Sorry

Encyclo...loads all over the Internet.
Probably all photo shopped but not very nice to see your wife like that.

Gaslight excellent post.

As civilians, we also get to look in on the fascinating self-replicating machine that is ‘the monarchy’ regardless of which individuals are currently in post. (Even though we know ‘the monarchy’ is also just an idea, which can never really be independent of the individuals in post..). I think that is partly what makes it all so interesting, that the monarchy is so tenacious an arrangement with us as ‘the people’ and how monarchy mutates over the years.

The H&M resignation has given us an interesting window in, to think about what the royals mean to us and to see how differently the different family members seem to see it.

It’s made me realise I really like the Queen’s version of the royal family being about duty and public service as a valuable end in itself. I also respect her own personal commitment to that.

HMQ’s ethos is a very welcome counterweight against the ‘celebrity’ model of being a public figure, which, however also charitable or not, is ultimately about building a personal brand based on personal commercial interests.

There’s everything right with people earning their own living, but I appreciate the Queen’s simple (but personally costly and I’m sure ruthlessly enforced) ethos of ‘serving’ as an ideal to live by. I hope Charles and William continue in that vein.

It’s a counter to celebrity culture and to normal people’s lives feeling increasingly encroached on by late stage capitalism to have HMQ holding up public service to others just as an end in itself and a meaningful ‘life’s work’ for herself. I’m not suggesting that HMQ is the worlds most productive humanitarian or anything but I do really appreciate the spirit that I think she is trying to embody.

I think that the security costs are going to be discussed very carefully. There needs to be a basic security budget with extras paid for by the Sussexes themselves if they desire to live an individual, independent globe-trotting existence. According to some of the articles recently the costs have spiralled out of control as a result of the Sussexes not staying together but have recently its been claimed been in 3 different countries and are demanding not one but 3 security teams when (for example purposes only) Archie and nanny are in Canada, Meghan is in the US and Harry in the UK.

I believe that they do need protection but the current costs a- however I also believe that if H&M are undertaking private, money making events then that they must pay the security costs of these. It sticks in the throat a little that they were reported to have travelled to the US to make $500,000 to $1,000,000 giving lectures to bankers, and also accepting private jets and other benefits - but that taxpayers are paying for the security team and its accommodation and food.

Gaslight and dateloaf, great posts.

It's this that concerns me. With the H&M debacle, for the first time, we are seeing the attitudes of a senior member of the royal family (Harry) towards his inherited privileged position and those attitudes appear to be breathtakingly arrogant. Coming on the back of Andrew, I just keep wondering just how much disregard the members of this family have for the ordinary people that pay for and support their position.

I cannot quite believe that Harry is not far more cautious; part of me wants to know how exactly he's grown up to be so inconsiderate of the financial and diplomatic realities of his current demands.

I've known a number of people from old money backgrounds or high wealth families, and the one thing they have drummed into them from an early age is not to broadcast their privilege and to be considerate of others in public - - largely because it's so dangerous to do otherwise. You don't talk about money, you don't publicly squabble about it, and you certainly do not broadcast your security arrangements.

But this? It's gone beyond bizarre.

And I have to add that the situation of Harry and Megan vis a vis their future is not our problem as British citizens. It strikes me that it is an internal family issue. If Harry no longer wants to do the job the State funds him for, then fine. But that's it. He's not doing the job, he therefore doesn't get the funding or the titles or the position in line to the throne. If you resign, you don't get to keep the company car and the VP business cards.

I think the problem is not only H&M but also the Royal Family's attitude to the situation that has created so problems. I can sense a desire to confuse the family with the institution and visa versa, with this attitude that Harry is a "Senior Royal" by virtue of his birth and that stands for all time, regardless.

Which then begs the question of what Royal actually means, and why, because it"s all looking a bit divine right to me at the moment.

Which then begs the question of what Royal actually means, and why, because it"s all looking a bit divine right to me at the moment.

Excellent summation....

Funding problem over, they’ve set up an Etsy shop.

So with the continued emphasis on Harry still being in the line of succession, are they basically saying they would come back if the top job became available? So suddenly then they would be able to deal with the press and scrutiny etc

Excellent posts Packing, Lunde and Date. These are the discussions we need to be having as a nation. I would hope a credible journalist picks up these thoughts.

Well as the blind posted up thread says - the level of entitlement is staggering.

Whatever the RF think of the the H&M debacle they must be loathing the scrutiny of the costs involved in protecting them especially as the Prince Andrew issue probably won’t be going away.

I can’t get over the massive disconnect between what they think they are entitled to and the ensuing financial/environmental cost that the rest of us are supposed to pay for.

Really interesting points made. It does resonate with me that if it was press intrusion, not wanting to be a senior royal etc then wanting to leave the line of succession would be a key component of what they wanted (plenty of precedent for people in the royal family choosing to do that). Otherwise, without coming out of the line of succession, surely, as people have said & alluded to in posts above, then it has to be about not wanting to be in curtailed by those higher in the hierarchy. (Which I fully understand - I wouldn’t want a future where my sibling would end up holding the purse strings!!)

Just read what she told her friends, rising above pettiness 🥴🥴

She is like Donald Trump now.

I wonder if the PCOs got the choice whether they wanted to continue when HaM were planning their 6 week holiday way back when. And then when it was extended. Those PCOs were then not at home for Christmas (it’s not like a couple of hours drive). Or are they just told your place of work has changed to Canada and then possibly USA. But no timings so you can’t plan anything. Must be a nightmare for the Met or whoever arranges it.

The costs of HaM had already increased when they insisted on moving away from KP to FC.

If E&B don’t get royal protection, then nor should A by the same rules. A’s should be funded by HaM.

All taxpayer funding should provide value for money. And cover only what is absolutely essential. That’s what social care keep saying when elderly people ask for help with care costs. So by this thinking, the essential would be the cost whilst they were living at KP. I would like transparency in these security costs.

HMQ does not turn a deaf ear to public disquiet:

Re the Windsor Castle fire:

A debate followed as to who should foot the bill for repairs to the castle. Technically it is owned by the state, not the monarch, and some MPs and parts of the media called for the Queen to pay for the repairs herself.

In response, the Queen agreed to open up parts of Buckingham Palace to the public for the first time, with money raised from the £8 entry charge going towards Windsor’s restoration. This covered around 70% of the repair bill, while the Queen donated £2 million of her personal wealth to the refurbishment.

I suspect a pragmatic solution to the security issue will emerge, Perhaps the Canadian statement was a warning shot across H&M's bow?

Just seen this in the news, how eco conscious is this?
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-booked-out-entire-21594368

some good thoughtful posts here