Harry and Meghan what they’ll do next

[PelicanPie]

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

I think the way the RF have handled this situation may well backfire on it. They've opened themselves up to a lot of scrutiny.

Please know I'm lot being goady, I like the discussion and hearing debate from both sides. How do you think the RF could have handled it differently?

I rarely post but I often read these threads and I do find them very entertaining.

As a huge anti-royalist I see no reason why the British taxpayer has to fund security for this family. As a minor royal Archie should never have been given protection officers as his position is similar to Andrew's daughters. Protection for him is not necessary and he should be left to make his own way through life as a private citizen. Anne's children, and I suspect Edwards, have never had royal protection so the precedent is there.

Meghan's position is similar to Fergie in that she is no longer the working wife of a senior royal, albeit down to resignation rather than divorce, but similarly she is no longer entitled to protection. There are claims that Harry needs protection because he served in the army but so did Andrew and Priti Patel has already told the RF that if PA isn't a working member then the cost of providing bodyguards for him can no longer be justified. I don't see that being any different to Harry's situation.

The cost of providing their own protection and financing it themselves would not be an issue if they wanted to go and live quiet, private lives but that is clearly not the case. They live a jet set lifestyle and intend to keep homes across different continents. International security is very expensive and should not be provided by the taxpayer.

Yes spouses - absolutely - I stand corrected.

I don’t think this security thing will be swept under the carpet. The RF are well aware of the criticism surrounding it at the minute and at the end of the day, it’ll be down to the government and met to decide what is needed and doable.

I remember when the press targeted Princess Margaret’s security costs following her extended stay in Mustique. Then followed the publishing of the costs of a 40 minute round trip for some minor royals to attend the Chelsea flower show - it was in the hundred thousands, I think.

The RF were given the opportunity to cut their own costs first then it was referred for review when those cuts were too low.

I can see the same happening here.

I am desperate for someone coming out and denying that a whole 1st class carriage was booked by PH. It is getting a bit too embarrassing now.

Difference with the Sussexes and other lower rankin* members of the RF, is the self publicity.
The Sussexes need the media to raise their profile to earn money, however it makes them more visible and more of a target (to whatever unseen threats there may be).

Honestly the only fair solution ( to the taxpayer) and for clarity of their position, is they need to fully resign. No titles, ( Prince or Duke) no HRH, quit the line of succession.

They can be Mr & Mrs Mountbatten Windsor, promote themselves however they lik e and pay for their own protection.
If they bring the MW name into disrepute; that’s a family issue not a Royal/State/Government issue

Some great posts here.

There are rules around managing public money, quite rightly, so what Harry and Meghan do and require to be spent on their behalf (security, housing, clothing, travel) is absolutely the business of the taxpayers if any of it is funded by the taxpayers. Which as we know, it is.

If their son; Archie Mountbatten-Windsor has no title and is a private citizen; then the same logic has to,apply to his parents.
Extra layer is the succession issue. Quite frankly; Harry needs to be in or out.

I don't want to pay for them.

I agree with Fizzylimes about the need to remove all titles and all protection and RF benefits. In the short term I think that would make "Call Me Harry" far more popular but in the long term losing the titles makes them far less attractive for commercial ventures. It would also mean that all deference would be lost and people might actually start to question the woke, eco-warrior credentials of a non-royal couple who intend to keep houses on different continents and jet between them.
Little Greta is at Bristol today and I don't suppose her announcing the purchase of a holiday home in Florida would go down well. I hope she doesn't make her speech barefoot, it's freezing outside.

I just can’t keep up with this thread anymore. It’s moving so fast and such great observations! I can’t add anything more to the excellent commentary so far. Absolutely staggered that Harry has once again blown his positive kudos by booking out an entire carriage in first class. He needs to decide what the line is. Is he ‘just Harry’ ordinary citizen or not? Is he trading off his Royal connections or not? Is he going to live in an eco friendly manner or continue jetting around the world at tax payers expense or not? Are they going to live quiet lives out of the spotlight and fund themselves or not?
I don’t think either of them have thought any of this through properly and are giving out mixed messages constantly.
Meghan needs to shut her friends up and stop whinging.
They really need to get a grip, the pair of them.
They have alienated both their families now apart from Doria, and they’re floundering around in a no mans land, expecting the RF to fund them whilst biting the hand that feeds them.
If they aren’t going to work for the RF they need to accept they don’t get paid. Let them pay for Frogmore now out of private funds. Let them buy a house from their own money. Then live a pared back lifestyle till they find work which doesn’t involve trading off titles and privilege.
They haven’t any right to moan about other members of the RF being able to use their connections etc. Beatrice and Eugenie work. So do Zara and Peter.

They should have locked Meghan in a room with Prince Philip for an hour or two. She might come out with a better understanding of how to be a supportive Royal spouse.

Excellent posts by Gaslight and Dateloaf

The British royal family is something very anachronistic and peculiarly British. Whether we are for or against and couldn't care less we, as Britons, know what the Royal family stand for and what place they hold in our society. They are diplomats first and foremost - they host dinners and gatherings and are interested and polite even when talking to people they may feel are unpleasant or hold opposing views; they are apolitical. They may, and I'm sure do, hold their own political views but these are secondary to the needs of the job they're doing.

I can fully understand that someone not brought up in British culture would fail to understand how it works and the very subtly balanced relationship between the British public and their royal family.

As a "couldn't care less" member of British society I want a Royal family who are giving us value for money. They cost a fortune to maintain but they bring millions of tourist dollars to the country and are a massive diplomatic resource. If they are not providing this then they need to withdraw from public life and become members of the public. The issue with this half in half out approach is that it satisfies no-one.

Harry should either be a working royal, playing his part full time and receiving the funding and prestige which goes with this role, or resign entirely. I don't want to pay for an ex-Royal, particularly not when he wants to cost us more as an ex-Royal than he did when he was a working Royal.

I think it's interesting that the Canadian government have drawn a line on security funding as at the date Harry and family cease to be working Royals. Britain should do the same. As others have pointed out Prince Andrew's daughters don't have security and, post step down, they will become more senior royals than Prince Harry.

The additional duke/duchess titles were given far too early on. I always thought these additional titles were given as merit for long and good service - like Princess Anne only became Princess Royal in 1987. The Sussex duchy titles, the HRHs and being 6th in line to the throne need to be completely withdrawn so that there is a clear demarcation between the Royal family and those who no longer want the job of being royal.

Amen to the above.

Good post waspie , I can't add much more , most of what I think has been said ( and more concisely than I could)
However to put it simply snd to the point.
You don't do the job , you don't get paid !
Simple and true , but it's what everyone has to adhere too , the same should apply too then also!

They just thrive on the attention but want to turn it off like a tap when it suits

Sorry doesnt work like that

said it before but they just want their cake and eat it but they are too self centred / thick to see it

I think that the situation with Harry and Megan has exposed an awkward fudge at the heart of the Royal Family. And it is about what is actually means to be royal.

I mean, why is the Queen royal? Is it because she is the head of state, or because she is from a family that inherits the role, or because she has descended from previous heads of state? Because there seems to be a fudge over this that leads to some uncomfortable places.

For if we were to become a Republic, the Windsor/Montbattens would be the former royal family, so "being royal" is connected to being a current head of state. If this is the case, then it makes sense for members of the family that support the head of state's role through working (ie. "working royal") to lay claim to royal titles -- because they are one of the limbs of the head of state, so to speak and in Britain, we still title our head of state with the historical term "Monarch". But if you look at it this way, there is no reason for anyone who does not support the head of state's work to have a royal title or be able to use any of the state funds or assets allocated to the role.

And, indeed, this reading makes sense when you consider that members of the family have opted out: Zara Phillips etc.

But then when it comes to Harry, all of a sudden, being royal seems to be about being a member of the family regardless, as though our Monarchy is not actually about a constitutional Monarchy with the Queen as head of state, but more about having a "first family". Under this model, even if you opt out of supporting the Monarch through being a working royal, you are still "royal" by default of seniority of birth and can still use some of the funds or assets available to support the Monarchy. The H&M statement certainly suggests that Harry believes this to be the case, as do the Palace comments about it being "unthinkable" to remove Harry's titles because he would then have to genuflect to less senior members of the family.

Again, this reading makes sense when you consider Andrew's position, who is still "royal" despite the fact he can no longer undertake royal duties.

So there's a fudge here. And to be honest, the "first family" model makes me very uncomfortable. I don't think the British people have understood the Monarchy to be a "first ruling family above all others to be funded in perpetuity by default of birth and with access to state privilege regardless" since the 17th century.

I think we badly need a national conversation about the Royal Family and what the definitions and parameters actually are.

Excellent post waspie.

What did you learn that you think I missed out on

Good question rocking.

I think you missed out on seeing her hustle (her word) in action before Harry was on the scene.

I don’t think she did it much during the first season of Suits but once it was renewed and moderately successful.

She was publicity-hungry, and had a broad-brush approach to getting her face out there:
-In a lot of magazines

• lots of sexy photo shoots, including the famous Grilling” ad for a men’s mag.

-Doing a clothing range with Target. -The Tig (maned after her favourite Italian wine). Which was mostly about how she was a foodie and loved to travel, particularly to Italy and other European places. Lots of photos of her and semi-famous faces.

• UN work with her giving a speech and interviews about how she was a feminist from a young age as she campaigned about a sexist tv ad (which turned out to be a class project).
• stuff on the Tig and in interviews about being bi-racial and how it was her father who made her proud of being bi-racial by forming her a doll family by getting dolls of differing ethnicities.
• Lots of social media posts on twitter as well as Instagram
• Her initiating a friendship with Piers Morgan: I remember photos of them at the time
• guest speaking at a wealth investment summit in the Cayman Islands
• Being a frequent visitor to Soho House in London & Soho Farmhouse - lots of photos of her on her accounts and others’ including Millie M from Made in Chelsea.

These are not the actions of someone who is publicity shy.

They are not the actions of what most other actors do- not to that extent.

Funnily enough, unlike other actors, the one thing she wasn’t doing much if any of during Suits was other acting work during filming breaks.

@ cakeisalwaystheanswer I am a huge fan of most of the RF but I agree 100% with what you say .

Interesting dandy , I never saw suits do didn't know who she was prior to her marriage to h,
So it seems she has not changed much at all then!

Royal status is only about representing the British state while the institution lasts, that’s the deal. Two worlds colliding badly here.

Totally this!

Harry will still need security whether he is Harry Mountbatten Windsor or Harry HRH /Duke /etc . Stii the Queen's grandson and brother of the next King .

@Packingsoapandwater This was the issue with Wallis as well, it started a 'What is being royal' conversation. If it's just a job that you can walk away from, why don't we all get a turn to do it?

For all we know HMQ may have been trying to avoid that conversation happening by giving them everything she did early on and keeping her fingers crossed, rather than following the precedent set by her uncle.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in the residences right now...

I get that Meghan was keen on publicity when she was a working actress . If she wanted to extend that publicity surely she would have wanted to stay in the UK as a fully working Royal ?

We're seeing a lot less of her now that when the couple were fulltime in the UK .

I think it's possible that the stepping down was to benefit Harry rather than Meghan .