It was “, 'a bit naughty' to imply Archie 'couldn't be a prince because of the possible colour of his skin' when it was due to strict rules,...”

[RickiTarr]

Hugo Vickers made me laugh with his phrasing. So British to say “a bit naughty”.

Also, seriously high lights how many people don’t understand the rules or can’t explain the rules well, and no American has a hope of grasping our quaint & complicated rules and institutions, really.

Sorry, it’s the Daily Fail, but funny.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9340545/Why-Meghan-Markle-bit-naughty-referring-Archies-skin-colour-prince-discussion.html

This thing about him wanting to "slim down the monarchy" though ... I'm aware (who isn't? hmm) of the endless reports about it, but does anyone know if he's actually said anything along these lines himself?

www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-30965548.html

I suspect the idea has been vaguely suggested by Charles’ office, rather than officially planned. Charles is not King yet and even in this family, an anticipatory list of targets for the chop might be beyond the pale!

mummy. not sure you can read. I said family relationships. By his own admissions, Harry wants to restore family relationships but is he just thinks time will heal it, then he is not very bright. It takes effort to heal rifts of that magnitude - and both parties to want to contact each other

@Roussette 👍😂

Recollections may vary = we identified the the person and spoke to them. They did not mean it the way it was taken. So the RF knows who it is, so why don't they tell us and explain what this person meant actually

As stretches go that one takes the biscuit, though it's of a piece with the assumptions many are making
Unlike some I don't pretend to know, but since they say recollections may vary, the conditional could equally mean that this may be the case once they're told more detail

And detail is something I'd expect the RF to demand, so as said I hope H&M have a good story ready ... because some flannel about impressions may not cut it and the family aren't always pleasant to those who've crossed them

I think, as an outsider, it seems to me the British view the Queen and the monarchy the way that many Catholics viewed the Church in the 50's or pre child sex scandals. It's just culturally so wrong to question or say or do anything against the Queen...

It has all been said that the Sussexes divide British culture between older conservatives who never explain or complain and the younger generation....

To me, I don't understand this idea that you should never speak out against your family and that it is tawdry. It seems so blinkered and tunnel visioned to me. Almost a bit North Korean and autocratic - never question the Queen, protect her at all costs, and almost this sort of idolisation and worship of her. The royal family isn't a cult, it's not a dictatorship but its almost something like that. You either leave the royal family in a coffin or get exiled for life. It's completely weird and the Brits accept it as normal.

This idea the Queen is an innocent Grandmother and sitting around with her tea and cookies and corgies. She isn't aware of the efforts that have gone into protecting Prince Andrew ? She didn't intervene when Princess Diana was ready to throw herself down a flight of stairs ? She exiled the Mother of the future KING without police protection or HRH title. She's the head of an institution known for politics, drama, competition between siblings and protection millions in real estate, dependent on politics for funding and selling their souls to the press ?

But we are all meant to believe she's sweet little Queenie ? You don't think she's overheard a few dirty arguments and calls in her time ? She's sweet innocent Queenie because other people pay the price. The royal family is in itself a world - a world divided between the haves, the have nots, the protected and the unprotected. Haz and Megs were left for dead - literally - they were bunking with a Hollywood celeb while they hustled for their supper. They weren't going to sell their privacy to the media and then go live in the Valley of California with no security. Get realy !

The royal family is completely toxic and void of values and morals in my personal opinion. Most of them have had affairs, one of them has been linked to an international paedaphile and the British media are willing to let that go and the politicans and the family. Now they're linked to racism by the FOURTH ADULT in line to the thrown

It just bothers me that everyone is upset about how the Queen feels. The Queen is the one signing off on having a former military public future, threatened by the Taliban, go around LA unprotected.

They could never have been expected to stay in the UK. The press would have made their lives a living hell.

“Investigate and do what?

The whole premise of the Royal family is that people have their roles because of birth, not because any intrinsic personal quality.

It’s not comparable to having a job where you might be sacked. Once you start evaluating performance you are on a quite slippery slope“

I agree. And that’s why the monarchy works only when it is covered with smoke and mirrors.

I mean how can a taxpayer highest public institution be exempt from public laws? Equality, human rights, health and safety, employment protection simply don’t apply to the institution that is meant to symbolise these as head of our democracy

Sorry I just don't know how you're not all outraged by this.
There is serious money that goes into the royal family.
Prince Harry did his time - his youth - Invictus games, most of his life in the spotlight.
How can the RF not protect him.
To me, to know my child or grandchild was at risk of death and not do anything, in what feels like spite. That's so negligent. I would argue that its manslaughter through negligence - you know someone has a real, serious threat from groups, extremists. You have the power to protect them. You don't protect them to save some cash and keep your family politically favoured.

They could never have been expected to stay in the UK. The press would have made their lives a living hell. Absolutely true but surely now they are free of all that they are living the dream. Happy people don't call up Oprah and start bitching to her about their family.

The Swedish Royal family “slimmed down “ in 2019 after years of planning. When Williams on the throne there will be his 3 children and their www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49958085 spouses and families. I suppose the Swedish example is what the aim was.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49958085

Is Harry at risk of death? Isn’t it the met not the RF that decide on risk? How much does 24 hour security cost I wonder? They would each need 2 guards each? For if they are out separately?

@Mummyozzi

Sorry I just don't know how you're not all outraged by this. There is serious money that goes into the royal family. Prince Harry did his time - his youth - Invictus games, most of his life in the spotlight. How can the RF not protect him. To me, to know my child or grandchild was at risk of death and not do anything, in what feels like spite. That's so negligent. I would argue that its manslaughter through negligence - you know someone has a real, serious threat from groups, extremists. You have the power to protect them. You don't protect them to save some cash and keep your family politically favoured.

They have the power and the means to fund it themselves. They just brought an 11 million dollar (I presume) house, I think they can afford their own security. Plus Harry has not exactly not received anything for his service.

One persons refusing to take calls is another saying that there is no point having the same argument over and over . If Harry just kept ringing and asking for money and PC felt that ‘no is a complete sentence ‘ as MN says, then maybe he was just saying that there was nothing more to be said. I suspect people have rarely said no to Harry and he doesn’t take it easily.

My guess is that the skin colour comment was said in the context of; life in the royal family is hard, whoever you marry they will get a lot of attention , and a biracial wife and children may get even more, it’s not right it’s not pleasant but it will happen . How will you and your future wife cope , is she up for this level of attention/harassment . Harry should have been rehearsing and openly discussing these matters with any future wife , you can’t just pretend that it’s all going to be fine.

Mummyozzi, everything you say is true - none of this makes sense. It is deeply, deeply weird, but the RF exist because at worst they provide fodder for the press and at best people like pageantry and ceremony.

However you also have to remember that H & M are not upset that the Royal Family exists, they are upset because they want their child to be a Prince. That might be tied up with genuine but confused fear for his safety, but they aren’t really challenging the idea of Royalty. They are just arguing over the terms.

@Mummyozzi

I love your post. Very eloquent and I agree.

Believe it or not, I was quite the Royalist at a certain point in my life. I remember years and years ago whilst on another forum writing a long post defending them. Then I started to slowly lose my faith in them, bit by bit.

The very final nail in the coffin with me was Queen taking Andrew to church literally 12 hours after his carcrash interview blustering, lying and covering up his friendship with a paedophile.
He was so arrogant he thought he'd nailed it.

I was shocked. I thought to myself... this is awful. She really really didn't have to be with her grinning son, she could've just said 'no, it is not a good idea after what has gone on', but no, she openly and brazenly stamped her approval on her favourite son to the whole world.

I lost some of my respect for her at that point and I have never felt the same since.

I suppose the Swedish example is what the aim was.

But by the Swedish example, the titles of prince and princess are preserved for the king's grandchildren who are not in the direct line. They are not HRH but the have retained their titles of prince and princess and duke and duchess. Also quite unlike the British RF, children of princesses (Madeleine) get the same title as children of princes (Carl Philip).

They were reportedly offered a half in half out option before marriage and rejected it because both wanted to be full time royals. I've seen this a few places but this was the first link I on google. www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7930957/amp/Meghan-Markle-happy-stop-career-working-member-Firm.html

@thesunwillout

Where's this baby toddling off to that requires security 😁

McDonald's?

To me, to know my child or grandchild was at risk of death and not do anything, in what feels like spite.

But they don’t know that. Harry may have very deep seated reasons to fear loss of royal protection, but that does not equate to actual risk.

How much does 24 hour security cost I wonder?

I can tell you that because Andrew gets 24 hour security, 3 protection officers all paid for.
£300,000 per annum.

If Harry just kept ringing and asking for money and PC felt that ‘no is a complete sentence

Why are you saying that was what the calls were about? Do you know that?

I presumed it was about leaving the RF and living elsewhere. Is there any proof he was ringing and asking for money?
Not DM though...

But the cost of providing protection overseas by the Met is estimated at approx £1million because it would involve relocating at least 6 full time officers and that’s if the US government would even allow it .

Have people really not ever had conversations where it goes round and round and round, interrupting what you are trying to do and not actually getting things said because it is so focused on emotion. I have and when the same person calls for the fifth time that day to go over the exact same points I've ignored the phone.

It was apparently only a couple of days PC didn't answer the phone and I can't blame him. Suggesting a letter be written some can look at the points is a good idea (I've seen it suggested on here, although usually as an email) I won't criticise him for that.

Making appointments sounds weird until you think of meeting up with busy friends. "Are you free Saturday?" "No, sorry, kids are going to softplay. Sunday" "can't, I'm meeting mum". These are very busy people and it's not surprising you need a time to go round or that their secretary will know their schedule better than they do. It's not a case of not caring - it's a case of being flat out!
I understand the curtsy is a sign of respect to the position and not the queen herself. Sounds weird but in churches you are often expected to cross yourself or bow to a table with bits of metal on it or two pieces of wood that make a cross. You aren't bowing to the object but to what they represent.

@Roussette

How much does 24 hour security cost I wonder?

I can tell you that because Andrew gets 24 hour security, 3 protection officers all paid for.
£300,000 per annum.

Thank you Roussette.

Why on earth is Andrew still getting protection if he’s no longer a working royal? I understood it was based on need.

I thought the Wessexes & Anne only had protection when they are working? I’m obviously wrong.

I can understand HM, PP, Charles & Camilla & obviously the Cambridges having full time protection. But the others too far down the line to need it surely?

You can tell I’m at a loose end today as I haven’t been off here!

Gosh.... to me it means, you can walk up the corridor and knock on a door (if that is necessary) open it and speak with your Mother. Or you have to ring a courtier and make an appointment.

You might just be wanting to say 'Mum (doubt they call her Mum, but you never know!) don't forget to watch the 3.20 at Kempton, that horse you talked about is running'

But no, it is a false artificial family dynamic that is odd.

Harry does seems to be bit spoiled but I expect they all are.
He will have a lot of adjustments to make and he will be ok