Harry's speech at the UN

[KatharineofAragon]

Just what is going on? Why does Harry think he is qualified to pronounce on various political matters in another country? Why is he invited and who cares what he thinks? Am I the only one thinking he is behaving like a total numpty?

I do not care who uses titles and who does not. A load of nonsense the whole thing.
I agree though that if you want Harry and Meghan not to use their titles when they should not, then you should expect everyone else to follow these rules as well. And that should include others not trading on their royal connections such as Peter.

I doubt it, as sadly Nelson Mandela has been dead for nearly 9 years.

Duke and Duchess Dolittle was rather apt.

unless one counts pontificating.

@TrashyPanda they have not been members of the Royal Family for years. Why

Agree that anyone not giving anything back should be in line for title removal. However, I would argue that there is a pressing need to begin with H & M because while Peter is not likely to start an international incident, H might. At the moment, H & M are mildly amusing but if he starts up again about a sensitive issue in the semi-official capacity that he is trying to cultivate, things could turn nasty - and we can do without any of that right now.

What about starting with Andrew. He has agreed not to use his title, he still has it though. He is most likely to start an international incident.
But that will not happen while the Queen is alive.

I’m confused.

i didn’t say anything about them being members of the Royal Family.

i merely remarked that they don’t do very much.

which is true.

Yes, him too. I don't think there will be any argument about that.

Peter Phillips doesn’t have a title, just his own name.

Peter Phillips doesn't have a title, but that doesn't seem to stop him flogging milk to the Chinese with pictures of a Palace in the background, footmen serving him milk with a tagline British Royal Family member Peter Phillips. He trades on his royal connections.

Whether M&H do much is irrelevant, we don't pay for them, they aren't working members of the RF, and they live thousands of miles away.
Think of Andrew... disgraced, does nothing, paid to live in magnificent luxury

That doesn't make sense. Why is it relevant that Peter trades on his royal connections, but not relevant that M & H do the same?

Neither of them are (now) paid working members of the family.

I don't think Peter has ever slagged off his family in public has he? If that has any bearing at all.

Why is it relevant that Peter trades on his royal connections, but not relevant that M & H do the same?

And where did I say that in my post?
I didn't.

I was pointing out that Peter Phillips, despite not having a title, still uses his connections to the RF to make money by flogging milk to the Chinese.

I read your post as the first paragraph critisising Peter Phillips for trading off his royal connections with the milk ad, but going on to say that whether M & H do the same (except not milk!) is irrelevant, as we don't pay for them and they're not working members of the royal family. Both points of which also apply to Peter Phillips.

I can't see what else you meant?

aj

You're reading far too much in my post. A PP said Peter Phillips didn't have a title. I pointed out that made no difference to him doing the advert.

H&M are also not doing tacky adverts selling goods to the Chinese with a picture of a Palace in the background, and footmen serving him milk. Now that is trading off the royal connection! It may sound contradictory to you, but it makes perfect sense to me!

Apparently the legal fees from
Harrys court action is being paid by the taxpayer. So yes, we are paying for them.

It’s bad enough that they all trade off their connections, but slagging off the family that has provided the titles , the wedding, the house , etc is a bit rich. They still own Frogmore and are presumably letting it out for financial gain. They didn’t earn that house .

Surely that is only because the government is defending the court action? We are not paying Harry's county action fees unless Harry wins and the judge awards costs.

Dunno. Just read that in the papers. Taking action that if he wins would cost the taxpayer when he doesn’t even live here anymore is hard to swallow. Joe Bloggs will have to pay through their hard earned money. Because a Prince who doesn’t want to be a Prince thinks he need special protection. A Prince
who doesn’t contribute anything to this country .

I'm glad to hear that. I think he should have security when he is here, which is infrequent anyway.

Incorrect. They don't 'own' Frogmore. It belongs to the Crown Estate so they aren't letting it out for 'financial gain'. I wish you wouldn't make stuff up. The ownership of the cottage is passed from the Monarch to the next Monarch. I think the Queen got a good deal on that as they paid for the renovations £2.4M.

If an individual takes the government to court and the government decide to fight the case in court and lose the case, then the court often says the losing party has to pay costs.
This is why the government at times concedes cases, because it thinks it will lose the case.
This is how any court case works.

Who said Prince Harry didn't want to be a Prince? He is a Prince by birthright whether you like it or not.

Like Andrew. Prince Andrew, the disgraced member of the RF

So Eugenie and Jack haven’t been paying rent to them? As was reported?

Dissing the RF in a public interview and saying his father and brother are trapped doesn’t sound like he has much respect for the whole institution that has made him a Prince .

They (M&H) are paying a commercial rent for Frogmore Cottage, and have done since they left, this is detailed in the Royal Report.
Eugenie and Jack (who now live in Portugal) possibly paid a rent to M&H whilst they lived there, although more than one source says that M&H let them live there rent free.

So your assertion that they are making a financial gain on this is totally incorrect.