New Meghan and Harry interview

[elprup]

JAN MOIR: She gave Harry an icy stare any husband would know - watch what you're saying, mister!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-13707697/JAN-MOIR-Harry-icy-stare-husband-watch-saying-mister.html

Her charitable work is through her own foundation, which supports young people's lives through athletics, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

I don't know if she would be interested in taking on more.

And even if she did, Harry is still the Founder and I don't think he can be got rid of.

He wasn't "given" a patronage. He wanted to bring the Warrior Games concept in to a different and international arena. It was incubated via the Royal Foundation as that was his charitable vehicle at the time, and when that slit his project went with him. Of course, being Royal opened lots of doors to get the Games off the ground - good staff and MoD support being key elements of that.

This is exactly why more transparency is needed when charities submit their accounts.

I don’t believe Harry and Meghan spend a single penny of their own money when they are representing IG. Harry thinks Invictus owes him everything. They are also known for not liking to spend their own money. Meghan would rather borrow sample clothes that don’t fit or suit her, in a deal to merch, rather than spend her own money on an outfit that fits perfectly and looks incredible.

So basically you are saying that Harry is bigger and more important than Invictus. And it should suffer a drop in support, funding and credibility along with him. And the veterans will just have to lump it.

Of course he can be gotten rid of. It happens to founders of companies and charities all the time. The board votes them out.

No I'm saying he's the Founder, the only Founder they will ever have and that can't be taken away from him. He knows it, and they know it and will have to find a way of going forwards.

Harry brings them a great deal of attention - but only really for the Games where he turns up in person, not for the rest of the work of the Foundation. I think they'd struggle to survive without the Harry factor, unless taken over by one of the bigger military charities

Who is the figurehead of the Warrior Games? And did I imagine it or have Germany set up their own games recently?

I think the IG would do much better without Harry. He's actually spoiling what is a great cause and event. Him and his wife.

It's Invictus Germany, a licenced subsidiary.

@WinnieTheW0rm nobody is trying to take his historical involvement away, so I don’t really know what point you are making. He can absolutely be asked (or forced, if there is good governance) to stand down for the good of the org. Harry increasingly brings nothing but controversy. If the movement is nothing without him, then it is unsustainable and not growing - it should be growing beyond its foundation and founding personnel, but it is not. As pp have said, Germany has already broken away.

I can't find a "figurehead" for either The Warrior Games, or Invictus Germany. Certainly no-one to date who uses it for personal fame and aggrandisiment with their spouse parading around.

I'm only surprised that Washington was in the mix at all !

Why would the USA want a charity that was basically copied from their own "warrior games" , surely they would prefer to champion a USA charity?

It makes no sense, @jeffgoldblum .

I do wonder how Archie will feel when he grows up and reads that his mother told the world that she wanted to commit suicide when pregnant with him and rather than getting help , his father took her to an event

@PoppysAunt indeed, not to me anyway !🤷‍♀️

@Manypaws I thought that about some of the "revelations" in Spare. Embarrassing and shameful for their children, and the knowledge that their parents have said all sorts to make money.
However, that suicide ideation episode will no doubt be very hard for Archie to contemplate, how awful when he reads about that.

A horrendous thing for a child to read

Well I suppose he could no longer have a seat on their governance committee, but there isn't really anything else. He can't be sacked as Founder, and also being a patron doesn't really add to that in any real sense.

I've never been quite sure how much actual hands-on he does with the running, and rather uncharitably assumed it was the square root of sod all. You seem to be suggesting that he does have greater input - ie it's worth removing him so things change. So what is that input? (genuine question - I realise my assumption is a lazy one)

His high-profile association as Founder won't go away, whatever else is done, so Invictus will have to work with that going forwards.

I think he does nothing but turn up for publicity purposes and hand in his expense receipts. He’s named as patron, not a board member, trustee or employee. He can absolutely stand back or be asked to, as he’s a Patron, which is a non governance figurehead role, there to raise the charity’s profile usually. If a patron is no longer providing good publicity for the org, or indeed is harming it, then the board should tell him to stand down as part of their own duties of good governance and the duty they owe the org. The trouble with Invictus is that everyone involved seems to think Harry is bigger than the org because of his foundational role. That’s not how a charity (or any well run org) that uses public money should be run.

PoppysAunt

However, that suicide ideation episode will no doubt be very hard for Archie to contemplate, how awful when he reads about that.

I agree - a dreadful thing for a child to contemplate.
Equally bad for William to know his mother threw herself downstairs when pregnant with him, especially as it was behaviour much more likely to injure her than result in a fatality but could certainly have precipitated a miscarriage.

Anyone else think it's weird that parents of children troubled by the internet are being encouraged by the Sussexes to chat on an Internet forum any old troll could participate in, and run by people of indeterminate expertise and moderation capability?

I think they’re hoping to work with agencies to completely limit freedom of speech, control and censor all online activities by the time Archie is old enough to understand. The problem being, it isn’t going to happen and this isn’t the Men In Black movie where people’s memories can be erased!

Nothing surprises me with these two

@Rhaidimiddim interesting point about the "donors" being M&H doing it for a tax break - which is possible. The other possibility if it was them is that they "donated" the money via Archewell, therefore using some of their 5% that they have to actually donate by law for foundations registered in Delaware - as the money would technically be going to a charity - but then straight back into their own pocket if they'd specified it should be used on their own security.

@WinnieTheW0rm you're right IG can't remove Harry as the founder, but they could certainly remove him as patron. If he was no longer turning up to events, accepting awards on behalf of Invictus etc, and they were making headlines on their own merit then the association would quickly fade.

I think there is a Netflix documentary to be made about this pair and all their underhand activities to be honest. Never mind the cookery programme. Someone needs to expose them for what they are.

I've often said the same, Manypaws, but never mind - when the children grow up H&M may well try to insist they didn't say that at all and the "British press" made it up (and probably somehow faked the interviews too)

No doubt, @Puzzledandpissedoff . That's certainly been their approach up until now!