King Charles orders Harry and Meghan to be treated like ordinary citizens

[Viviennemary]

Apparently an order has gone out from King Charles saying that Harry and Meghan are to be treated like ordinary citizens as they are not working members of the royal family. That's according to the DM so it must be right. The thought of those two being pleased at being ordinary is too much.

I wonder just how low they will keep their profile and if it's to do with them wishing to be involved in charities. I wouldn't be surprised if they try to set up their own mock royal court.

Well to be fair it was never a proper agreement was it if most reports are true? It was a fait accompli which Harry was forced to accept when he had made it clear that he always wanted to carry on representing the late QE2. Didn’t the MIGs only present him with one option when he thought many more would be discussed?

And that is a total misrepresentation . . .

HMQE said plenty. I suppose recollections still vary.

IMO they are no better than commoners now and should be treated as such.

Football fans get crazy though. Did you see some of the behaviour at the World Cup?

Quite. Elizabeth was an oyster. She shared only with a selective few.

I like Harry. I dont know Megan but I like her drive and energy about womens rights and equality.

How do you ‘like’ Harry but not know Meghan? Did you know him at Sandhurst or something?

Tell me, if you know him, which military charity might he align himself with @booboo?

Elizabeth did not write a book complaining about her parents, unlike Charles and harry.

We have only ever heard Harry’s version of that meeting .
I suspect others may remember differently .

Nor did Charles. That was the Dimbleby book. Have you read it? Hardly in the same league as the vituperative Spare. No penis details or fantasy of killing Dad, for starters.
Hardly a comparison.
Poor Harry. Such a wretched life.

Harry and Meghan attempted a fait accompli by issuing a public statement about a made up role they had not discussed with the Queen, his employer.

She then told him how things would be.

I imagine it would go the same way for most of us were we to try and redefine our employment terms in such a manipulative and underhanded manner.

Had to read that a few times.

KC3 isn't just a father of two adult men, he's the monarch. In his capacity as the King, he's simply reiterating the terms of the Sandringham agreement ie the HAMS are not working royals, are not able to use HRH, don't qualify for state funded security (unless agreed by RAVEC) etc. And given that statements from the monarch are as rare as rocking horse poo, it seems to me that KC3 has received information which has triggered this statement to be released. It's a smart move but not 'spiteful' or 'undignified.'

There are better ways.

According to Rebecca English

It comes after sources close to the couple repeatedly briefed select media about plans for their new life back in Britain.

They include a resumption of public engagements with the media invited to attend. Some of the couple's friends have even boasted that Harry has finally secured the 'half-in, half-out' deal he always wanted – with the freedom to mine lucrative commercial opportunities while undertaking limited official duties by the 'back door'.

That model was firmly rejected as unworkable by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth, at the so-called 'Sandringham Summit' of January 2020, which led to the Sussexes' acrimoniously quitting, not only royal life, but also Britain while embarking on a series of very public attacks on the institution.

Now the King has moved decisively to quash speculation over their return, and publicly re-enforce the boundaries laid down by his late mother.

And he makes clear that Harry and Meghan's public appearances should not be treated as royal engagements and no public money should be spent on them.

It seems pretty routine and straight-forward; one can hardly get excited about the King giving guidance if there have been several requests for guidance from him. It is an unusual situation, even though honestly everything he has said is already in the public domain.

(I WAS momentarily excited when I thought it was actually an order! Just for a second I thought maybe he'd do an off-with-their-heads 👑 or at least go with a fatwa or something, but noooooo.... )

We need a British Republic urgently to avoid this absolute nonsense.

Also, QE2 lost her authority when she died.

"Who died and made you king?" QE2.

If QE2 had the authority, because Monarch, to say "Camilla will never be called Queen".

Then KC3 has the authority to say " Yes she bloody will!"

And why wouldn't he? Crazy to expect a king to roll out his wife to all the HoS business and stuff but not grace her with the title befitting that role.

Pigeons

Why shouldn’t he mark armistice day with his charity? Solely In the capacity of a non-working royal trustee

if charities and organisations actively want to associate with him they should be allowed to - he might be a non working royal but he not a pariah…..

Yes, very true - that makes no sense. Camilla is the Queen because she's married to the King.
I've no idea why people don't understand that!

Of course she's the Queen, she married to the King!

Not sure why you are quote quoting me I haven’t mentioned armistice day.

What better ways @mumumental?

I truly don’t understand why H or others may claim he needs this or that because he is ‘brother of the future King/son of the present King’.

He has paid scant heed to the institution apart from ‘ask not what I can do for my country but what can my country do for me?’

He paid even less heed to the safety of his family, his new family, his ex colleagues and serving personnel when he talked of his military exploits.

They both said how happy they were in Montecito and lived a relatively quiet and ‘safe’ life.

They stepped down and back and fired a shot as they did so. Their choice.

They came back. Their choice. It does not hurt to reiterate the terms that were agreed to save any embarrassment going forward.

For the letter to be issued? I think misunderstandings may have already been starting to happen. Best for all parties to be clear surely?

Do you think there was something in the statement which implied that he can't mark Armistice Day as a private person, linked to a charity? I didn't read it as if he was being prohibited from supporting charities in a private capacity.