Please or to access all these features

The royal family

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

1000 replies

Viviennemary · 07/09/2026 15:50

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:27

binkie163 · 08/09/2026 12:04

Because they will always want more. They don't want a grace and favour house with 250k a year to run it and pocket money.
They want a mansion, designer clothes, jewellery, unlimited money on demand, tax payer security and on top of all that they want to rub t he e tax payers nose in it. They also want equal billing as the monarch and heir.
They are greed personified and bone idle.

Edited

Oh I don’t know! If they had been allowed the run of a £30 million mansion like Sophie and Edward, for a peppercorn rent, they might have stayed around a bit longer!

This is all quite ridiculous frankly. Harry’s situation simply exposes the difficulties that a hereditary monarchy throws up, and it also highlights the smoke and mirror presentation of private and public wealth that goes along with it. That’s why the institution is so unhappy about it all.

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:29

That’s why the institution is so unhappy about it all.

Not as unhappy as H&M are I’ll wager.

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:32

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:15

I think it’s perfectly understandable that Meghan wanted to retain a degree of control over her own finances having always worked and been independent. They could have worked out a solution that she did royal duties when in UK but could keep her pay from acting roles in USA? Or something similar?

If Harry is so insignificant as many argue on here, why would it matter?

But they didn’t work it out. They, I believe got the option of that (continuing acting) but it didn’t transpire. If it was other work? Then it would depend on the work…

As to the second paragraph? It absolutely doesn’t matter any more. He is insignificant to the RF in a professional capacity as he is a non working royal. As has had to be pointed out again.

From whom did we hear that Meghan was given the option to carry on acting? Palace leaks?

And do we know why the negotiations went wrong?

If Meghan was given that option, why is it an issue now?

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:33

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:27

Oh I don’t know! If they had been allowed the run of a £30 million mansion like Sophie and Edward, for a peppercorn rent, they might have stayed around a bit longer!

This is all quite ridiculous frankly. Harry’s situation simply exposes the difficulties that a hereditary monarchy throws up, and it also highlights the smoke and mirror presentation of private and public wealth that goes along with it. That’s why the institution is so unhappy about it all.

They'd have stayed longer if they had been given Bagshot House? No evidence for that.
Their leaving statement was quite clear.
It never was, nor have they subsequently ever claimed, that the problem was not getting Bagshot House.
They were very generously provided for.

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:33

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:32

From whom did we hear that Meghan was given the option to carry on acting? Palace leaks?

And do we know why the negotiations went wrong?

If Meghan was given that option, why is it an issue now?

It’s been well proven that Harry and Meghan leak and lie so I’d assume it came from them.

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:34

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:32

From whom did we hear that Meghan was given the option to carry on acting? Palace leaks?

And do we know why the negotiations went wrong?

If Meghan was given that option, why is it an issue now?

From Harry. He said the late Queen offered them a low key start with a small wedding, and Meghan could carry on acting.

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:34

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:33

They'd have stayed longer if they had been given Bagshot House? No evidence for that.
Their leaving statement was quite clear.
It never was, nor have they subsequently ever claimed, that the problem was not getting Bagshot House.
They were very generously provided for.

Charles offered to buy them something before they left, right?

I assume he’s always been there to bankroll them as needed along the way.

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:35

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:34

From Harry. He said the late Queen offered them a low key start with a small wedding, and Meghan could carry on acting.

Well quite.

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:36

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:34

Charles offered to buy them something before they left, right?

I assume he’s always been there to bankroll them as needed along the way.

As the Duchy of Cornwall accounts show. They were still being subsidised after they left to live in the USA.

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:38

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 12:20

I'm never in favour of 'policing' threads, but I wish a shorthand system could be adopted here. For those wanting to say the following things

1 Why do you care?
2 You don't know them!
3 Why do you let them live rent-free in your head?
4 Why are you attacking a young father/young couple?
5 Charles committed adultery with Camilla.
6 Camilla is not the Queen.
7 It's racism
8 Charles is a terrible father etc etc

Could we not just use a number system - just give the number? It would make filling in my bingo card much quicker.

Just a suggestion!

That would save so much time.

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:38

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

I think the idea was to ease her in, because it was a big step to join the RF. Just have a low key start, get used to it, suss out the job etc.
Kate and Sophie had that by virtue of being with their husbands much longer before they were married.

smilesy · 08/09/2026 12:38

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

I think it was mooted that she carry on with acting while she settled in to the RF and before becoming a working royal. But I believe they rejected this with their “hit the ground running”
malarkey

italics fail

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:39

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

It would be a little odd if she was on screen shagging someone up against a file drawer and getting her heart broken after screwing some woman’s boyfriend.

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 12:39

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:38

That would save so much time.

Yes, thank you.
A number for Diana the Saint as well.

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:41

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

I think it would have been managed carefully by both parties.

The line would have been drawn at anything deeply controversial, nudity or anything sexual I’m sure. As a working royal, she likely would not have been allowed to depict fellatio or a knee trembler in a file room but plenty of options would have been available.
Had she wished and/or been able to make the cut.

Mylovelygreendress · 08/09/2026 12:43

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 12:27

Oh I don’t know! If they had been allowed the run of a £30 million mansion like Sophie and Edward, for a peppercorn rent, they might have stayed around a bit longer!

This is all quite ridiculous frankly. Harry’s situation simply exposes the difficulties that a hereditary monarchy throws up, and it also highlights the smoke and mirror presentation of private and public wealth that goes along with it. That’s why the institution is so unhappy about it all.

They wanted Windsor Castle and that was refused . They were offered Frogmore which was completely redesigned and fitted for them but it wasn’t good enough .
They wanted to get married in WA or St Paul’s but were told no but still accepted a £30milion + wedding in beautiful St George’s ( where Edward and Sophie were married) scathingly described it as a spectacle for the masses .
Meghan spent more on clothes than any other Royal woman but complained she had to wear tights.
I could go on .
The problem was that they were/ are below W and C in the Royal hierarchy and M’s ego could not tolerate that .,

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:44

The problem was that they were/ are below W and C in the Royal hierarchy and M’s ego could not tolerate that .,

Or Harry’s.

Mylovelygreendress · 08/09/2026 12:45

smilesy · 08/09/2026 12:38

I think it was mooted that she carry on with acting while she settled in to the RF and before becoming a working royal. But I believe they rejected this with their “hit the ground running”
malarkey

italics fail

Edited

Indeed . Harry himself said it and seemed annoyed about it .

IcedPurple · 08/09/2026 12:45

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:41

I think it would have been managed carefully by both parties.

The line would have been drawn at anything deeply controversial, nudity or anything sexual I’m sure. As a working royal, she likely would not have been allowed to depict fellatio or a knee trembler in a file room but plenty of options would have been available.
Had she wished and/or been able to make the cut.

She wouldn't have been allowed to act in even the tamest role, or indeed pursue any commercial activities, if she was a working royal. I agree with @smilesy that it's more likely the idea was that she continue acting while gradually being introduced to royal life. But it's all hypothetical now.

Anyway, she's now free to return to acting if she wishes. She and her husband are private citizens so can do pretty much what they want, other than claim to represent the Monarchy. Which was the whole point of the recent letter.

Catpuss66 · 08/09/2026 12:45

MeetMeOnTheCorner · 07/09/2026 16:31

@NewAgain26 Not working for the Royal Family is in effect, being on their own and private citizens. It’s clarification.

It’s not just the Daily Mail looking at this story! Everyone is carrying it because the letter is open to everyone.

I agree with you but the DM has a habit of running least one if not more made up stories about them for years.
just for info found out the DM supported Oswald Mosley in the 1930’s they did eventually drop them think after WW2 started. They have been supporting the Right for a long time, somthing I was unaware of.

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 12:47

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 12:41

I think it would have been managed carefully by both parties.

The line would have been drawn at anything deeply controversial, nudity or anything sexual I’m sure. As a working royal, she likely would not have been allowed to depict fellatio or a knee trembler in a file room but plenty of options would have been available.
Had she wished and/or been able to make the cut.

Yes, agree. Some parameters. But since they rejected the option maybe she feels acting is beneath her now.

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 12:48

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:36

I can't believe the Palace would have been ok with Meghan being a working royal and being an actress? Maybe if all she ever did was stage work with the RSC or something but realistically almost no roles would be considered suitable alongside that, and how would she get the time to do both?

And, I'm sorry - I'm struggling to 'be kind' here, but...Meghan...the RSC??? I'd like to see that!! I'd pay good money.

I will never believe she's up to learning a whole, complicated play in early modern English and performing every night, and sometimes twice a day, the whole damn thing.

TV and film acting is totally different.

And can you see her taking direction? And how would she get on with the RADA-trained classical actors she'd be working with.

Mind you, it might be like that Peter O'Toole Macbeth, where it was so bad it was good, and people went to see it just to laugh!

jeffgoldblum · 08/09/2026 12:48

The 1930s? , that’s very odd thing to hold onto ! , are we still supposed to be holding a grudge against Germany then?

ThatCyanCat · 08/09/2026 12:49

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 12:48

And, I'm sorry - I'm struggling to 'be kind' here, but...Meghan...the RSC??? I'd like to see that!! I'd pay good money.

I will never believe she's up to learning a whole, complicated play in early modern English and performing every night, and sometimes twice a day, the whole damn thing.

TV and film acting is totally different.

And can you see her taking direction? And how would she get on with the RADA-trained classical actors she'd be working with.

Mind you, it might be like that Peter O'Toole Macbeth, where it was so bad it was good, and people went to see it just to laugh!

I think she'd make a fabulous Bottom the Weaver.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.