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
OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 14:58

carbuncleonapigsposterior · 08/09/2026 14:44

I think the king wanted to pre empt any confusion. After all they've done several overseas tours where they more or less acted as de facto royals. I wonder whether, even if their Nigerian and Colombian hosts knew it was an unofficial visit, whether in fact the people who attended those events thought they were doing it on behalf of the royal family. I think they intentionally blurred the lines and would continue to do so if they could get away with that.

Of course everyone knew. The press kept banging on about them not being working royals.

One thing royalists and the royal family have to accept is that once harry and Meghan were no longer working royals, they were free to do what they want.

Quasi royal tour is not a thing. Loads of famous people visit countries and projects on behalf of charities, or just because they want to. Pretending only royals can do this is just plain bonkers.

Gymnopedie · 08/09/2026 15:00

Following the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to relocate to the UK, we have received a number of requests for guidance. To help avoid doubt or confusion, the King has directed that the following information be shared

Surely that hasn't come out of nowhere. Have they been making requests -demands - of various agencies to receive treatment they're not entitled to (even though they think they are)?

I'm glad it was published. Obviously the agencies needed the clarification but by making it public it stops endless speculation about their status.

And as for them being surprised - well they got more notice of it than the RF got of the Netflix series, the Oprah interview, Spare etc...

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 15:02

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 14:55

We all know that already. Every single person in Britain knows that as it was said so many times before. Thus just comes across as extremely petty and snide,

So many HaM supporters, which we can dub HaMsters for brevity, are saying it’s nothing at all and that others are making it out to be something it not.

Your opinion does show evidence that they are wrong about that.

It’s something. I’ve never seen CK or BP to be petty and snide so would be highly surprised if they decided to start now.

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:02

I don't believe them. It has been in the UK press many many times that harry and Meghan are not working royals. You would have to consume no media online, TV, radio, or print to not know that.
It is an excuse to be snidy.

IcedPurple · 08/09/2026 15:03

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 14:58

Of course everyone knew. The press kept banging on about them not being working royals.

One thing royalists and the royal family have to accept is that once harry and Meghan were no longer working royals, they were free to do what they want.

Quasi royal tour is not a thing. Loads of famous people visit countries and projects on behalf of charities, or just because they want to. Pretending only royals can do this is just plain bonkers.

Quasi royal tour is not a thing. Loads of famous people visit countries and projects on behalf of charities, or just because they want to.

Do they? I honestly can't think of too many examples. You might occasionally hear of some high profile person visiting a project they were associated with, but not a 'tour' of different locations.

Can you tell me the last time a famous couple travelled to a foreign country together and turned up at hospitals and other venues?

smilesy · 08/09/2026 15:04

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 14:55

We all know that already. Every single person in Britain knows that as it was said so many times before. Thus just comes across as extremely petty and snide,

Eh?

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:07

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:02

I don't believe them. It has been in the UK press many many times that harry and Meghan are not working royals. You would have to consume no media online, TV, radio, or print to not know that.
It is an excuse to be snidy.

In that case, could you possibly explain the terms of the Sandringham Agreement to H & M, then? Because clearly they either didn't understand them, or just decided to flout them.

Cosplaying "royal" tours, endless speeches all over the world, cheeky insults to such as John Travolta, accepting all kinds of spurious 'awards' and making a complete mess of their charities (Sentebale, Invictus to name but two..) have the potential to embarrass not only the RF, but the UK itself.

Please try and get through to them that they act as private people, not in any way as official, and certainly not royal. individuals.

As a pp reminded us, they were given a whole year to reconsider their departure from royal life. They've had chance after chance, and still create mayhem.

IcedPurple · 08/09/2026 15:08

Gymnopedie · 08/09/2026 15:00

Following the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to relocate to the UK, we have received a number of requests for guidance. To help avoid doubt or confusion, the King has directed that the following information be shared

Surely that hasn't come out of nowhere. Have they been making requests -demands - of various agencies to receive treatment they're not entitled to (even though they think they are)?

I'm glad it was published. Obviously the agencies needed the clarification but by making it public it stops endless speculation about their status.

And as for them being surprised - well they got more notice of it than the RF got of the Netflix series, the Oprah interview, Spare etc...

Also, the Sussexes flounced out nearly 7 years ago. Other than the initial 'Sandringham Agreement' statements, and the 'recollections may vary' response to the Oprah interview, BP and KP have been completely silent about the Sussexes. And lord knows it's not for the want of provocation. If they wanted to be 'snide' they've had plenty of opportunities these past 7 years, but haven't done so. That's a lot more than can be said for the Sussexes, who seem to excel in passive aggressive whining.

WitlessCheeseEatingPeasant · 08/09/2026 15:11

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:02

I don't believe them. It has been in the UK press many many times that harry and Meghan are not working royals. You would have to consume no media online, TV, radio, or print to not know that.
It is an excuse to be snidy.

Perhaps the message wasn’t intended for you.

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:12

Catpuss66 · 08/09/2026 12:51

Every British citizen is entitled to security if they are at risk, Salman Rushdi was protected for years. Then he wasn’t & look what happened.

Yes - I remember him saying that while he was no supporter of Margaret Thatcher, fair play to her - he appreciated the fact that he was given protection in the UK. And that threat was VERY real.

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:19

MrsFinkelstein · Today 13:33
mumumental · Yesterday 22:31
I think it’s rather undignified and a bit spiteful to publish such a letter regarding your own children, regardless of what you’ve been through with them. Most ordinary people would never do it. No love lost in that ‘family ‘.
What's your view on the 6 part NF documentary, Spare, several TV and print interviews where they accused his family of racism and toxic behaviour?
Spiteful and rather undignified?

Spot on, Mrs F.
Good grief! The lack of logic, self-awareness or even knowledge of events in HAM-apologists is beyond belief.

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:24

Bloozie · 08/09/2026 13:42

I'm paraphrasing. The glee with which people are interpreting a perfectly straightforward statement as somehow an 'order' is honestly quite pathetic.

Oh, I think it's defnitely an order!

It's a royal declaration. They've been told, told and told again.

This is KC (understandably) losing patience with the irritating pair. I hope the message finally sinks in. I'm really pleased he's been firm with them, and I think most people will be too.

No-one likes spoilt children, especially when they're 41 and 45.

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:26

@CoffeeCantata how can it be an order to harry and Meghan? It is an order telling OTHER people to treat harry and Meghan as ordinary.
People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

AcquadiP · 08/09/2026 15:27

Strawberrycups764 · 08/09/2026 07:16

That may well be the case but that doesn’t mean that the principle on which H and M were originally denied a little flexibility pre-Megxit, ie no HIHO, has very little basis, because Zara does earn her own money with extremely lucrative sponsorship contracts which take her to the Gold Coast every new year for example, yet she and MT still work for the royal family on occasion eg at the summer BP garden parties. She also attends official events like Ascot and rides in the carriages with guests such as foreign dignitaries ec. That is definitely blending royal work with earning private income.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-17/sa-government-silent-on-how-much-zara-and-mike-tindall-were-paid/101863196

https://www.tatler.com/article/zara-tindall-is-radiant-in-blue-at-the-buckingham-palace-garden-party

So there is a degree of flexibility in the system, they just awarded it to everyone else but Harry.

If you reversed it, and applied the same principles, then presumably Harry could earn money in rl then help out at BP garden parties and Ascot and perhaps at remembrance events and be present at Trooping the Colour? What’s the difference?

He wouldn’t have received an official stipend for doing so but he would still have been living in a heavily subsidised house, have his uniform laundered for him, and would be provided with transport and join the rest of the family for state subsidised scones with Dubonnet after each event?

So the whole concept of HIHO is a bit flawed anyway if you ask me. It’s just another smoke and mirror strategy employed by the royals to make us think they have clear boundaries around finances when in fact they do not.

Charles and William for example as monarch and heir are allowed unique exemptions that bypass the obligation to pay standard costs that every ordinary citizen must pay, eg they have inheritance tax immunity and don’t have to pay the 40 % tax on inherited wealth passed down through families.

And KC and W pay income tax voluntarily unlike the rest of us.

And KC and W benefit from vast income from the Duchies while carrying out their roles, which are huge corporate entities which do not pay corporation tax.

Why do those important exemptions not qualify as benefiting financially from carrying out royal duties?

And so many of the working royals wear clothing brands such as Turnbull and Asser and Barbour , drive around in Land Rovers, eat food produced by Fortnums, shoot guns manufactured by Purdey etc; companies which all hold Royal warrants. Do you think that they all pay full price for those?

Do you think they pay full price for anything?

They are ALL mixing personal financial reward with charitable duties!

Prince Andrew famouslly did it for years!

The other so-called official working royals like Sophie and Edward enjoy ridiculously lavish living accommodation for a peppercorn rent totally out of proportion to the job they do, with the benefit of clothing allowances and travel.

So the RF’s so-called principles around HIHO are a bit of a fiction! Harry had every right to be upset that he wasn’t given the same flexilbility as his cousin Zara, given that she is twenty-third in line to the succession, whereas Harry is fifth. The monarchy presumably believe in hierarchy or do they just bypass it when it suits them?

IMHO it’s ludicrous that they are a “royal family” instead of an elected head of state but to have that and then try to give the appearance of putting professional rules in place surrounding HIHO is laughable.

Either have a dysfunctional flawed family fulfilling a professional role where the boundaries separating professional and private are blurred, or don’t!

A bit more careful handling of H&M’s propositions and consideration for the fact that M wasn’t the usual royal bride, she was older, from another country, with an established career, could have averted this entire schism at the heart of the crown and all of the surrounding noise which has made the RF in to more of a soap opera than it was before!

If BP naievely think that issuing this statement will cause the press, and Harry for that matter, to go quiet, then they are deluded frankly! Press organisations and a thousand commentators with podcasts are finding the conflict between father and brothers far too lucrative to stop, and pushing Harry further in to another corner will probably result in him doing something even more rash.

BP are just doubling down on a strategy that didn’t work before, and it won’t work now either. Sticking your head in the sand and not speaking face to face and not confronting the emotional aspects of the rift will make Harry, if anything, even more of a loose cannon bc he won’t be able to earn enough money and he may feel he has nothing to lose.

The only way to resolve this is proper mediation and negotiation with compromise on both sides.

I wish they would negotiate frankly as the good citizens of the UK deserve more weighty press stories filling the airwaves than this one.

yet she (Zara) and MT still work for the royal family on occasion eg at the summer BP garden parties. She also attends official events like Ascot and rides in the carriages with guests such as foreign dignitaries ec. That is definitely blending royal work with earning private income.

Zara and Mike Tindall do not 'work' for the RF and are not on the royal payroll. They are not HIHO. They are in the unusual position of being private citizens who generate their own income, but who are also invited by the RF to attend some royal events in a supporting capacity.

Why? As I said previously, they are close to the senior royals especially KC3, W&K. They are loyal to the royal family, discrete and popular with the public. They are a safe pair of hands. No doubt Z&M are very happy with this arrangement as it will generate additional kudos for them in terms of sponsorship deals and so on.

If you are seriously asking me why the HAMs haven't been offered such a position of trust -when all they have done is destroy trust - then I really can't help you. H&M would be well advised to consider how it is that his cousin Zara - who doesn't even have a royal title - is a private citizen at the very heart of the senior RF. That position wasn't a given, it was earned.

With regards to businesses such as Barbour and Land Rover etc offering their products at discounted prices, that's entirely at the discretion of the businesses involved. This statement hasn't excluded such activity, infact it doesn't even mention it. Why would it? The statement refers to "recourse to public funds" which is something entirely different.

IcedPurple · 08/09/2026 15:31

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:26

@CoffeeCantata how can it be an order to harry and Meghan? It is an order telling OTHER people to treat harry and Meghan as ordinary.
People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

Enquiries as to the Sussexes' royal status, or lack thereof, has everything to do with Charles. It's good that it's now been clarified.

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:38

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:26

@CoffeeCantata how can it be an order to harry and Meghan? It is an order telling OTHER people to treat harry and Meghan as ordinary.
People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

It's an order ABOUT Harry and Meghan.

And a pretty clear reminder to both of them about what was agreed at Sandringham in 2020.

They seem either not to have understood (duh) or to think that Papa didn't really mean it.

Now they know.

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 15:38

I don't believe them. It has been in the UK press many many times that harry and Meghan are not working royals. You would have to consume no media online, TV, radio, or print to not know that.
It is an excuse to be snidy.

And yet we are told by the same press and media that they are ‘on tour’ and have highly publicised visits and dinners. They have the means and the contacts to slip in and out to do their good unnoticed.

If they are not working royals, they are trying very hard to show that they are. And are seemingly at pains to be treated as though they are.

We know that they aren’t working royals.

How? Because working royals don’t visit school children with half their side bap on display.

justcallmemarywhitehouse · 08/09/2026 15:39

😂😂😂😂😂

damnatiomemoriae · 08/09/2026 15:39

An excuse to be snidey?

Nah bruv.

King be factual innit?

smilesy · 08/09/2026 15:43

CoffeeCantata · 08/09/2026 15:38

It's an order ABOUT Harry and Meghan.

And a pretty clear reminder to both of them about what was agreed at Sandringham in 2020.

They seem either not to have understood (duh) or to think that Papa didn't really mean it.

Now they know.

Indeed. And it’s a reminder that the King is singing from the same hymn sheet as his late mother, just in case the Sussexes thought they could ignore the Sandringham agreement now we have a different person in charge of the Firm

justcallmemarywhitehouse · 08/09/2026 15:46

Bloozie · 08/09/2026 13:41

No. They've just wildly elevated the tone and framed it as something damning.

When you see how low media literacy is in this country, you understand why it's all going to shit.

🙄

Reach For The Sky Morning GIF by FOUR PAWS
LaMarschallin · 08/09/2026 15:46

People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

Thing is, it's everything to do with Charles.
They will not be treated as working royals. No Lord Lieutenant or whatever is going to decide, "Well, I like the cut of their jib. I say we lay on full Royal protocol for this visit".
It's not going to happen.
Sure, if other private citizens decide they want to bow or curtesy to them, or call Meghan "HRH My Queen" or whatever, they can fill their boots.
It just won't be official or real.
But I'm not sure they're big on reality anyway.

StormGazing · 08/09/2026 15:47

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:26

@CoffeeCantata how can it be an order to harry and Meghan? It is an order telling OTHER people to treat harry and Meghan as ordinary.
People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

Different parts are aimed at different people IMO, I suspect H&M need to get the picture that they’re not welcome to the UK being faux royals, and they’re not able to use the HRH that they adore so much! Other relevant parties understand exactly what it’s saying!

OlympicWomen · 08/09/2026 15:50

Daisywhatsyouranswer · 08/09/2026 13:27

It’s mind boggling any point needs to be clarified. I’m a lay person and even I don’t need clarification. It simply says what was agreed in 2020 stands,

their push back shows they do not wish what was agreed in 2020 to stand and they do not wish to be private citizens,

instead of trying to shoe horn themselves back in by the back door, they’d be better to say we are sorry, we fucked up. A lot of the shite we wrote and said was either blatant lies or exaggerated, we were angry and spiteful as we wanted to be number one, we have failed to make it work, and would like to come back please.

This ☝🏼

BunnyBunbunbun · 08/09/2026 15:58

OneLilacHedgehog · 08/09/2026 15:26

@CoffeeCantata how can it be an order to harry and Meghan? It is an order telling OTHER people to treat harry and Meghan as ordinary.
People decide themselves how to treat someone. It has nothing to do with Charles,

How can people decide to treat him as though he's a working royal who represents the monarchy when he isn't?

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread