There is a big difference between when they were working royals and after they left. After they left, I agree that taxpayers should not pay for any of their security. While they were there, as stated above I think there should have been separate security for Archi. I will take Meghan at her word that she asked for security for Archi while they were working royals, and this was denied to them. If people have an issue with the taxpayers paying for Archi because he is so remote in the line of descendancy, even though there are particular security concerns for him that others in a similar line of descendancy would not face, then I think the Crown should step up to pay for this out of their own money since Harry/Meghan were doing the work of the Crown.
We lived in London from 1996-1999. (We were there when Diana died.) We managed to see the Queen, Prince Charles, Prince Phillip, the Queen Mother, and several other royals during our time living there. I am a royalist.
I found the interview appalling. The parts about Archie not being a Prince because of his race is just a flat out lie. They knew it was a lie. He will be made a Prince when Charles becomes King. His race had nothing to do with it. It didn’t matter who Harry married, their son would not be a Prince until he became the grandson of the monarch.
Security is a big expense. Beatrice and Eugenie lost their security in 2011 when they started streamlining the Royal Family. (Andrew was upset, but the girls took it in stride.) If you are not a “working” royal, then you don’t get security. Moreover, royals like Prince Edward and Sophie get security when they are working, not just generally.
Meghan got pretty good press before and shortly after the wedding. Then, things started coming out (don’t know how) and it has gone down hill.
It was interesting that Oprah did not ask Meghan about her family. There is tons of drama there, but it was obviously not a topic for discussion.
This article in the Daily Mail did some fact checking on some of the items brought up in the interview. Royal ‘revelations’ put to the test | Daily Mail Online. I thought it was interesting.
I think someday a bigger story will be the tax implications that they have. Did she pay taxes on the gifts that she has received? As an American citizen, she will have to pay taxes on the large gifts that she has received, and so will Harry.
The Irish have nothing on the elephants when it comes to long memory.
They did talk about her family. They aired portions of that on CBS the next morning when they talked to Oprah on air. The interview was more than three hours long, and it had to be edited to one hour, 20 minutes. There was tons of “new” footage that aired that morning.
I continue to be amazed at some of these posts.
One fallout: Piers Morgan is gone.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/section/good%20night%20britain
What a great read! Thanks for sharing.
I’ll admit the Archie/prince thing really bothers me because as of the way things are written right now, he can become a prince upon the coronation of Charles as King. The only reason William’s children have the title is because George is the future king of England and is direct in the line of succession. The Queen issued that in 2012.
But the truth is that as of right now, Archie and his baby sister will become prince and princess. If Charles changes that after becoming king, well then that’s a different ballgame, but acting like he’s already been denied something is misrepresentation and that really bothers me.
Do I believe she suffered from severe depression? yes. Do I believe she’s encountered a lot of racism at the hands of English press and what sounds like Harry’s own family? yes. Do I think Charles is a terrible father? yes. Do I think Harry did the right thing in protecting his wife and child? yes. I wish them the best.
But I don’t think that they are entitled to payments when they choose to leave or entitled to security either. That’s not right to the taxpayers of England. So that and the whole prince thing irked me because honestly it made them look entitled in general and I think it took away from all of the other very powerful issues they exposed (lack of mental healthcare or awareness, horrific racism, Charles is a jerkface).
I could be wrong, and I’m not a big follower of the royals (though I did wake up early for the weddings!), but I thought what they were saying is that they were told that Archie would never be made a prince, even when Charles becomes king, and that’s what irked them. And that paired with questioning how dark the baby would be, I don’t think it’s such a leap to think race played a role in that decision. I think I’d like to go back and rewatch the whole thing, but I don’t have CBS all access or whatever you need to do that.
I mean the way the rules are worded now once Charles becomes king they will be a prince/princess. Charles would have to change that as king and maybe he’s said he will. But as of right now they will be a prince and princess.
If Charles changes it, then that’s on Charles, but that hasn’t happened yet and it certainly wasn’t Elizabeth doing anything.
It’s pretty clear Charles is a jerk (can’t use language worse than that) and I’m sorry for them both as I can’t imagine how that must feel. But hopefully he will not change the way things are and Archie and his sister will become prince and princess if Harry and Meghan still want that for them.
That was a great piece of writing (as everything is in the Irish Times). Didn’t see the interview, don’t care that much, but this opening paragraph is sublime:
“Having a monarchy next door is a little like having a neighbour who’s really into clowns and has daubed their house with clown murals, displays clown dolls in each window and has an insatiable desire to hear about and discuss clown-related news stories. More specifically, for the Irish, it’s like having a neighbour who’s really into clowns and, also, your grandfather was murdered by a clown.”
From what I’ve read (and it could be wrong) Charles has indicated that he would change the rule so that only children and grandchildren of the direct line of succession to the throne would receive HRH titles.
I take this to be some effort on the part of the Monarchy to streamline the “royal family” as well as accompanying expenses to the primary line of succession. Security is very expensive and taxpayers should not be expected to cover the entire extended royal family, except when engaged in official royal duties, since they clearly have the funds to pay for it themselves.
For example, former Presidents and their spouses receive lifetime secret service protection but their children only receive it until they’re 16.
I think this is more telling about how the interview is being received than anything else.
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/542354-piers-morgan-leaving-good-morning-britain-after-meghan-harry-controversy?rl=1
UK media regulator Ofcom said it had received over 41,000 complaints about the program as of Tuesday afternoon
And for those who don’t like CNN
My question is… why do we care about these entitled brats? LOL( Harry and Meghan included). I am trying to figure out how we are going to pay for my kid’s college education and she sits there in her $4000 dress, asking for my sympathy.
Give me a break. How nauseating. She truly is a “princess”.
It is my understanding Charles’ intention is / was to streamline the monarchy the include M&H as part of the ‘main’ royals ie Charles & Camilla / William & Kate / Harry & Meghan.
If Meghan ever misunderstood her role, or her children’s role in the future of a slimmed down monarchy, there were plenty of people who could have explained it, not least of whom, her husband. I do not believe it was ever Charles’ intent to exclude H&M or their children from the face of the monarchy.
As for suggestions Charles is a terrible father, I don’t agree.
I think this is one of those items under “recollections may vary”. You are right that Charles has been very candid about his desire to streamline the monarchy. Andrew has rocked the boat a lot over the years with his insistence that Eugenie & Beatrice be treated on a par with William & Harry. Because he’s the Queen’s favorite, she indulged him.
I don’t think Charles sees the need for that kind of treatment for a “second/third/fourth son’s” family happening for another generation. He may very well have privately told Harry & Meghan that their children would never be titled notwithstanding the current rules. In his mind, he’s being consistent with his vision for the future. In Harry & Meghan mind, another race based snub.
Yes, I agree with what both of y’all have written, which is why I don’t think they are lying. While Meghan may not have understood how it worked, Harry surely did. He wouldn’t have gone on TV and let his wife go on TV to say something demonstrably wrong. I think they were told by Charles that they wouldn’t be giving Archie the title and all that comes with it. I do think it was in part an effort to streamline expenses knowing the growing feeling of why are taxpayers footing the bill for them anyway. I also think there may have been other motives.
Look, I have spent more time thinking about the royals in the past two days than I have the past two decades. I found Meghan and Harry absolutely credible. Do I think there may have been some polishing here and there? Sure. They know this is a PR battle, and they are both skilled in that arena. That doesn’t mean the core of their complaints isn’t legitimate, and that what they said wasn’t truthful.
I think there’s a lot of hurt here. Being an armchair psychologist … Harry always has been the family renegade. I think being “the spare” shaped that. He simply doesn’t have the obligations his brother has. It’s not an accident that he married someone not of their choosing. Any one of the “strikes” Meghan has against her – a commoner, American, divorced, biracial – would raise eyebrows, but he went for the grand slam. He wanted out from under this archaic system. I truly believe he has PTSD surrounding his mother’s death. And once he saw how his wife was being treated/not treated, that was his chance to get out. I imagine he thought bloodlines and time served would get him a level of treatment that clearly his dad didn’t think he deserved.
It was clear to me based on things he’s said he adores Elizabeth and loves William very much. He and Charles are at odds. I think, and this is pure speculation having brothers myself, that he’s angry with William for being all duty, honor, and stiff upper lip and not standing up for him and his family. But that’s not insurmountable anger. It sounded to me like he threw Charles under the bus, backed up, ran him over again, and then kept on going.
When your father tells you to put it in writing and stops accepting your calls, clearly there is a communication problem. It has to be frustrating to navigate talking to your father vs the leader of “the firm”
One thing I questioned is how Meghan was able to pick up the phone and speak to the queen about Phillip. She made it sound so easy but with all of this discord, it seems as if it wouldn’t have been that simple.
ETA I didn’t mean this as a direct response to @Youdon_tsay but for some reason CC won’t allow me to change the post.
You are correct. Charles has mentioned streamlining the HRH’s and I believe it was before Harry was even with Meghan. If that is true, I understand why Harry might be upset, up I don’t necessarily think that decision was a race issue. It’s more a “not upsetting the taxpayers before they demolish the monarchy” issue.
I 100% think that Meghan and Harry were told that their son was not going to get a title and the reasons why. She didn’t like the response.
There are things they said that they were very careful to say without the entire context to make things look in their favor. They weren’t lying, but they weren’t exactly truthful either.
Meghan says she’s suicidal and wants to go to a treatment center, she was told that wasn’t done. She didn’t say she couldn’t get a therapist, but that she wanted to go to a treatment center. So it looks to people that the family told her she couldn’t get help.
Meghan and Harry walked a fine line, say enough to be truthful but go right up a line that puts them in the best light. And they knew that the family wouldn’t answer their questions publicly.
It is rather a shame Meghan and Harry told so many half-truths or outright lies; they are disputed by the maid of honor at her first wedding, her half sister, and former members of their own staff. They had such a unique opportunity to make a statement about racism in the media, their role in the royal family-it really could have been insightful, but they squandered it with claims that were easily discredited and thus cast doubt on the entire account.