This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/08/prince-harry-and-meghans-move-signals-slimmed-down-future-for-royals

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Prince Harry and Meghan's move signals slimmed-down future for royals Move by Prince Harry and Meghan signals a slimmed-down future
(about 1 hour later)
Duke and Duchess of Sussex look to forge an untested path by stepping back from public dutiesDuke and Duchess of Sussex look to forge an untested path by stepping back from public duties
The announcement by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex that they are to step back as senior members of the royal family follows a year of stress and uneasiness about their roles. The announcement by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex that they are to step back as senior members of the royal family follows a year of stress and uneasiness about their current roles.
The ambition of Prince Harry and Meghan to plough an untested and unconventional path comes after much speculation that they were not completely comfortable with the status quo. The couple’s ambition to plough a unique, untested and unconventional path comes after much speculation that the two were not completely comfortable with the status quo.
This new route, it appears, could allow them to capitalise on their international celebrity and still retain their HRH status. This new route, it appears, will allow them to capitalise on their international celebrity, while retaining their HRH status.
The recent portrait of the Queen, with the Prince of Wales, Duke of Cambridge and Prince George, was a tangible reminder of the couple’s role as the monarchy’s “spares”. Prince Charles backs a slimmed down monarchy. The message this photographed conveyed was very clear – this was the nucleus of the royal family. The recent portrait of the Queen, with the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge and Prince George, was a tangible reminder of the couple’s role as the “spares”.
The statement followed “many months of reflection and internal discussions”, according to the website in the Sussex name. Plans are understood to be in their infancy. The couple’s six-week holiday in Canada, from where they have just returned, could have been a trial run. Prince Charles is a supporter of a slimmed-down monarchy. The message this photograph conveyed was very clear – this is the nucleus of the modern royal family going forward.
The biggest clue that they were rethinking their role came, perhaps, in the television interview they gave to ITV’s Tom Bradby during their tour of South Africa late last year. The statement by Prince Harry and Meghan followed “many months of reflection and internal discussions”, according to the couple’s website. And plans are very much in their infancy.
Meghan said of her role: “It’s not enough just to survive something, right? That’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive, you’ve got to feel happy. I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip . I tried, I really tried. But I think that what that does internally is probably really damaging.” Buckingham Palace immediately stressed that the couple’s proposals raised “complicated issues that will take time to work through”. The palace response raises the question of just how advanced those discussions were, and to what extent the Queen and her senior advisers were consulted, before the remarkable announcement by the couple on Wednesday.
Her concerns appeared to weigh heavily on Harry. The prince has made no secret of his anger at the British press, and both of them are pursuing legal actions against newspapers. She has begun a lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday over an alleged breach of copyright and privacy, after it published a private letter between her and her estranged father. The move comes less than two years after their marriage. Since their wedding in May 2018, the couple have faced criticism over:
Harry’s impassioned statement when he accused British media of waging a “ruthless” campaign of vilification of Meghan, and comparing her treatment to that of his mother, was an unleashing of his pent-up fury at the way they perceive they have been treated. Their use of private jets, taking four in 11 days last summer.
“I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces,” he said. He has filed his own proceedings at the high court against News Group Newspapers, which owns the Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, and Reach Plc, which owns the Daily Mirror, in relation to alleged phone hacking. Meghan flying to a luxurious private baby shower in New York.
Further signs of the pair’s wish to carve out new roles appeared when they announced they were going their separate way from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They decamped from Kensington palace to Windsor and moved their offices into Buckingham palace. They split from the Royal Foundation, run by all four of them together, and are now about to launch their own foundation. Harry told Bradby he and his brother “were on different paths”. The £2.4m of public money spent on the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, their Berkshire home.
The couple’s decision to step back comes less than two years after their marriage. Since their wedding they have been criticised over their use of private jets, taking four such planes in 11 days; of Meghan flying to a luxurious private baby shower in New York; and for the £2.4m in public money spent on the refurbishment of their home, Frogmore Cottage. Frogmore Cottage will now remain empty for a considerable part of the year as they split their time between the UK and North America. Some claim their actions have blurred the lines between royalty and celebrity.
Some have criticised their actions as a blurring of the lines between royalty and celebrity. Quite how they intend to become financially independent has not been explained. But it is evident the couple feel constrained by the restrictions they currently face.
How they intend to become “financially independent” has not been disclosed in detail. On their website they say that in 2020 as they step back as senior members they will no longer receive funding from the sovereign grant. But the move will allow them to “continue to carry out their duties for the Queen while having the future financial autonomy to work externally” . As well as carrying out their charitable endeavours, they said, in addition “they value the ability to earn a professional income, which in the current structure they are prohibited from doing”. Future financial autonomy would give them the freedom to “work externally”, they said.
At present, they said, the sovereign grant covered 5% of their costs and was specifically used for their official office expenses. They added: “Their royal highnesses prefer to release this financial tie.” Up until now the remaining 95% of their expenses has been met by Charles from his income from the Duchy of Cornwall. At present 5% of their costs are met by the Sovereign Grant – the annual funding mechanism that covers the cost of the monarchy and replaced the civil list in 2012. This is the public money they intend to relinquish. Charles funds the remaining 95% from his income from the Duchy of Cornwall.
The couple do not, it seems, intend to relinquish their titles of “royal highnesses”, saying there is precedent for this structure; it applied to current members of the royal family supporting the monarch but also having full-time jobs external to that commitment. The planned new arrangement will still see their security bill in the UK paid for by the taxpayer, however. Their website explains that the couple’s status as “internationally protected people” mandates that armed security is provided by the Metropolitan police. Who will foot the security bill across the Atlantic is not yet clear.
In this new role they said they remained “dedicated to maximising Her Majesty’s legacy both in the UK and throughout the commonwealth”. The couple argue that there is precedent for members of the royal family holding a title and earning an income, though have not given examples. Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie earn an income.
Though they intend to spend time in north America, they said they would continue to use Frogmore Cottage, on an estate that forms part of the larger Windsor estate, “so that their family will always have a place to call home” in the UK. When travelling on official duties overseas their expenses would be met by the sovereign grant. However, the royal family has faced problems in the past with working senior royals. The Earl and Countess of Wessex struggled unsuccessfully to combine high-profile jobs in TV and public relations with royal duties. They were accused of exploiting their positions for commercial gain, before both giving up their businesses and devoting themselves to full-time royal duties in 2002.
Regarding security, they said they were classified as internationally protected people, which mandates the provision of armed security by the UK’s Metropolitan police. The biggest clue that the Sussexes were set to redefine their position came in the TV interview they gave to ITV’s Tom Bradby during their tour of South Africa late last year.
Meghan’s unhappiness was evident when she said, very candidly, of her role: “It’s not enough just to survive something, right. That’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive, you’ve got to feel happy.
“I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I tried, I really tried. But I think that what that does internally is probably really damaging.”
His wife’s concerns have weighed heavily on Harry. He has made no secret of his anger at the British press. Both are pursuing legal actions against newspapers.
Further signs of their wish to carve out new roles were evident when they announced they were splitting from Prince William and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge.
They decamped from Kensington Palace to Windsor. They moved their offices into Buckingham Palace. They split from the Royal Foundation all four of them ran together, and are now about to launch their own foundation.
In their new role, they say, they remain “dedicated to maximising Her Majesty’s legacy both in the UK and throughout the Commonwealth”.
Royal commentators called the decision “unprecedented”. Former Buckingham Palace press officer, Dickie Arbiter, compared it to Edward VIII’s abdication, telling the BBC “that is the only precedent, but there’s been nothing like this in modern times”.
Graham Smith, of campaign group Republic, said it showed the couple “wanting to have your cake and eat it”.
It raised serious questions for the monarchy, he added. “The Queen and Prince Charles appear comfortable with all the trappings and formality of royal duties but it’s increasingly clear that the younger generation are not so keen.”