London: The speculation about Prince Harry and his family has reached a point where King Charles has felt the need to step in and make a few things very clear.
In a strongly worded letter sent to Harry’s team as well as every major institution – from Parliament to the military – the Palace set out the ground rules following the couple’s return to British soil.
Its tone and wide distribution is being framed by some royal commentators as a stern and deliberate reminder to the Duke of his non-royal status – almost a rebuke from his father.
“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,” the letter sent out by Lord Benyon, the head of the royal household, reads.
“It is well known that in January 2020 the Duke and Duchess stepped down from undertaking representative duties on behalf of The Sovereign, and are no longer working Members of The Royal Family.
“This position, distinct from the State and Royal duties undertaken by the working Royal Family, and with the personal latitude it brings the couple in respect of financial independence and protection of their privacy as they would wish, will continue to be fully respected.”
It emphasised that any charitable work by the couple “is a personal matter for them both and undertaken in their private capacity.”
“In short, their position is akin to private citizens with commercial and charitable interests.”
They will not be known as His and Her Royal Highness because they are not considered working members of the royal family, the letter stated.
Lord Benyon also issued instructions that questions about the charitable and commercial activities of the Sussexes were to be sent to their team, not the royal household.
Prince Harry and his family arrived back in Britain late last month, six years after quitting royal duties and moving to the United States.
This letter is now in the public domain because the palace knew it needed to be sent out widely across government and knew it would be leaked. Knowing that some in the press might portray this as a “secret” plot against Harry, palace officials sent the letter to the media.
Lord Benyon also made sure the letter was shared with the Sussexes. This does not have an impact on their security arrangements, which are being decided separately by a Home Office group known as RAVEC, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures.
The key point is that Harry and Meghan are not being stripped of any titles. Harry remains a prince and the couple remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. They have their own charitable activities, especially the Invictus Games, and their own commercial activities, such as Meghan’s line of food, candles and Californian sparkling wine.
There should be no surprise that Harry remains outside the working ranks of the royal family even though he is back home. This is exactly what he has sought over the past six years and in recent weeks. When news broke that he would return to England, his aides told the media he would remain a private citizen.
Buckingham Palace also briefed the media that it was impossible for Harry and Meghan to be “half in and half out” of the working royals while running their sidelines as private citizens.
Even so, the return of the Sussexes has set off some intense speculation and commentary about their status, which explains why the palace felt there had to be a new letter to remind everyone of the old arrangements.
Donald Trump, for instance, said last week that he was happy the couple chose to leave America. “I’m happy about it. I was not a fan,” he said. “And I thought they treated the royal family with great disrespect.”
Then he added his dislike for the way Meghan acted. “I thought she was terribly disrespectful to the Queen, to King Charles. I don’t know. Maybe I’m different. I wouldn’t have taken them back.”
Trump mangled the facts, of course. The key point about the return home was that the royal family was not taking them back. The Sussexes were not being restored as working royals because they did not want the work and the palace saw no way to make the arrangement possible.
Some of the commentary about the return has also veered into slightly mad circles of speculation about Harry’s formal status. In one article, Camilla Tominey of the London Telegraph asked why Harry should keep his title as a duke when he condemned “the firm” he had left behind?
The scandal surrounding Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor means there is now a clear pathway to removing a duke’s titles. There is no reason, however, to apply that process to Harry.
Harry’s crimes, as least in the eyes of his critics, are that he criticised other members of the family, did a Netflix special with his wife, wrote an autobiography, launched legal action against the press and generally spoke his mind in ways that upset others.
So, should he lose his dukedom for exercising his freedom of speech?
With so much of this feverish talk around, the palace was being asked for clarity around the Sussex family. The Lord Chamberlain has delivered the clarity on the King’s behalf. And, surprise, the old arrangements still apply.
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.
David Crowe is Europe correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.Connect via X or email.From our partners
Discover more from PressNewsAgency
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.