Prince Charles’ Desire For ‘Slimmed-Down Monarchy’ Strengthened, May Include Only His Children, Grandchildren (Dec 2019): . . . Prince Charles may propose major changes for the royal family in the near future. While speaking with The Sun, Brittani Barger, deputy editor of Royal Central, said that Prince Andrew’s recent scandal has most definitely strengthened Prince Charles’ desire for a slimmed-down monarchy.
Since the Duke of York is now out of the picture, and it is unlikely that he or his two daughters would take on royal duties ever again, the monarchy may eventually only consist of Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince Harry, their wives and their children. While speaking with Sky News, Labour leader Jeremy Corbin said [...] When asked if he thinks the royal family is indeed too big, Corbin said that he thinks there are a lot of people attached to the royal family.
- - -
January 10: . . . the Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge were said to be adopting a pragmatic approach to [...Prince Harry & Megan's...] bid to become hybrid royals.
Meghan flies back to Canada; Prince Harry in ‘crisis’ talks with Prince Charles (Jan 10): Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has flown back to Canada following the bombshell announcement that she and her husband, Prince Harry, are "stepping back" from royal duties, prompting intensified speculation that the couple will make Canada their part-time home.
[...] Robert Lacey, a royal biographer and author of “The Crown: The Inside History” [...] “Canada is the ideal base for the two-way royal work they have in mind,” he said, speculating that Harry and Meghan may try to launch something in the model of the Obama Foundation. He added that “in post-Brexit Britain, it could make sense to strengthen ties across the Atlantic.”
He said that Prince Charles, the queen’s eldest son, had previously signaled that he wants a slimmed-down monarchy if and when he takes the throne. “Some European royal families get by with four people,” Lacey said, adding that those numbers would not work for Britain, where there is “such an appetite for royalty.” But Charles nonetheless wants to cut down on the number of working royals, Lacey said, and part of that plan includes expanding roles for William, who would focus on efforts domestically, and Harry, who would concentrate on members of Britain’s Commonwealth of Nations. “But half a Harry is better than no Harry, and if Meghan can be kept onside and brought in, that’s all for the good,” he said.
[...] Harry and Meghan attempted to explain how they see their new roles on a new website, SussexRoyal.com, which promotes “supporting community” above “serving the monarchy” or “strengthening the Commonwealth.” They said they wanted to continue to work with the charities they have supported, which focus on issues such as female empowerment and mental health, and would also seek to set up a new charitable entity.
The Sussexes said they would like to achieve “financial independence.” But there are more questions than answers. How will they earn money? Will they continue to receive money from Prince Charles ... Where will they live in North America? (MORE - details)
Move by Prince Harry and Meghan signals a slimmed-down future: . . . At present 5% of their [Prince Harry & Megan's] 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 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.
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. [...] 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...
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. (MORE - details)
Since the Duke of York is now out of the picture, and it is unlikely that he or his two daughters would take on royal duties ever again, the monarchy may eventually only consist of Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince Harry, their wives and their children. While speaking with Sky News, Labour leader Jeremy Corbin said [...] When asked if he thinks the royal family is indeed too big, Corbin said that he thinks there are a lot of people attached to the royal family.
- - -
January 10: . . . the Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge were said to be adopting a pragmatic approach to [...Prince Harry & Megan's...] bid to become hybrid royals.
Meghan flies back to Canada; Prince Harry in ‘crisis’ talks with Prince Charles (Jan 10): Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has flown back to Canada following the bombshell announcement that she and her husband, Prince Harry, are "stepping back" from royal duties, prompting intensified speculation that the couple will make Canada their part-time home.
[...] Robert Lacey, a royal biographer and author of “The Crown: The Inside History” [...] “Canada is the ideal base for the two-way royal work they have in mind,” he said, speculating that Harry and Meghan may try to launch something in the model of the Obama Foundation. He added that “in post-Brexit Britain, it could make sense to strengthen ties across the Atlantic.”
He said that Prince Charles, the queen’s eldest son, had previously signaled that he wants a slimmed-down monarchy if and when he takes the throne. “Some European royal families get by with four people,” Lacey said, adding that those numbers would not work for Britain, where there is “such an appetite for royalty.” But Charles nonetheless wants to cut down on the number of working royals, Lacey said, and part of that plan includes expanding roles for William, who would focus on efforts domestically, and Harry, who would concentrate on members of Britain’s Commonwealth of Nations. “But half a Harry is better than no Harry, and if Meghan can be kept onside and brought in, that’s all for the good,” he said.
[...] Harry and Meghan attempted to explain how they see their new roles on a new website, SussexRoyal.com, which promotes “supporting community” above “serving the monarchy” or “strengthening the Commonwealth.” They said they wanted to continue to work with the charities they have supported, which focus on issues such as female empowerment and mental health, and would also seek to set up a new charitable entity.
The Sussexes said they would like to achieve “financial independence.” But there are more questions than answers. How will they earn money? Will they continue to receive money from Prince Charles ... Where will they live in North America? (MORE - details)
Move by Prince Harry and Meghan signals a slimmed-down future: . . . At present 5% of their [Prince Harry & Megan's] 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 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.
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. [...] 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...
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. (MORE - details)