Queen Backs Harry, Meghan's Wish for Less-Royal Lives - Page 2
But the financial details are still getting ironed out
- The money: As an example of the "complex matters" mentioned by the queen, the Guardian reports that the palace is consulting with government officials on the constitutional implications of all this, including the allocation of any public funds to the couple or their use of public estates while in the UK. In her statement, the queen says "Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives." A CNN video explains that the couple is at least giving up income from a fund known as the "Sovereign Grant." But will the government pay for their security in the future? Questions like that are still unanswered.
- Still royals? It's not clear whether Harry and Meghan will retain their titles of His Royal Highness and Her Royal Highness, notes the AP in a roundup of lingering questions. They may give them up voluntarily. Because they are withdrawing from most of their royal obligations, the royal family may insist on it. However, the queen did not address the issue Monday, though she emphasized the couple would remain "a valued part of my family." Of note: She referred to the them as "Harry and Meghan" rather than the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
- Analysis: The queen's statement is "remarkably candid and informal," writes Jonny Dymond at the BBC, and the reference to a "transition period" shows that she "sees this as a process, not an event." It's possible the agreements reached this week will be reviewed for months, if not years.
- A contrast: BuzzFeed has an interesting headline comparison of how British tabloids gave Kate Middleton and Prince William glowing coverage on certain things (from childraising to financial matters) and highly critical coverage to Harry and Meghan over the very same things.
(Read more Royal Family
My Take on This Story
Show results |