The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s extraordinary statement released on Friday night contained a subtle dig at Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, a royal source claimed.
Harry and Meghan put a new statement on their own website hours after announcing they would stop using the word ‘royal’ in their branding after the Spring – and they insisted on keeping their HRH titles even though they would not ‘actively use’ them.
The couple appeared to complain that the palace is treating them differently to other family members and a royal source claims this is a reference to minor royals such as Beatrice and Eugenie.
The statement read: ‘While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.
‘Per the agreement The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.’
A royal source told The Mirror: ‘It’s pretty clear they are referencing minor royals such as Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, which is an odd association to make for two people whose associates were once claiming they had single-handedly modernised the monarchy.’
The Princesses, daughters of the Queen’s second son Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson, are not currently considered to be senior working royals, because they do not carry out duties full time on behalf of the Queen.
Instead the sisters, who are ninth and tenth in line to the throne, both have full time jobs.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s extraordinary statement released on Friday night contained a subtle dig at Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, a royal source claimed
Princess Beatrice, who is known as Beatrice York in her professional life, studied History and the History of Ideas at Goldsmith’s University before taking on roles at boutique private wealth firms.
She also worked as an associate at Sandbridge capital, a small consumer-focused private equity firm, and as a Business development associate at Sony pictures television before resigning in 2014.
Meanwhile Princess Eugenie works as a director for Mayfair-based gallery Hauser & Wirth.
The royal, who like her sister receives no money from the Queen, graduated from Newcastle University in September 2009, after studying English Literature and the History of Art.
After completing her studies, Eugenie moved to New York to work for online auction firm Paddle8, before moving back to London in 2015 to start a career with Hauser & Wirth.
The sisters currently attend a handful of royal events a year, including occasionally joining the Queen at one of her annual garden parties in the summer, and making an appearance with other royals at Trooping the Colour.
The statement released on Friday also said that neither the government nor the Queen herself own the word ‘royal’ internationally – but Harry and Meghan would nonetheless stop using the title.
The statement read: ‘While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word “Royal” overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use “Sussex Royal” or any iteration of the word “Royal” in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.’
A statement issued by the palace last month stated that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer use their HRH titles.
Meghan and Harry’s statement states, however, that they will keep the prefixes His and Her Royal Highness.
They go on to claim that the titles will not be used ‘actively’ when the couple cease being working members of the firm.
Meghan and Harry say: ‘As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their “HRH” prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020.’
A spokesman for the couple first issued a statement to the media about their use of royal titles shortly after 7.30pm on Friday but around 10pm they shared a much longer statement on their website via their Instagram story.
The much-longer statement included the reference to the treatment of other royals, the fact that Harry is still sixth-in-line for the throne, will keep his military rank and that they are still entitled to public protection.
They said they ‘require effective security to protect them and their son’ amid controversy surrounding the estimated £3million – £6million protection bill that would be split between taxpayers in Canada and the UK.
Many sections of the later statement released on their website appear hostile in tone, especially when compared to the earlier statement which was released through a spokesman for the couple.
Many royal experts believe the episode is another PR disaster for the couple.
Richard Fitzwilliams, royal commentator and international editor of Who’s Who, said about the lengthier statement on their website: ‘It is completely unnecessary to add that. Simply because it underlines their differences with the palace in a way that is avoidable.’
Prince Charles’ biographer Tom Bower told MailOnline that the public is ‘finally seeing Meghan’s true nature and motives’.
‘Her comments about the Queen’s decision smacks of spiteful fury,’ he said. ‘I fear it will get worse.’
Harry and Meghan imply that they are being treated differently to other members of the royal family who can ‘seek employment outside of the institution’
The Duke and Duchess issued a statement – a shorter version first issued yesterday evening – which said that while neither the government nor the Queen herself own the word ‘royal’ internationally, they would stop using the title
They said security ‘to protect them and their son’ is necessary amid controversy surrounding the estimated £3million – £6million protection bill that would be split between taxpayers in Canada and the UK
The statement makes it clear that Harry will maintain military titles including: the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader
The statement states that the couple will be allowed to keep their patronages even though they won’t be allowed to carry out ‘official duties’ for the Queen
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have posted an extraordinary statement on their website claiming that the Queen does not own the word royal across the world after they were forced to drop their ‘Sussex Royal’ brand. Pictured: The Duke and Duchess arriving in Canada on Valentines Day
They also confirmed that their office – based in Buckingham Palace – would be closed, a move they said was ‘saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff’.
The couple also reiterate their plans to ‘become privately-funded members of The Royal Family’ and stated that Harry is still sixth in line to the throne.
The statement also states that the couple will be allowed to keep their patronages even though they won’t be allowed to carry out ‘official duties’ for the Queen.
It comes after Meghan was given until Easter to prove her mettle as Royal Patron of the National Theatre, according to a top West End producer.
She was gifted the honour last January by the Queen, who had been the National’s patron for 45 years.
The statement also makes it clear that Harry will maintain military titles including: the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader.
This contradicts an earlier statement from Buckingham Palace which stated that the couple ‘are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments.’
The statement claimed his military appointments will not be used during the 12-month transition period.
The announcement follows the Daily Mail’s revelation this week that Buckingham Palace had told Harry and Meghan not to employ the ‘Sussex Royal’ name when they are no longer working royals.
It is a significant blow for the couple, who have spent tens of thousands of pounds building the Sussex Royal-branded website and creating a hugely popular Instagram feed.
In an unprecedented legal move, the queen has drafted in top lawyers in a bid to enforce the ban.
A string of trademark applications, covering items from clothing and books to stationery and bandanas, were withdrawn.
It comes after MailOnline yesterday revealed that Meghan has told friends there is nothing ‘legally stopping’ her and Harry from using their Sussex Royal name.
Meghan complained to her inner circle that using the name ‘shouldn’t even be an issue in the first place and it’s not like they want to be in the business of selling T-shirts and pencils,’ the insider said.
They added: ‘Meghan said she’s done with the drama and has no room in her life for naysayers, and the same goes for Harry.’
The friend added: ‘Meghan said the global projects they are working on speak for themselves and they chose that name to protect the royal name, not profit off of it.’
But, the insider added: ‘Meghan has told her inner circle that their success is inevitable with or without their current brand name.
‘She said regardless of the name, Harry and Archie have royal blood and no one can take that away. And that as a family, they will always be considered royalty.’
Harry and Meghan are in the process of setting up a new charitable organisation after their split in August last year from the Royal Foundation Charity, which they shared with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
The pair wanted to use Sussex Royal branding but a new name will now have to be found.
Meghan’s friend added: ‘Meghan said the name of their brand pales in comparison to the foundation they are building and the enormously positive impact it will have on people and the environment.’
Losing the name is the latest humiliation for the couple who announced last month they were stepping down as senior royals and moving to North America.
The pair have already agreed to give up their HRH titles for work purposes, and their official patronages on behalf of the queen, including Harry’s honorary military titles.
Complicated negotiations concluded that it was untenable for them to use the word ‘royal’ in their branding.
A spokesman for the Sussexes said: ‘While the Duke and Duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK Government rules surrounding use of the word “Royal”, it has been therefore agreed their non-profit organisation, when it is announced this spring, will not be named Sussex Royal Foundation.
‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use Sussex Royal in any territory post-spring 2020.
‘Therefore trademark applications that were filed as protective measures, acting on advice from and following the same model for The Royal Foundation, have been removed.’
Harry and Meghan first began using Sussex Royal this time last year after they split their household from that of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, known as Kensington Royal.
The Sussexes’ Instagram page, @sussexroyal, has amassed 11.2million followers – the same number of fans as William and Kate’s account.
But the Mail revealed this week that the Queen and senior officials had decided the couple would have to drop their name.
A source told the Mail at the time: ‘In many ways this is inevitable given their decision to step down.
‘But it must surely come as a blow to the couple as they have invested everything into the Sussex Royal brand. The Queen would have had little choice, however.
‘The Sussexes’ original plan – of being half-in, half-out working royals – was never going to work.
‘Obviously, as the Queen has made clear, they are still much-loved members of her family.
‘But if they aren’t carrying out official duties and are now seeking other commercial opportunities, they simply cannot be allowed to market themselves as royals.’
Harry and Meghan announced on Wednesday that they will step down as working royals in less than six weeks and close their Buckingham Palace office.
The statement went on: ‘Based on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s desire to have a reduced role as members of The Royal Family, it was decided in January that their Institutional Office would have to be closed, given the primary funding mechanism for this official office at Buckingham Palace is from HRH The Prince of Wales.
‘The Duke and Duchess shared this news with their team personally in January once they knew of the decision, and have worked closely with their staff to ensure a smooth transition for each of them.
‘Over the last month and a half, The Duke and Duchess have remained actively involved in this process, which has understandably been saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.’
They will take part in six more engagements before formally withdrawing from frontline roles on March 31.
Their final official engagement is expected to be on March 9, when they will join the Queen at Westminster Abbey to mark Commonwealth Day.
The statement also addressed the controversy surrounding the cost of the Duke and Duchess’s security.
Protection for Meghan and Harry is estimated to cost taxpayers in Canada and the UK between £3million and £6million a year, as staff work round the clock two weeks at a time.
The statement read: ‘It is agreed that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son.
‘This is based on The Duke’s public profile by virtue of being born into The Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess’ own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years.
‘No further details can be shared as this is classified information for safety reasons.’
The statement also spoke about the couple’s desire for financial independence.
They said: ‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will become privately funded members of The Royal Family with permission to earn their own income and the ability to pursue their own private charitable interests.
‘The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant.’
The couple insist that it is their ‘preference’ to ‘continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant’
The couple plan to relaunch their careers – potentially earning millions of pounds a year – in a bid to ‘become financially independent’
The line of the succession to the monarchy is: Prince of Wales followed by Prince William, then Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis finally followed by Prince Harry
The statement said that they would not continue to use the word ‘royal’ in their branding, even though they are technically able to do so
The Daily Mail revealed this week that Buckingham Palace had told Harry and Meghan not to employ the name when they are no longer working royals
While the Duke and Duchess plan to champion a charitable foundation, it was feared they could exploit the royal brand to secure lucrative commercial deals (Sussex Royal logo pictured)
The couple’s decision to step down as senior working royals and pursue ‘financial independence’ put a spanner in the Sussex Royal works
Harry and Meghan intend to split their time between North America and the UK.
They are planning to base themselves in Canada, where the duchess lived while starring in TV drama Suits.
The couple are also said to be looking for a property in Los Angeles so they can spend time with Meghan’s mother Doria.
They will no longer use their HRH titles, but they can keep their personal associations with charities and other organisations.
The Sussexes appeared at a conference in Miami earlier this month organised by banking giant JP Morgan in what was their first public sighting since their shock withdrawal as senior royals.
Their appearance at the exclusive summit, where Harry gave a speech, could have earned them up to £775,000.
A source said the duke ‘opened up to the wealthy crowd about the childhood trauma of losing his mother’.
How does what Prince Harry and Meghan Markle say about their future differ from the Queen? The subtle (and not so subtle) contrasts in how both sides view the split
By Jemma Carr for MailOnline
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex released a sour-sounding statement after they were forced to drop their ‘Sussex Royal’ brand.
In the extraordinary statement that appeared on their website, Meghan and Harry claimed the Queen does not have ‘jurisdiction’ over the lucrative term ‘royal’ overseas.
They also appeared to complain that the palace is treating them differently to other family members.
Here, MailOnline examines what the Sussexes said about what they called their ‘Spring 2020 transition’ and examined how it compares to information already released by the palace.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex released a sour-sounding statement after they were forced to drop their ‘Sussex Royal’ brand. Here, MailOnline examines what the Sussexes said about what they called their ‘Spring 2020 transition’ and examined how it compares to information already released by the palace
A statement from Buckingham Palace announcing Megxit in January said:
‘The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their “HRH” prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex.
‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020.’
The palace statement, issued last month, clearly states that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not use their HRH titles.
Meghan and Harry’s statement states, however, that they will keep the prefixes His and Her Royal Highness.
They go on to claim that the titles will not be used ‘actively’ when the couple cease being working members of the firm.
The statement from Buckingham Palace in January said:
‘They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties. With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations.
‘While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant.
‘While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.’
It later adds: ‘It was agreed that The Duke and Duchess will no longer be able to formally carry out “official duties” for The Queen or represent The Commonwealth, but they will, however, be allowed to maintain their patronages (including those that are classified as ‘royal’ patronages).’
The Buckingham Palace statement from January is clear in its assertion that the Duke and Duchess will not receive any public fund for royal duties.
This is repeated in Harry and Meghan’s statement but it starts by stating that the Duke and Duchess did want to represent the Queen in a ‘more limited capacity’.
The Sussexes state that they have been subject to a ’12-month review period’ even though ‘there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution.’
A statement from Buckingham Palace in January said:
‘As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘In relation to the military, The Duke of Sussex will retain the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader. During this 12-month period of review, The Duke’s official military appointments will not be used as they are in the gift of the Sovereign.
‘No new appointments will be made to fill these roles before the 12-month review of the new arrangements is completed.
‘While per the agreement, The Duke will not perform any official duties associated with these roles, given his dedication to the military community and ten years of service he will of course continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity.’
The Duke and Duchess of Sussexes statement lists all the military ranks The Duke of Sussex will retain – even though his military appointments will not be used during the 12-month transition period.
In the statement published on January 18, the Queen said:
‘Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
‘I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘The Royal Family respect and understand the wish of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to live a more independent life as a family, by removing the supposed ‘public interest’ justification for media intrusion into their lives.
‘They remain a valued part of Her Majesty’s family.’
The Sussexes repeat that they are still part of ‘Her Majesty’s family.’
The Queen says the Duke and Duchess have experienced ‘intense scrutiny’ in the past two years.
The royal couple instead choose the words ‘media intrusion’, a harsher and more divisive stance.
A statement from Buckingham Palace in January said:
‘Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘It is agreed that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son.
‘This is based on The Duke’s public profile by virtue of being born into The Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess’ own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years.’
The Sussexes stated that they ‘require effective security’ to protect them amid heightened public scrutiny about who will foot the estimated £3million to £6million bill.
In a statement in January, the palace refused to comment on security arrangements all together.
In a statement, the palace said:
‘Due to the fact that the Duke and Duchess will not be undertaking official engagements in support of the Queen, which are funded by the Sovereign Grant, an office at Buckingham Palace was no longer needed.
‘It is important to note that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be in the United Kingdom regularly.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘Based on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s desire to have a reduced role as members of The Royal Family, it was decided in January that their Institutional Office would have to be closed, given the primary funding mechanism for this official office at Buckingham Palace is from HRH The Prince of Wales.
‘The Duke and Duchess shared this news with their team personally in January once they knew of the decision, and have worked closely with their staff to ensure a smooth transition for each of them.
‘Over the last month and a half, The Duke and Duchess have remained actively involved in this process, which has understandably been saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.’
The Duke and Duchess’s statement is much more emotional than the palace’s initial one.
Harry and Meghan stated that having to shut their London office was ‘saddening’ and explained that they have been actively involved in the process.
They also said that they told they told ‘their team personally’ last month.
In a statement, the palace said:
‘As The Duke and Duchess are stepping back as senior members of the Royal Family, and will work towards financial independence, use of the word ‘royal’, in this context, needed to be reviewed.
‘Discussions are still ongoing, however, a change will be announced alongside the launch of their new non-profit organisation.’
In the statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said:
‘As The Duke and Duchess will no longer be considered full-time working Members of The Royal Family, it was agreed that use of the word ‘Royal’ would need to be reviewed as it pertains to organisations associated with them in this new regard.
‘As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a ‘foundation’, but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally.
‘The creation of this non-profit entity will be in addition to their cause driven work that they remain deeply committed to.
‘While The Duke and Duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘Royal’, it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name ‘Sussex Royal’ or any other iteration of “Royal”.’
It later added: ‘While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.’
The Duke and Duchess agreed that their new charitable organisation would not use the word ‘royal’, following on from the Palace’s statement in January.
They did insist, however, that they did not have to do this as the Queen has no ‘jurisdiction’ over the term abroad.
What does each paragraph of Harry and Meghan’s statement really mean? MailOnline breaks down the couple’s announcement they will drop royal
By Jemma Carr for MailOnline
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex released an extraordinary statement on their website after they were forced to drop their ‘Sussex Royal’ brand.
In the sour-sounding statement Meghan and Harry claimed the Queen does not have ‘jurisdiction’ over the lucrative term overseas.
They also appeared to complain that the palace is treating them differently to other family members.
Here, MailOnline decodes what each carefully-chosen phrase means.
There is ‘not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word “Royal” overseas’:
Harry and Meghan make it perfectly clear that they could use the term ‘Royal’ as part of their branding overseas if they wanted to.
However, following their transition this Spring, they will drop the term on request of the Queen.
The Daily Mail first reported that the Queen had asked Harry and Meghan not to employ the ‘Sussex Royal’ name when they are no longer working royals this week.
It is a significant blow for the couple, who have spent tens of thousands of pounds building the Sussex Royal-branded website and creating a hugely popular Instagram feed.
In an unprecedented legal move, the queen has drafted in top lawyers in a bid to enforce the ban.
A string of trademark applications, covering items from clothing and books to stationery and bandanas, were withdrawn.
It comes after MailOnline yesterday revealed that Meghan has told friends there is nothing ‘legally stopping’ her and Harry from using their Sussex Royal name.
Meghan complained to her inner circle that using the name ‘shouldn’t even be an issue in the first place and it’s not like they want to be in the business of selling T-shirts and pencils,’ the insider said.
They added: ‘Meghan said she’s done with the drama and has no room in her life for naysayers, and the same goes for Harry.’
The friend added: ‘Meghan said the global projects they are working on speak for themselves and they chose that name to protect the royal name, not profit off of it.’
But, the insider added: ‘Meghan has told her inner circle that their success is inevitable with or without their current brand name.
‘She said regardless of the name, Harry and Archie have royal blood and no one can take that away. And that as a family, they will always be considered royalty.’
‘There is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution’:
Harry and Meghan imply that they are being treated differently to other members of the royal family who can ‘seek employment outside of the institution’.
They say the guidelines are different for them a 12-month review period has been put in place.
They do insist, however, that it is their ‘preference’ to ‘continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant’.
‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son’:
The couple also insisted that security ‘to protect them and their son’ is necessary amid controversy surrounding protection costs.
Protection for Meghan and Harry is estimated to cost taxpayers in Canada and the UK between £3million and £6million a year, as staff work round the clock two weeks at a time.
The statement read: ‘It is agreed that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son.
‘This is based on The Duke’s public profile by virtue of being born into The Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess’ own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years.
‘No further details can be shared as this is classified information for safety reasons.’
The couple boldly insist that security is necessary, putting a swift and sudden end stop to the naysayers.
However, they refuse to provide details about what forms this security will take, claiming doing so would be a breach of ‘safety’.
By saying that no more details ‘can’ be shared, the couple imply that they want to give more information but are unable to.
‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will become privately funded members of The Royal Family with permission to earn their own income and the ability to pursue their own private charitable interests’:
Remaining financially independent has been a key Megxit focal point.
The couple plan to relaunch their careers – potentially earning millions of pounds a year – in a bid to ‘become financially independent’.
This will allow them to give up funding from the Sovereign Grant – the money taxpayers give to the Queen every year – and launch themselves onto the international celebrity circuit.
Earlier this year they said they had ‘made the choice’ to ‘no longer receive funding’ from the Sovereign Grant, adding: ‘Their Royal Highnesses prefer to release this financial tie.’
Harry and Meghan’s first post-Megxit appearance earlier this month was at an event held by US banking giant JP Morgan in Miami – an organisation which has been embroiled in a succession of controversies.
Harry is still ‘sixth in line to the throne’:
The statement spells out the fact that Harry is still sixth in line to the throne.
The line of the succession to the monarchy is: Prince of Wales followed by Prince William, then Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis finally followed by Prince Harry.
The statement reads: ‘As the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of The Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex remains sixth in line to the throne of The British Monarchy and the Order of Precedence is unchanged.’
They will ‘be allowed to maintain their patronages’:
The statement states that the couple will be allowed to keep their patronages even though they won’t be allowed to carry out ‘official duties’ for the Queen.
By using the word ‘allowed’ they put the onus on the Queen, who the couple make clear has given her express permission.
It comes after Meghan was given until Easter to prove her mettle as Royal Patron of the National Theatre, according to a top West End producer.
She was gifted the honour last January by the Queen, who had been the National’s patron for 45 years.
Nica Burns – who co-owns The Nimax Group, which comprises six London West End theatres including The Palace, the Apollo and the Vaudeville – has said that the Duchess should not hold the position indefinitely.
Ms Burns said: ‘I think we should give Meghan until Easter to say what she thinks is possible with her patronage.’
‘We have to give her a chance, forget who she is and give her some space.
‘If she is not going to be doing any work with the National, then she should step down. But as she is a role model, we would rather she didn’t.’
The Duke and Duchess’s statement read: ‘It was agreed that The Duke and Duchess will no longer be able to formally carry out “official duties” for The Queen or represent The Commonwealth, but they will, however, be allowed to maintain their patronages (including those that are classified as ‘royal’ patronages).’
Harry ‘will retain the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader’
The statement makes it clear that Harry will maintain military titles including: the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader.
It was earlier revealed that Harry is being stripped of a number of military roles including Captain General of the Royal Marines, the ceremonial head of the Corps.
He will also lose Honorary Air Commandant of Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
Harry will also be barred from wearing his military uniform after stepping back from Armed Forces appointments, although he can still wear his medals at engagements.
The couple’s statement read: ‘In relation to the military, The Duke of Sussex will retain the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader.
‘During this 12-month period of review, The Duke’s official military appointments will not be used as they are in the gift of the Sovereign. No new appointments will be made to fill these roles before the 12-month review of the new arrangements is completed.
‘While per the agreement, The Duke will not perform any official duties associated with these roles, given his dedication to the military community and ten years of service he will of course continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity.
‘As founder of the Invictus Games, The Duke will proudly continue supporting the military community around the world through the Invictus Games Foundation and The Endeavour Fund.’
Royal experts blast Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over ‘spiteful’ and ‘completely unnecessary’ statement after the Queen forced them to drop Sussex Royal brand name – and one commentator fears ‘it will get WORSE’
By Luke Andrews for MailOnline
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been criticised by royal commentators over their ‘spiteful’ and ‘completely unnecessary’ statement after the Queen forced them to drop the Sussex Royal brand name.
One commentator even blasted their words as showing Meghan’s ‘true colours’ and said that he feared things ‘will only get worse’.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said they would drop the word royal before adding that the Queen does not have international jurisdiction over its use.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured on February 25 last year) said in a statement they will stop using the phrase Sussex Royal, even though the palace lacks international jurisdiction
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams, left, said their statement was ‘completely unnecessary’ while Prince Charles’ biographer Tom Bower, right, branded it ‘spiteful’
Royal commentator and former Editor of International Who’s Who, Richard Fitzwilliams, told MailOnline that the statement was ‘completely unnecessary’ as it ‘underlines their differences with the palace in a way that is avoidable’.
‘The idea of putting out a statement which agrees that they can’t use the word royal but contradicts the idea the monarchy can stop them using it,’ he said, ‘they’re basically saying the royals can’t stop them using it, but they won’t be using it’.
‘It has been especially unnecessary to underline it in this way, especially as the agreement will be reviewed after a year.
‘It simply empathises the division that we know that’s there. The tone they’ve taken is that they are unhappy, they’ve made it clear every step of the way.’
Prince Charles’ biographer Tom Bower told MailOnline that the public is ‘finally seeing Meghan’s true nature and motives’.
‘Her comments about the Queen’s decision smacks of spiteful fury,’ he said. ‘I fear it will get worse.’
Harry and Meghan (pictured meeting youngsters at the Commonwealth games in London in July 2018) also said that they will need security for themselves and their son
In their sour statement released yesterday and published to Instagram the Duke and Duchess said: ‘While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.’
In terse words the couple also outlined how they ‘will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son’.
‘The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the sovereign grant,’ they said.
The Duke and Duchess quit the royal family this year to start a new life together in Canada with their son Archie.
They have since made an estimated £750,000 for speaking at an event for bank JP Morgan, and have also faced criticism for allegedly sending their security guards to fetch ethical meals for them.
The Queen has left the door open for the Duke and Duchess. Although Prince Harry will no longer serve in his military roles, these will not be filled, and she has offered to review the deal in a year which leaves room for further re-conciliation.
The sixth-in-line to the throne and his wife are expected to rake in millions as they launch their life outside the royal family on March 31.
Meghan Markle has until Easter to prove that she can continue as Royal Patron of the National Theatre, says top West End producer
By Richard Eden for the Daily Mail
The Duchess of Sussex should have only until Easter to prove her mettle as Royal Patron of the National Theatre, according to a top West End producer.
Meghan Markle, 38, was gifted the honour last January by the Queen, who had been the National’s patron for 45 years.
But in the light of ‘Megxit’, which has seen Meghan and her husband Prince Harry step away from royal duties and relocate to Canada, questions remain over her suitability for the job.
‘I think we should give Meghan until Easter to say what she thinks is possible with her patronage,’ Ms Burns told me at a fundraising gala for the King’s Head’s 50th anniversary.
‘We have to give her a chance, forget who she is and give her some space.
Now impresario Nica Burns, who co-owns The Nimax Group, which comprises six London West End theatres including The Palace, the Apollo and the Vaudeville, has said that the Duchess should not hold the position indefinitely.
The Duchess of Sussex should have only until Easter to prove her mettle as Royal Patron of the National Theatre, according to a top West End producer
Nica Burns, who co-owns The Nimax Group, which comprises six London West End theatres including The Palace, the Apollo and the Vaudeville, has said that the Duchess should not hold the position indefinitely.
‘If she is not going to be doing any work with the National, then she should step down. But as she is a role model, we would rather she didn’t.’
Earlier this week, it was announced that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s official departure from The Firm would begin on March 31.
However, the artistic director of the National Theatre, Rufus Norris, revealed this week that Megxit would not prevent the Duchess from continuing as Royal Patron and all would be ‘business as usual’.
But Ms Burns — whose commercial successes include Chicago The Musical and Harry Potter And The Cursed Child — suggests that if and when Meghan’s U.S. commitments begin to take over, she should do the decent thing and step down.
Adds Ms Burns: ‘If her life is going to take her somewhere else, it will be hard for her to raise awareness and money for the National Theatre.
‘If her new life means she is going back to work, maybe in film, or she’ll have another child, I think the right decision would be for her to say: ‘I have a new life and I can’t continue.’ ‘