The Sussexes’ Oz tour is causing ‘a definite sense of irritation in royal circles’

About 20 hours after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived in Australia and completed the “first day” of their “royal tour,” Buckingham Palace rather huffily tried to change the subject back in the UK. The palace was watching helplessly as Harry and Meghan once again generated wall-to-wall coverage in the British and Australian media, and the palace’s answer to that was… confirming some of King Charles and Camilla’s schedule for their US state visit. Barely anyone cared. Royal reporters dutifully paused their Sussex hysteria to report the schedule updates, then went back to screaming. What’s the palace to do? Give in. Let the Sussex hysteria overtake them. The Daily Mail’s Becky English had a big exclusive about the feelings within the royal courts about Harry & Meghan’s adventures in Oz. Please enjoy these highlights, this whole story made me chuckle.

The ‘Sandringham Summit’ of January 2020. Putting aside the inter-family tensions and drama, at the heart of it was an elderly woman faced with the devastating professional and personal loss of an adored grandson. And yet, as much as she loved Harry and was deeply, deeply pained by his decision to walk away from the institution she had devoted a lifetime of service to, Queen Elizabeth’s mind was clear. There was no world whatsoever in which Harry and his wife, Meghan, could or should be allowed to operate as ‘half in, half out’ royals.

The Palace accepts that Harry & Meghan are rich: In recent months, however, an uneasy truce (if indeed it can even be called that) has settled between the parties. The Palace accepts that Harry and Meghan are no longer working royals and have bills to pay. And as long as their actions aren’t too heinous and they keep their barbs to a minimum, then peace may reign. Fast-forward to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s pseudo-royal tour of Australia this week, however, and one half-wonders whether the couple has actually managed to outplay the institution in the end.

A mix of commercialism & royal work, oh my!! But, as has become abundantly clear barely 24 hours into their trip, this is only the tip of the iceberg as far as the Duke and Duchess of the Almighty Dollar are concerned. Hours after they were feted for visiting a hospital in Melbourne, posing with young cancer patients, it was revealed by (the Sussex-friendly) People magazine in the US that the duchess was ‘merching’ the very clothes off her back via a new AI fashion portal [OneOff] that she is now investing in… The current revenue split on a sale is, apparently, 10 to 25 per cent from the retailer to OneOff, which is then shared with the creator. It is not clear how much the duchess expects to make, but the firm said of its deal with Meghan: ‘She cares about fashion and was motivated to invest not only to expand her portfolio, but to help uplift the fashion designers she is a fan of.’

Meghan’s MasterChef Australia appearance: In a short clip released on social media, Meghan can be seen beaming from ear to ear as she strides onto the set, after being introduced as ‘royalty’ and ‘the Duchess of Sussex’. None of this would actually be a problem in royal circles, I am told, if the couple had simply gone to Australia – where Harry’s father, King Charles, let us not forget, is head of state – as private individuals looking to make a fast buck…What makes Harry and Meghan’s approach so egregious to many, however, is the way in which they have organised their trip as ‘cosplay royals’, kicking off with a string of highly choreographed and very traditional royal tour-style public engagements (hospital, tick; sports event, tick; armed forces and wreath-laying, double tick).

Harry’s wreath-laying: The photographs of Harry at the Australian War Memorial in Canberra, medals on display, surrounded by dignitaries and children in school uniform, could easily have been taken on his and Meghan’s official 2018 tour to the country. All of this has cleverly made them headline news just before they embark on a series of presumably lucrative commercial gigs. Even the ‘operational note’ outlining details of the trip sent out to selected journalists bears an uncanny resemblance to those regularly issued by Buckingham Palace. Neither has there been any pushback from their normally quick-to-criticise PR team over the way in which Australian media has taken to describing their time in the country as a ‘royal visit’.

Back to the Sandringham Summit: A source involved in those highly tense negotiations six years ago once told me that the ‘focus’ of the talks, as far as the Palace was concerned, was not on the issue of security or HRHs, but ‘always on Harry and Meghan’s status as working royals and protecting all those concerned’, as well as ‘preserving the commercial-free nature of the institution’. So do their activities in Australia this week, which seem to fail to delineate in any way between their notoriety as former working royals and their new lives as entrepreneurs, push matters to the point of provocation? Well, yes and no.

Royal irritation: While there is a definite sense of irritation in royal circles, there have been no renewed conversations, I am told, about the King stripping them of their titles and Harry’s place in the order of succession (something that the public, at least on social media, have begun to call for loudly again). The Palace fears any suggestion of defenestration would only add to the Sussexes’ sense of injustice, particularly given how long it took for the former Prince Andrew, who is currently being investigated over a serious criminal offence, to be stripped of his.

Roll with the punches, by god: ‘It’s clearly irritating, but the feeling is that the institution just needs to roll with the punches in order to keep moving forwards,’ once source with knowledge of their thinking remarked tactfully. Another added, slightly more testily: ‘I think the general public made up their minds about that pair a long time ago. Probably best to let it lie at that.’

The humiliation of earning their own money! They may have been forced to walk away in abject humiliation that January – their grand plans to ‘collaborate’ with the late Queen as ‘progressive’, financially independent members of the Royal Family in tatters – but have Harry and Meghan eventually got what they wanted by the back door after all? One well-placed source, previously close to the late monarch, told me of the Sussexes’ Australian’s jaunt: ‘While I am not going to speculate on what Her Late Majesty would have thought about all this, I can tell you with utmost certainty that this is exactly what she tried to ensure wouldn’t happen.’

[From The Daily Mail]

All of this talk of the terms of the Sandringham Summit agreement reminds me of two salient details which are never really discussed by royal reporters: in the Sussex-proposed half-in solution, the palace would have had enormous input and control over what Harry and Meghan did and didn’t do, where they went and how they worked. The palace balked at that proposal and said “sink or swim.” Now the institution has spent six-plus years spitting with fury that they don’t have any way to control Harry and Meghan. The second salient detail is that the Windsors themselves violated the terms of the Sandringham Summit agreement within a few months when they pulled the Sussexes’ security. Thus, the agreement is null and void. Cry harder. (Let me also add that Meghan was purposefully excluded from the summit, and she never signed on to any part of it – so why are any of the terms being applied to her at all?)

As for the dilly-dallying of “there have been no renewed conversations, I am told, about the King stripping them of their titles and Harry’s place in the order of succession” – bring it on, for one. Andrew hasn’t been removed from the line of succession, but if they want to do it to Harry for the crime of marrying a beautiful woman and moving out of the UK, so be it. Let the chips fall where they may. But the reason why there’s so much dithering and hand-wringing is actually because the left-behinds use the titles and royal connection as a way to tie themselves to the Sussexes’ star-power. There’s also something hilariously pathetic about “we wouldn’t have had a problem if there were just making a purely commercial visit” – that is demonstrably false given all of the mainstream attacks on Meghan’s participation in the girls’ retreat.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.