Why There May Be No ‘Harm’ in Letting Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Up Royal Duties
According to a royal expert, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could still be assets to the monarchy.
The term ‘working royal’ has received renewed interest after King Charles released a guidance letter clarifying Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s royal status. The monarch stated that the pair will live in the UK in a private capacity and are not working royals. However, one royal expert believes that the term needs some revamping and should include the Sussexes.
Writing for The i Paper, Jennie Bond argued that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t want to leave the Firm in the first place. They just wanted to be “let off the Palace lead a little more,” which would have cost taxpayers less money. Finding nothing “wrong” with that particular request, the royal expert noted that Markle and her “dual heritage” could have been a major “asset” to the monarchy, and Harry, with his “cheeky charm,” was high in popularity polls back in the day.
Given these points, Bond claimed that Harry and Markle should have been allowed to continue being working royals, along with pursuing financial independence. “Why shouldn’t they also take on a few royal duties, representing the sovereign on a Commonwealth tour or helping out with occasional charity events at home? Where’s the harm?” she wrote. She mentioned that it was time for a “new definition” for the term ‘working royal’ and that there was nothing “impossible” about their suggested half-in, half-out approach.
While Harry and Markle’s request to be half-in and half-out was categorically denied by Queen Elizabeth, many have opined in the past few months that the pair has managed to achieve just that. They are financially independent, and continue to support the causes and charities they had committed to during their time in the UK. Since their exit, Harry has continued to work on the Invictus Games and WellChild Awards. Earlier this year, Harry travelled to Ukraine and gave a rallying speech calling on all the world leaders. The couple made a privately funded trip to Australia in April this year with stops at the Royal Children's Hospital, Veteran Arts Museum, Scar Tree Walk, Bondi Beach, etc., talking to patients, staff, veterans' kids, first responders, and survivors. Everything about the entire four-day affair screamed royal tour. But it wasn't.
One of the prime examples of royals who sought a financially independent life before Harry was his uncle and aunt, Prince Edward and Duchess Sophie. Bond pointed out that the Edinburhs pursued independent careers, but soon things took a turn for the worse. Edward's Ardent Productions derailed, and Sophie was tricked into talking about the royal family by a reporter disguised as a sheikh. Both eventually had to give up that life and become full-time working royals. However, that may not be Harry and Markle's fate. "Of course, there would always be a potential conflict of interest if Harry and Meghan were half in and half out. But surely they could learn from the past mistakes of their relatives and tread carefully?" she argued.
When it comes to working royals, money and security are two of the biggest concerns, considering they are paid for by taxes. The expert stated that the Sussexes’ working expenses could be covered by the Sovereign Grant while staying financially independent the rest of the time. However, she agreed that the matter of automatic police protection was a “separate issue,” but not “more complicated” than it is now.
