Britons have not yet recovered from the Brexit divorce saga that Megxit and continuous fractures in the monarchy decided to make headlines.
In her Christmas message last year, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II had acknowledged that 2019 was a “bumpy year” for the Royal family. Perhaps, she spoke too soon!
Last year in January, the Duke of Edinburgh was involved in a car crash while driving near the Queen's Sandringham Estate in Norfolk. He escaped uninjured, but two women required hospital treatment. Then, in November, the Duke of York, Prince Andrew withdrew from public life and had to step down from his royal responsibilities following a BBC interview about his ties with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Amidst such controversies were the “tensions” simmering between the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton and Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle. Following these tensions and the negative headlines that villified Markle, Prince Harry had issued an official statement where he had referenced his concern at the “racial undertones of comment pieces”. However, some MPs such as Priti Patel have recently come out denying claims of any sort of “racial prejudice” existing within the royal family.
Then was the legal action that Markle lodged against the Mail on Sunday over a claim that it unlawfully published one of her private letters that she had sent to her estranged father. Photographs and tête-à-tête amidst royal sources have indicated the couple's unhappiness at their roles whether during their trip to Australia or in their decision of breaking tradition and spending Christmas in Canada last year. Therefore, it shocks very few that the couple should want to “step back” as senior members of the royal family and become “financially independent”.
In an emergency meeting at Sandringham House, the Queen reluctantly blessed the couple with a transition period and allowed them to split their time between Canada and the UK. A general overview indicates that people respect the couple's need for personal space. But, it is not quite so simple with regards to the expenses incurred on the couple's maintenance. Some taxpayers' are now miffed with over £30mn spent in the couple's royal wedding and a further £3.4mn invested in the re-decoration of their Frogmore Cottage. Furthermore, questions around who shall be funding the security of the couple in Canada still lingers.
On 12th January, The Sunday Times started a readers' poll: 'Should taxpayers fund Harry and Meghan's security if they live abroad?'. The poll closes on January 17th with its results likely to be published two days later. As of today, 14th January, the poll indicates that 89% of the 20,000 readers who participated in the poll disagree with the idea of paying tax for the royal couple's security.
Financial independence sets them free: from press scrutiny, a pretense of taxpayer accountability, family bother. However, intricate details around their responsibilities, finances and Archie's upbringing remain unknown. What this has essentially done is raised questions around the shape of the monarchy, and for the future roles of young royals including Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, the youngest of the Cambridge’s three children.
