The lucrative reason Prince Harry and Meghan wrecked any chance of a compromise with the Royal Family during 'Megxit', royal author claims
Prince Harry and Meghan allegedly wrecked any chance of a compromise with the Royal Family during 'Megxit' because they wanted the 'freedom to make money and dip their toes into politics', a royal author has claimed.
When Harry and Meghan stepped down as working royals in 2020, hopes were high within the Firm that a compromise could be found.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed their decision to 'step back as senior members' was to become more financially independent and to enjoy privacy from the prying eyes of the media.
At the time it seemed plausible that these wishes could be fulfilled alongside an agreement to represent the Crown at a select number of events every year.
However, according to royal author Valentine Low, any prospect of a soft 'Megxit' was scuppered by the Sussexes over finances.
Writing in his tell-all book Courtiers, Low claims that Meghan's desire to 'earn money for herself' led the couple to abandon their duties entirely.
Low revealed that during discussions about how to reach a happy middle ground - which could please the whole family - multiple scenarios were explored.
These ranged from Harry and Meghan 'having a month a year to do their own thing' to 'spending most of their time privately but doing a select number of royal activities'.
There was apparently a 'positive atmosphere' in the room, with each party believing a deal was close.
The one caveat for the Sussexes continuing royal duties - however small or minor - was that they must stick to the 'normal rules about royal behaviour'.
Crucially, that would mean Harry and Meghan could not 'act or take decisions in order to gain financially'.
Low writes: 'Some suspected that in the end she wanted to make money. And the only way she was going to do that was by leaving her royal life behind and going back to America.'
On top of this, the couple wanted the 'freedom to dip their toes into American politics', which would represent a major breach of royal protocol for a family with a long history of being staunchly apolitical.
'There was no way for the two sides to reach an agreement on that point.
'Crucially, it was the Queen who took the view that unless they were prepared to abide by the restrictions that applied to working members of the Royal Family, they could not be allowed to carry out official duties.'
Indeed, since 'Megxit' the couple have 'dipped their toes' into US politics.
During the 2020 US presidential race, the couple endorsed Joe Biden in all but name in a video address urging voters to 'reject hate speech', while Meghan labelled it the 'most important election of our lifetime'.
The duke said at the time: 'This election I am not able to vote in the US. But many of you may not know that I haven't been able to vote in the UK my entire life. As we approach this November, it's vital that we reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity.'
While Harry and Meghan did not name their favoured candidate, many viewers thought it 'obvious' they were backing Joe Biden over Donald Trump. As such, the Sussexes were accused of 'violating' the terms of their 'Megxit' deal.
In September 2020, Trump said that he was 'no fan' of the duchess after the couple released their video.
In the aftermath, Republicans and other critics called on the Royal Family to strip the couple of their titles, calling their interference 'inappropriate'.
In last year's election, the couple stayed publicly neutral and instead urged Americans to go out and vote.
The statement read: 'Voting is not just a right; it's a fundamental way to influence the fate of our communities.
'At The Archewell Foundation, we recognize that civic engagement, no matter one's political party, is at the heart of a more just and equitable world.
'By participating in initiatives like this, we aim to amplify the message that every voice matters.'
Free from the shackles of royal protocol, Meghan appears more ambitious than ever. The former Suits actress reportedly hopes to become a billionaire by launching a career in media and as a entrepreneur.
In March 2024, she soft-launched American Riviera Orchard before changing the company's name to As Ever.
Announcing the venture, Meghan said: 'This new chapter is an extension of what has always been my love language, beautifully weaving together everything I cherish - food, gardening, entertaining, thoughtful living, and finding joy in the everyday.'
The food products sold by the brand include an assortment of teas, edible flower sprinkles and a £20 jar of honey.
Speaking on an episode of her podcast, Confessions Of A Female Founder, Meghan revealed she has decided to 'just pause' restocking her As Ever brand after previously selling out of products in less than an hour.
Meghan has invested in a number of companies including the vegan coffee brand Clevr Blends and haircare line Highbrow Hippie.
She has also invested in asset manager Ethic, which focuses on sustainable investments.
Harry and Meghan signed a lucrative £18million deal with Spotify in 2020. However despite appearing to be a joint venture, the only show they produced was hosted by Meghan.
In the series, titled Archetypes, Meghan interviewed various celebrities from Serena Williams to Paris Hilton.
The deal was 'mutually ended' in June 2023 with sources claiming the music streaming giant did not see enough content to warrant the full payout.
Earlier this year, the duchess launched her Confessions Of A Female Founder podcast, which saw her chat with female business owners from an array of successful companies.
In a slight career change, Meghan also penned a children's book in 2021 titled The Bench.
It follows the relationship of a father and son through the eyes of the mother and received mixed reviews from critics.
In their television projects, Harry and Meghan have kept a much more united front, but even so, the couple appear to be working separately more often.
Although an official figure was never announced, Harry and Meghan's deal with Netflix was allegedly worth around £80million, and the couple produced multiple shows.
In 2022, the first Netflix series about the Sussexes was released aptly named Harry and Meghan.
While it holds the record for the biggest debut for a Netflix documentary it received mixed reviews.
The pair were also executive producers on the Polo sports documentary series which followed athletes at the US Open Polo Championship.
In 2023, Meghan did not join Harry as an executive producer on the Heart Of Invictus series, although the duke and duchess did appear together in the show.
Meghan's first major solo television project was her lifestyle programme called With Love, Meghan, which saw her team up with a number of famous guests to cook and create homeware products.
Harry was almost entirely absent from the series, aside from a very brief cameo in the last episode.
A source from the show has since reported that neither Harry nor their children will appear in the next season.
Although The Mail On Sunday revealed in May that Harry is planning to launch his own as-yet-undisclosed commercial venture in the next few months, he remains focused on his charity work.
Harry is still involved heavily with the Invictus Games and the foundation which supports the tournament as well as the HALO Trust - a charity working to remove landmines which Princess Diana supported.
The duke has also launched other projects in recent years, including an eco-travel campaign through his non-profit Travalyst, aimed at encouraging sustainable travel.
And in November 2023, he became the global ambassador for Scotty's Little Soldiers - a charity that cares for children whose parents died while serving in the Armed Forces.
Earlier this year, Harry had his most high profile fallout with a charity to date when he and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho resigned from their roles as patrons of Sentebale.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
36 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
ANDREW NEIL: No future UK government has a hope of making things better if it can't reform our incompetent Left-wing, WFH civil service
Former Tory Cabinet minister-turned-magazine editor, Michael Gove, this week revealed that, as Education Secretary, he had to overrule civil servants who wanted to suppress newspaper revelations about in Rotherham. The local council requested the government join it in legal action to prevent The Times from publishing details of its ground-breaking investigation into the scandal. Some senior civil servants in his department advised Gove to join in this bid to muzzle the press.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
BEL MOONEY: Why is it called ‘infanticide' to kill a newborn child, yet it will soon be legal to end the life of a baby when it's fully formed in the womb?
There are times in life when you shake yourself hard, as if wishing to awaken from sleep, only to find that the nightmare is all too present and frighteningly real. So I felt when our representatives in His Majesty's Government, elected MPs in the country we like to call the 'Mother of Parliaments', gave a resounding 'Yes' to making it legal for any woman to pop a pill at any time in a pregnancy – and terminate the baby in her womb.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Angela Rayner accused of waging 'class war' over her plans to cut funding for wealthier Southern areas so more can be spent in the North
Labour was yesterday accused of declaring 'class war' over plans to cut funding for town halls in the South and splurge it in its northern heartlands. Under Angela Rayner 's shake-up, wealthier southern households face a raft of raids to help pay for the giveaway in Labour's traditional working-class areas. These include hikes in council tax bills and fees, such as parking, planning and licensing charges. Town halls in the South also face having to cut existing services because of the raid on their coffers. Under the plans, unveiled yesterday, town halls with 'stronger council tax bases', which tend to be in wealthier parts of London and the Home Counties, will get less Government cash. Those with 'weaker bases', often in the North, will get more under the 'progressive' redistribution model. The Deputy Prime Minister Ms Rayner, who is also the local government secretary, has long argued that an overhaul of council funding is needed. Ms Rayner, the MP for Ashton-under-Lyne, has pointed to people living in the North who pay hundreds of pounds more in council tax than those in wealthier southern areas, calling it 'unfair'. But the plans, which affect councils in England and would begin for three years from next April, sparked a furious backlash. Greg Smith, the Tory MP for Mid Buckinghamshire, said: 'We're already massively over-taxed and council tax has already blown out of all proportion across the country. 'Anything that takes from the South to pay for the North is class war.' And Kevin Hollinrake, the Tories' local government spokesman, said: 'In reality, Labour's appetite for tax hikes knows no bounds. These new backdoor rises in fees and charges are nothing more than stealth taxes – punishing the very councils that have kept taxes low and responsible.' The new proposed formula for allocating money would take into account local needs, based on population, poverty and age data. This will lead to more cash going to deprived areas. And Government grants, which account for about half of councils' income, will now be based on calculations of what local authorities could raise if all areas charged the same rates of council tax based on their housing mix. This will mean steep falls in grant income for wealthier councils. Vikki Slade, the Lib Dems' local government spokesman, said: 'It would be a big mistake for the Government to force councils into unfair council tax rises. 'At a time when councils desperately need support, it beggars belief that Angela Rayner is considering reducing funding entitlements for many, including councils which already receive very little grant funding.' But ministers insist councils won't go bust as it would be phased in over three years, removing a potential 'cliff edge' if the redistribution happened in one go. They also say it will not lead to huge council tax hikes because these are already capped at 5 per cent, and most councils already raise it by this amount every year. However, they could apply to Ms Rayner, who is from Stockport, for special permission to raise it by more than this given the unprecedented pressure their finances could come under. They are also likely to look at cutting back on existing services and hiking other fees to help balance the books. It raises the prospect of councils being handed more powers to raise revenues by hiking such fees. Yesterday's new consultation, which will run until August 15, said ministers will now 'review all fees previously identified and consider where there is the strongest case for reform'. Kate Ogden, a senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said councils in 'leafier suburban and rural areas' in the South will be among the biggest losers. Local government minister Jim McMahon said: 'There's broad agreement across council leaders, experts, and parliamentarians that the current funding model is broken and unfair. 'This Government is stepping up to deliver the fairer system promised in the 2017 Fair Funding Review but never delivered.'
