The Sussexes’ new charity will have ‘an international arm,’ with close US links


BRITAIN LONDON RAF 100TH ANNIVERSARY

The Royal Foundation is being broken up. It will still exist as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s signature charity, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be starting their own foundation by the end of the year. I have a feeling that the language of the split announcement was worked on by both communications teams quite rigorously. The formal reason for the split is still “William will be king and Harry won’t!” But of course, people want more information. Katie Nicholl at Vanity Fair had… slightly more info, but no real dirt. In fact, I think it’s interesting that even the most sycophantic Cambridge-sympathizing reporters haven’t really found a way to spin this as Harry and Meghan’s fault. It must have finally been clear that William orchestrated this breakup. Some highlights from this VF piece:

The foundation split: The split is described by sources close to the royals as a “natural and organic progression” now that Prince Harry is married and has his own family. and given that the Sussexes and the Cambridges have “very different ambitions.” “They are both excited about the future,’ says an aide about the decision, which is said to be harmonious, with all of the “Fab Four” fully behind the move.

How the Foundation changed: “When the foundation was formed it was for two boys in their early 20s. Their lives have changed considerably. Everything has been brought into a clearer focus now and there’s a new direction,” an aide told Vanity Fair. “This is a natural development. It’s a starting gun for some ambitious projects for the future and I think everyone is really excited. There is plenty of work to go around and the two foundations will work closely together.”

Different trajectories: Palace aides are keen to stress that the creation of a new charity forum for the Sussexes is not because of any royal rift or distance between the couples, but in order for William and Kate and Harry and Meghan to pursue different trajectories. While William is being prepared for his future as King with Kate as his Queen consort, Harry and Meghan plan to be international royals pursuing philanthropic causes close to their hearts.

Both of the couples’ foundations will have an American arm: It is likely that the Sussexes new charity forum will have an international arm, and Meghan is keen to have close links with the U.S. “American Friends” will remain the American version of the Royal Foundation, while the Sussexes will be looking to create a new US arm for their work. “They will likely have some sort of presence in the U.S. In all the work they’ve done to date, they’ve had a global outlook,” adds a source.

What the Sussexes will be working on: The Sussexes will put the spotlight on the issues that matter to them. As well as conservation issues, Harry will continue to focus on veterans through his involvement with the Invictus Games, his pledge to help clear the world of landmines, his very personal AIDS mission and his charity Sentebale. Meanwhile sustainable tourism is another area he is looking at. Meghan, who has four royal patronages, is keen to focus on vulnerable women around the world and continue her work with the Grenfell community. Both want to work in Africa and will be traveling to southern Africa this fall.

[From Vanity Fair]

“Palace aides are keen to stress that the creation of a new charity forum for the Sussexes is not because of any royal rift or distance between the couples…” LOL. That means that there hasn’t been any NEW rift, because the rift has been there for a while between Harry and William. I feel like we keep hearing about how William is super-supportive of all of these breakups, like how William “supported” giving the Sussexes their own household, etc. I feel like that’s William’s keen spin on what has been obvious to Charles and the Queen for a year and a half: the Sussexes are the real stars, and William has to put on a show of “supporting” them publicly so he gets credited with their successes. Then in private, he plots to find a way to exile them to Africa. Anyway! Yeah, whatever. The split was always going to happen and it should be fine, but I’m sure the weekend papers will find a way to slam Meg and Harry. Especially for the “American arm” thing.

Trooping the Colour Ceremony, London, UK - 8 Jun 2019

Britain's Prince William, Duke of Cambridge (R) and Britain's Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex,  host a reception to officially open the 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference at St James' Palace in London on October 10, 2018. - The 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference is the fourth such international conference bringing together heads of state, ministers and officials from nearly 80 countries, alongside NGOs, academics and businesses, to build on previous efforts to tackle this lucrative criminal trade. The conference is being hosted by the UK Government from 11th – 12th October 2018.

Photos courtesy of WENN and Avalon Red.

return home

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

105 Responses to “The Sussexes’ new charity will have ‘an international arm,’ with close US links”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    I’m going to take a shallow moment here before I read the post – I don’t remember what I said about that outfit last year, but the more I see it in pictures the more I really like that McQueen coatdress Kate is wearing, and that fascinator with it. It was a nice look for her (even though she has that coatdress in at least one other color LMAO.)

    • Redgrl says:

      Ha! I thought the same thing about that coat dress!

      • (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

        Doesn’t she have it in cream (Louis’ christening? Or was it Char’s?) and in pale yellow for the Sussex’s wedding? What a waste of money, no matter HOW much you like the pattern.

      • Becks1 says:

        @TheOG – hahahaha it depends on who you ask. I am of the opinion that she only has it in two colors – this ice blue and the cream from Charlotte’s christening (that I think she wore to the Sussex wedding.)

        But it was kind of funny when she came out wearing this last year, because Kate fans couldn’t decide what route to take. they had insisted for two months that the dress for the Sussex wedding was yellow, not cream, and a new dress. Now she has it in a third color, that’s actually not that different from the original (just a pale blue instead of a cream). Is she just the most classic duchess ever? Does she just know what she likes? or is a waste of money to have the same coatdress in three colors? OR is it only two colors?!?!?!?!?!?!

        I agree with you that its a waste of money to have the exact same thing in different colors, but at least it is a good look on her, as opposed to some of those Wickstead dresses she has in different colors.

    • Seraphina says:

      I agree that the dress looks good, but that’s because the too of the dress is very flattering on her. And I think that is what sets it apart.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes! that is a very flattering neckline for her. And the dress works well with the brooch for RAF.

        I’m just saying, I know I can be critical of her, lol, so I feel I need to speak out when I like something too haha.

      • Seraphina says:

        Becks1, I really would love to see her play around with different cut tops. And since her torso is thin and straight, that really helps carry the look.

  2. Sofia says:

    Katie N? Yeah I’ll wait for official details

  3. lily says:

    this woman cannot catch a break, it’s gross.

    • Britt says:

      The obsession is real when it comes to her.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      Obsession and plain, old fashioned, straight foreward *Jealousy* and *envy*. And it eats them up inside like a strong, corrosive acid.

    • Lorelei says:

      You just know that all of the articles bashing Meghan & Harry for this (Twitter is already filled with outrage) will completely ignore the fact that the Cambridges have ALWAYS had an “American arm” of their foundation. And that they’ve attended glitzy fundraisers attended by celebrities in both Los Angeles and New York just within the past few years.

      • Megan says:

        Gifts are only tax deductible if they are made to a US charity. Incorporating in the US is essential if they want to do any serious fundraising here. The issue is a nothingburger.

      • Blue Orange says:

        Yes and by raising the profile of the Royals in the US, they’re drumming up business for the UK too.

  4. Seraphina says:

    I agree with the thought that this is a natural progression. Yes that we can see. But I smiled when reading: both couples will be taking on more ambitious projects. Ambitious, in regards to work, is not really a word I associate with Wills and Kate. Megs and Harry, yes.

    • C-Shell says:

      Yep. I posted yesterday, too, that it will be interesting to see which foundation accomplishes the most going forward. I’ve placed my bets.

      • Seraphina says:

        Yes, me too. The sad part is that if the Sussexes do more and outshine the Cambridges, the wrath of Wills will be quite a blow. I really think he doesn’t like to be outshined and that’s why Kate tends to blend into the scenery. Plus, if rumors are true and he and Charles don’t get along, I believe it’s because they are so much alike. And Charles didn’t like Diana’s star power since it eclipsed him. Just my thoughts.

      • C-Shell says:

        In the event the Sussexes outperform the Cambridges (predictably), and I believe Harry & Meghan will do their own thing regardless of Will’s ruffled feathers, Will might be curtailed by backlash for petulant and retaliatory moves against them. Times and social media have really changed the dynamic, I think. We’ve seen some of that lately. And, some of the shine is off Will with the Rose Hanbury story (which won’t be the only one, past or future) and his ham-handed handling of the press. The barracudas are schooling. Just my opinion based on nothing more than gossip, so here’s a grain of salt to season it with.

    • Lorelei says:

      Yeah I’d like to know what William & Kate’s “ambitions” are, other than ascending the throne so they can do even less work with no one to answer to.

  5. PrincessK says:

    This makes absolute sense. I believe that wealthy US individuals and organisations are lining up to donate to Sussex charities, in exchange for a luncheon or dinner party thrown in the US. The National Theatre has an American link that needs to be tapped. Go Sussexes!

  6. Eliza says:

    I still think none of them should have foundations. Cambs and Sussexs. People donate to royal fund, then their money goes to the staff of the foundation or sits there (look at their books they leave some funds untouched), then if/when it goes to a charity it has the same problem of going to pay for their staff before the actual cause. They should continue to get people to donate directly to actual causes to minimize overhead.

    • Lolo says:

      I mean, I wish I could find a job that I could completely make up, only do what I want to do when I want to do it and still be paid lavishly from public funds in the form of expensive home renovations (on a “gifted” home), unlimited clothing budget, and luxury vacations, but, weirdly, nothing like that is listed on Indeed.

    • Hoopjumper says:

      That’s a really interesting point. Do these foundations not do their own programming? I assumed so but now realize that may be wrong.

      Celebitches who know: Other than raising orgs’ visibility (and hopefully bottom lines), which the royals should be doing anyway, how do either of these foundations benefit these programs? It’s clear how they benefit the royals…

      • OriginalLala says:

        I have the same questions – whats the value of all these royal foundations/charities? Why not partner with existing charities (which they already do to some extent?) They are clearly PR driven, but what is the overhead like? are they taking away money that would otherwise go to actual charities?

      • Megan says:

        The foundation has its own programming and makes direct grants. It’s how most foundations operate.

      • Blue Orange says:

        The foundations do have their own programming and do raise money for charities but it would be extremely interesting to look at the real figures and see just how much of that money goes to charities vs how much is spent on ‘fundraisers’ such as lavish parties.

      • Eliza says:

        Per the UK charity commission, this foundation does its work 2 ways 1) giving grants to organizations/charities, and 2) acts as an umbrella organization. It does not run any charities or give personal grants to individuals.

        In 2018, there were 42 employees (most IT brought in for updates) which account for 1.5million pounds spent compared to the 7.8m pounds total income raised/earned(invested) that year. So there’s a 20% loss to employee costs, and another 20% or so at the actual charity’s overhead the money eventually might go to. If you want to give to charities, give directly to reputable organizations and avoid umbrellas to allow more bang for your buck.

      • Powermoonchrystal says:

        The umbrellas have overhead costs, so potentially you are giving more, if given directly to the charity. But then donors would really need to do their homework since not all charities are the same, some are not very well managed, and scams are a potential threat. That is the benefit of a foundation that is supposed to sort out the bet charities where donors’ money can make a difference. If a donor is truly committed, they can do this homework and make their money go a long way.

    • Blue Orange says:

      THIS EXACTLY! I wish more people understood this.

  7. Becks1 says:

    QUEEN CONSORT!!!! I win the scavenger hunt!

    Seriously though, like we have said on here numerous times, and Kaiser says – of course this was going to happen. and I even think the timing makes sense since they split up their households. But I find the spin around it really interesting.

  8. Enn says:

    As an American, I don’t think we need any interest from the royals when it comes to the charity and nonprofit sector, let alone two royal foundations.

    Are they going to be political and support the ACLU, SPLC, PP, Everytown, etc.? The causes we need focus on at a high level are the human rights violations by this administration, rampant gun violence, the opioid epidemic, the war on women’s and reproductive rights, the insidious stripping of LGBTQ+ rights, and the systematic oppression of black and brown people. What are any of the royals going to do to help us with those?

    • Eliza says:

      The royals “shine a light”: that’s it. This month the Sussexs Instagram only follows LGBTQ+ people, charities, for-profit organizations in honor of Pride Month. Sadly, that’s about all they can do. They’re not in the trenches, they point at things, wave, and cut ribbons and unveil plaques. If Sussex shed their title they could get political and get down and dirty for their causes but I don’t think they will go that route.

    • Flora Kitty says:

      +1

    • Arnk says:

      Absolutely agree. This makes no sense. There are many countries in the Commonwealth they would work with, why the US?

      And I’m always first in line to criticise Harry (I just don’t like him), but I really liked that he supported the launch of Made by Sport, and I think that would be a good way for them to start their work after the separation.

      • Becks1 says:

        The article does say that the Royal Foundation does currently have an American version (American Friends), so if the Sussex Foundation has one as well that wouldn’t be unusual or different.

      • Megan says:

        It’s a fundraising office. Gifts are only tax deductible if they are made to a US charity.

      • Megan says:

        I just pulled the public records. In 2017 (most recent publicly available), American Friends raised $745,000, had no paid staff, and a board made up of super wealthy people.

      • Myra says:

        Because the U.S. has the money and those with the money want to rub noses with the Royals. Brits should be happy that American dollar will support British charities!

    • Emerald Eyes says:

      The “American Arm” will be the weak arm. It’s likely they’ll focus mostly on the home front and the Commonwealth with regard to actual charitable efforts.

      The Duke of Edinburgh’s Foundation has an “American” arm as does the Royal Foundation, but they aren’t the focus. The American “Arm” in those cases has a diplomatic function which is primarily to spread good PR about Britain. It is likely the Sussex Foundation will follow that paradigm.

    • Blue Orange says:

      As others have said, they’re not intending to aid charities in the US. They’ll be there to raise funds for British & commonwealth charities and for the sake of PR.

    • I tend to agree. I love following both couples and all of the pomp and pageantry involved with the whole “royal” thing. As an American I don’t have cash on the table so the “work” angle doesn’t bug me ( work! 😂😂😂 ). I digress …
      Why on Earth should they focus on things beyond the Commonwealth and UK???

  9. Redburgandy says:

    “Both want to work in Africa and will be traveling to southern Africa this fall.”

    There is currently a nationwide discussion taking place in Britain about whether the country should be sending privileged white people to Africa to highlight the continents problems. This came to a head during Comic Relief when a black MP complained about the show parachuting white celebrities to Africa surrounded by poor black people and what sort of message this is sending. It was even being discussed in parliament just this week. Given the history of the British Royal family and colonialism, I am surprised why they think this is such a good idea.

    • Lolo says:

      But they are “roving royals”, haven’t you heard? Can’t be roving royals if you don’t rove! Sorry to be glib, I completely agree with you and even though I follow the fashion, etc. I think all of these trips are basically vanity projects for the people undertaking them.

    • Julie says:

      Yeah, this has the potential to be a very, very bad look. Especially since Harry’s (and also William’s) behaviour when he’s vacationed in African countries has always been that of a rich kid playing out a pathetic little romantic fantasy of white colonialist. The way he and William and all their rich white buddies act in Africa is gross, and the conversation has finally reached the point where if they try it again they’ll actually get the blowback they’ve long deserved.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Harry’s main charity, Sentebale, was co-founded by Prince Seeiso of Lesotho. They work fully together on it, not with Harry as some interloper. Go watch some videos of Seeiso talking about Harry. He loves the guy and what he’s helping to do for Lesotho.

      • Salvation says:

        Thank you @notasugarhere. Plus, all clean accessible water initiatives on the entire continent of Africa, Meghan’s included, have been very, very well received. Also, ALL fight against HIV/AIDS initiatives on the entire continent of Africa have been priceless in terms of infection reduction through education, awareness, free condoms etc, availability of ARVs. In addition, Angelina Jolie has done a lot for the UNHCR in terms of advocacy, fundraising to assist in aids to feed, cloth and made healthcare accessible to refugees wherever they may be, and also to reduce displacement of people’s from Thiers homes due to wars mostly initiated by the US etc. So, yes these people and their charity organizations are very helpful. Dissing them just because one hates Harry or is just….yeah..it’s just

  10. Mumbles says:

    I agree that their charity should focus on issues in the UK and the Commonwealth nations. There are plenty of wealthy people and charities in America and every vulgar megarich American social climber will be glomming onto them. Think of a bunch of American Jessica Mulroney types. Shudder.

    And I wince every time “Africa” is mentioned in these articles as if the entire continent is just one entity.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      She’s American though. Being married to a royal doesn’t change that fact.

      Plus, the BRF as a whole benefits from their enhanced profiles in America, let’s be honest about it.

    • Jumpingthesnark says:

      Um, What is “gross” about Jessica Mulroney? Do you not like that she and Megan are friends? Plus, she is Canadian.

      • marjorie says:

        Like it or not, Jessica Mulroney is a friend of Meghan and a very close one at that.
        She is well-connected and has done well for herself financially but she also does a fair share of charitable work. What’s gross about that?

        Edit: My comment was in response to Mumbles.

    • PrincessK says:

      Rich Americans are more generous with their wealth than rich Brits, plus there are more of them. Rich Americans, through the Sussexes can help directly and indirectly both British and Commonwealth charities. Also there are lots of poor and underprivileged communities of people in the US, and if the Sussexes can shine a light and raise money for them, where is the problem?

  11. Britt says:

    The split was necessary and needed. I’m sorry but I’m frankly tired of the excuses people give the Cambridge’s because they lack passion and drive and both are quite frankly boring and bland. The only thing I keep hearing is that they’ll be king and Queen as if that’s supposed to carry them for the next 10 years. That excuse won’t get them that far especially when you look at Charles and his endeavors. The media knows Harry and Meghan branching out and expanding is scary to them because they have no information and no access. The fear mongering and double standards toward and about Harry and Meghan is downright eye roll worthy. Meghan has people scared because she’s not an ornamental arm piece and isn’t kissing the media’s behind to get them to love her.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Britt I honestly wonder if things will change when Charles is King. Will he continue to let them skate by like they are now? Is he only keeping his mouth shut to keep the peace while his mother is still around? Or is he so scared of retaliation from William (withholding the kids) that he will let him get away with whatever he wants? It will be interesting to watch it all play out in the coming years.

      I bet that Camilla has PLENTY to say about William and Kate behind closed doors.

      • Royalwatcher says:

        I wonder how long Charles will wait to grant William the Prince of Wales title. Will he wait a while, to try to make some sort of point (assuming he is unhappy with their current workload)? That will be interesting to see.

  12. perplexed says:

    What does being an “international royal” mean? Their intent is probably good, but the term sounds funny.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Maxima, Mary, Letizia, Charlene, Mette-Marit, Mathilde. All of these royals do plenty of work outside of their home nation. Some with the UN, Charlene with her own international water safety foundation.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I forgot to add Queen Sylvia of Sweden’s international anti-sex trafficking charity, The World Childhood Foundation.

  13. celialarson12 says:

    I am with Kaiser. I am waiting for the weekend to see how much mud has been collected in the last couple of days to sling at the Sussexes. Normally it comes the night between saturday and sunday. If it does not come, then the Cambridges must not want somethings to be highlighted.
    IMO the constant bringing up of the future king and consort roles, portrays such an inadequency and insecurity in the couple the likes of which I have never witnessed. Which person keeps on being described in terms of what they will be in 15 to 20 years to come? How come we do not describe Charles or the crown couple of Denmark or Victoria of Sweden in those terms. You do not hear about Victoria preparing, restricted……. She just does her work.

    • Britt says:

      It’s becoming clearer that the media and some in the palace are seriously threatened by Harry and Meghan. The funny thing is that she hasn’t even begun her full endeavors and you would think she was running for President. It’s odd. This idea that Harry and Meghan have to take a back seat because the heir and his wife won’t step up is hilarious. The media won’t admit that the man is lazy and has no charisma.

      • Lorelei says:

        I can see why the British media sees her as a threat. She’s shown that they aren’t needed — she has friends in high places (who can talk to People magazine if they want) and now people go directly to Instagram for content from the Sussexes. The royal reporters are basically obsolete and they blame her for speeding it up. But instead of trying to work with her, they lash out.

  14. MrsBanjo says:

    “Meanwhile sustainable tourism is another area he is looking at.”

    I like this. Even shining a light on how damaging tourism is for the environment and the cultures indigenous to the areas often toured would be a good thing. One of my dearest friends is indigenous Hawaiian and it’s so frustrating for him how entitled tourists are – to the point where they’re even willing to break laws for that “perfect location and picture.”

    • Eliza says:

      Yes. Entitled but not everyone is. I was in Lisbon on the train a few weeks ago, it was so clean compared to my NYC/Boston standards. And I found out why… A man had street vendor popcorn, dropped some, bent over to pick it up put it in his pocket to throw out later. Can you imagine that in NYC? I see people “accidentally” leave their coffee cups and beer bottles behind, i cant imagine someone pocketing 2 kernels of litter from the floor on a packed train. People have to care, or at least be afraid of fines.

      But for Hawaii, tourism is their number one income source, so it’s complicated. I think stricter environmental enforcements (like larger tickets for rubbing your butt on sacred stones, JLaw, and for littering) should be made to incentivize good behavior. Also selling limited tickets a day to more sensitive areas to limit the human toll.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I was recently reading about the increase in climbers to Everest and the effects its having on the landscape – apparently local guides regularly have to clean up after climbers/campers who leave their sh!t behind (rubbish and the like). I was saddened to read that – esp given the news coverage over the increase in deaths. Everest is not for the faint hearted with even the most experienced climber struggles with it.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes, I was reading an article a few weeks ago about how bad travel in general is for the environment. Not just in terms of the carbon footprint (flying long distances etc) but also that many of these popular tourist attractions were not meant to withstand the number of visitors they are getting. Cities can’t keep up, natural attractions like the Grand Canyon cant keep up, etc. It was interesting. It’s not even about the tourists being “bad” when they’re there (although that is certainly a concern.) but some areas just cant keep up.

        Here:
        http://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/crowds-tourists-are-ruining-popular-destinations/590767/

  15. Citresse says:

    None of this break up surprises me….the brothers are very different in every way.
    I think the conflict between Harry and William intensified during MM’s pregnancy. I have a feeling the number one issue is William didn’t defend Harry and Meghan from ongoing snobbery from certain members of the aristocracy.

    • Britt says:

      I mean, you are against cyber bullying but you’re pregnant sister in law, who is biracial, is hounded and has to deal with racism and xenophobia and you say nothing. I think William could’ve earned a lot of respect had he at least called that out. Hell the royal family as a whole should’ve done something because I’m sure the commonwealth countries are looking at this and don’t like the abuse she’s receiving at all.

      • Surly Gale says:

        We don’t like it, not one little bit, and we are very aware of the inequality of coverage. Also, keep repeating that he’s gonna be king and she’s queen consort one day….like, the British peeps, the Commonwealth peeps are not aware of the rules of the reign? it is beginning to seriously irritate me. WE KNOW!! Also, Duchess Meghan is one of US! (not just USA, but one of us in that she knows LIFE).

  16. Digital Unicorn says:

    The ‘American arm’ thing totally reads to me as ‘we’re going to ride on Meghan’s coattails into the American market, because of course we can and will’.

    Its FUTURE FUTUE King and FUTURE FUTURE Queen Consort, get it right people.

    • Hope says:

      I guess Charles isn’t jealous anymore because for years that was one of the biggest excuses for why William and Kate didn’t do more.

      Now, being a future King and Queen Consort is a constant refrain to prop up William and Kate, totally leaving out Charles and Camilla.

      Congrats to Charles for such emotional growth!

    • Lorelei says:

      The whole “future King and QC” is really getting ridiculous. It could be 30 YEARS before they’re anywhere close to the throne. I wish someone would call them out. It is truly absurd.

  17. RoyalBlue says:

    Finally! I am hoping this brings an end to the silliness.

    I am in favor of the Sussexes having their own foundation. There are tax advantages for having a foundation vs working with the charity. But the most important reason to me is they want to have control over the type of charities they support under one umbrella and in the end the foundation will help define their legacy.

    I think this summer The Cambridges are supporting their new big charity, the kings races I believe? Similar to the America’s cup which is an extremely elite boat race sponsored by Louis Vuitton, BMW and Oracle to name a few. They are trying to go for big money funding of their foundation through this effort which I think they want to claim as their flagship program. So much for broken Britain. :-( .

  18. Karen2 says:

    They are doing exactly what so many irrelevant Royals do. Running a charity/foundation & hoping US sponsors pony up. I’m embarrased on their behalf. Lemme get back to working for a living.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      Are you embarrassed for W&K as well? Because they also have an American arm in their foundation and wanted nothing more on their first tour than to go to Hollywood and rub elbows with celebrities.

      Or were they included with your irrelevant royals comment?

  19. Robinda says:

    I think the separate foundations are probably a good idea, but the American arm seems like a mistake. The first time that some rich American tweets out a picture of the access they bought through a hefty donation, the papers are going to go wild. It’s going to be a point of contention that won’t go away and potentially reinforces the “She isn’t really one of us” narrative.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      But the current foundation already has an American arm and no one has been complaining about that. Why is it only a bad look for the Sussexes?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Too much logic, Royalwatcher.

      • Robinda says:

        Because the current foundation predates Meghan, the American arm was just seen as a meaningless fundraising effort. With Meghan, it could look like a way to take advantage of her wealthy American connections and it plays into the “not one of us” line of criticism. Photos will be released and it’ll be another little storm of controversy she’ll have to deal with. I just think they’d be better off sticking with European and Commonwealth countries.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Having a US arm isn’t new. There was already a US arm for some Windsor fundraising, used when William or Harry did fundraising events or polo matches in the US.

  20. Eyfalia says:

    Did somebody read the annual report of the Royal Foundation? It’s on Twitter and it is very revealing.

    Some people obviously believe that money grows on trees. Money is always there.

    Kate and William would work, if they knew how to do it. They have no clue.

    • Becks1 says:

      It was mentioned in a comment yesterday. It didn’t sound too good for the foundation.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If the majority of the funding has come from Harry and Meghan’s projects, it does spell trouble for W&K after the split.

  21. GM says:

    Reading some of these comments crack me up. Yes, royals are rich and entitled, but does that mean they should just fade off into the sunset? They have clout and receive immense amounts of media attention. Having their foundations will help highlight various charities that might otherwise not get the same amount of publicity. Having Harry and Meghan involved means SO much more than a Jessica Mulroney type. Let them get involved with the United States and countries in Africa if they so wish. They are trying to make the world a better place- let them.

    Also, i’m confused on the comments above regarding the continent of Africa. So should Harry not concentrate on humanitarian efforts in countries such as Angola (landmine removal) just because he’s wealthy and white and how it is perceived? Genuinely curious.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think the Africa comments are partly because often “Africa” is referred to in these stories as one entity. “Meghan and Harry want to go to Africa!” “Africa has a special place in the hearts of William and Harry!” etc. It overlooks the fact that Africa is a continent, not a country, and a rather large one at that.

      I do think the white savior aspect of this is important too, but I defer to other opinions on that.

  22. Myra says:

    I suspect the Sussex will model their foundation similar to the Gates. Can’t wait to see the final product.

  23. mable says:

    I don’t think you understand what the Queen has spent her entire public life valuing. Time will tell but if history is any indication celebrity is not the driving factor of the BRF.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Charity work is, and that is the focus of the new Sussex foundation.

      • mable says:

        With the aid of public financial support in both the sovereign grant and security (which is the most significant cost). That aid also encompasses significant tax benefits and fan support of the Sussexes doesn’t change that. The role of the monarchy is as head of state. This is the current reality and fan support online doesn’t change that. If that changes and the monarchy is forced to become structured differently it will be subject to enormous tax liabilities. As much as the Sussexes may want to venture out on their own they will limited as long as they continue to accept taxpayer money. They are not celebrities no matter how much you think they are.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think they’re celebrities but you appear to. Plenty of royals have charitable foundations and do international work with them. Princess Charlene’s water safety foundation has taught 300,000 kids to swim in the last five years. Queen Sylvia of Sweden’s anti-sex trafficking charity, The World Childhood Foundation. Taxpayer-supported royals can and do have successful international foundations that do charity work.

      • mable says:

        Interesting, but not relevant to the BRF.

      • Nic919 says:

        Charles went to visit the set of the new Bond movie. I guess that was charity too.

      • violet says:

        @mable +1,000

      • notasugarhere says:

        Charles works in Romania, Anne travels all over the globe for Save the Children. Sorry kids, but royals do international work and that includes British royals. Harry and Meghan doing international charity work is par for the course and to be expected.

      • mable says:

        The role of an HRH is to support the monarch. They are public servants. The Sussexes are being given every opportunity to attempt a way to find roles they consider meaningful while still fulfilling their primary function. If they deviate from too far from their publicly funded roles they will receive pushback and be forced into a different path. I’m sorry you don’t understand the role of the BRF but it is not going to change for the Sussexes. This is why they they were relocated from KP and why they have been removed from the Royal Foundation. They are more than welcome to set up any international charity they wish, and can retain their Sussex title, but as long as they are HRH and public servants to the British taxpayer there will be limits. If they wish to be independent they will lose their HRH and public funding. These are facts. Fan support online doesn’t change that.

  24. TuxCat5 says:

    “While William is being prepared for his future as King with Kate as his Queen consort…”

    There it is…gotta remind everyone that “Kate will be Queeeeeeeeeeeen!!!1!!1!”

  25. Sduff says:

    The BRF is attempting to cauterize the Sussexes, who in turn are using US media sources to spin corresponding developments to their advantage. Ominous long term consequences.

  26. emily says:

    If you think the rest of the world is not picking up on this – ya, no

    this makes QE look so bad

    tears for this woman who spent her life with dignity only to have you two ignorant boys of DIANA step into the scene and destroy it. shame on you both

  27. Hope says:

    Hopefully they know better than to punch down at people who are also suffering.

    Hopefully they’ll focus on people paying their fair share of taxes and work to reverse the Queen’s, Charles’, and William’s financial affairs being secret. Especially as the Queen has attempted to take funds meant for the poor.

  28. Bella DuPont says:

    Have you considered that the BRF’s role (individually and as a whole), is bigger than just the support of individual charities? They also fulfill a diplomatic function for the country as well i.e. selling the UK internationally as an influential, prosperous and trade worthy nation (ha!).

    I can imagine this sort of international charity work goes a long way towards facilitating that.

  29. RoyalBlue says:

    Thanks for the clarification.

  30. Myra says:

    It’s odd when people complain about those who are wil!ing to help the less fortunate