The Duke & Duchess of Sussex went on a five-day vacation to Ibiza, lol

archie2

The Duchess of Sussex celebrated her 38th birthday on August 4th, two Sundays ago. There was an old photo posted on Instagram with a special message from Prince Harry. Hello Magazine reported that Meghan was spending her birthday “privately” with her family, and we were supposed to assume that meant she, Archie and Harry would have a low-key day at Frogmore Cottage. But no! Apparently, Meghan, Harry and Archie went on a little mini-break to Ibiza. Good for them.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have taken baby Archie abroad for the first time, according to reports. Local media reports the Sussexes flew to Ibiza on a private jet, where they enjoyed a five day break on the Spanish island to celebrate Meghan Markle’s 38th birthday on August 4.

The Majorca Daily Bulletin reported: “No images have emerged of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Archie, who stayed at a villa well away from the cameras. They travelled with security personnel, and it is reported that local security forces were not needed.”

Fabulous Digital approached the palace who declined to comment. This would be three-month-old Archie’s first trip abroad with his second due when he travels to Africa in October for his first official royal tour. Ibiza is thought to be a favourite with Meghan Markle who previously visited the Mediterranean island in 2016 with pals including Misha Nonoo.

[From The Sun]

I mean, does this contribute to the “Meghan and Harry are fancy and spend too much money” narrative? Sure. But that narrative will exist no matter what they do or did not do, so might as well go on a little holiday to Ibiza. I hope everyone keeps the same energy for the Sussexes’ trip that they had for the Cambridges spending two weeks in a (comped) £27,000-a-week luxury rental in Mustique last month. Just as I hope everyone knows that this little tidbit of info was released to distract from the Duke of York. Oh well!

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle watch the Red Sox vs Yankees game

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

159 Responses to “The Duke & Duchess of Sussex went on a five-day vacation to Ibiza, lol”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Maria says:

    They are staying well away from this mess, lol.

  2. OriginalLala says:

    This is not just on them, but I get pretty annoyed at all the celebs who preach about saving the environment to us plebs, and then use private jets.

    • AB says:

      I was just thinking the same thing! It is completely hypocritical and undermines the entire messaging on how dire the climate situation truly is. It’s not just them, but they have the opportunity to be different.

      At the very least, they could acknowledge the carbon footprint and pay to offset, or plant a million trees, anything.

      • OriginalLala says:

        It’s because the very rich don’t care – when resources become scarce they will largely be insulated from it through their money and access.

        The crowing about the environment is all PR for most of them.

      • Ertia says:

        Exactly, AB.

        I think it’s silly to say no person thinking about the environment should ever get on a plane again.

        But when people have posited themselves as environmentalists, they have a huge platform to say “Listen, here are a few ways to reduce your consumption, try traveling this way to reduce your footprint, here are some tips. Oh, and since we have the means to do it, we’ve also done *insert tree-planting esque thing here and donated to a charity, etc*.”

      • (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

        Think of the recent Google get together in the Italian ruins (I’m too lazy to look up where it was in Italy). The mega rich arrived there in private planes, mega-yachts… wasn’t Harry there, giving a speech, barefoot on the beach? It was reported he was flown there on private jet and helicopter. So yeah.. preach on, for the plebs. Hey… maybe that’s the secret slogan!

        While I’m convinced this was released to take some eyeballs off Pedo Andy, (and I’m a huge Sussexes fan), they either need to stop preaching to others about the environment, or walk the walk that they preach to others.

      • Megan says:

        We are way past the point where planting trees will save us from climate change. There is a reason why Greta is sailing, and not flying, to NYC.

      • Nahema says:

        Completely this. As @Jan90067 just said, it’s hardly surprising given the recent stories about Harry in Italy. They live close to three major airports who have multiple daily flights to Ibiza and yet they need to charter a private jet. They’re total hypocrites, no matter how much people on here may stan for them.

      • PrincessK says:

        How do you know what the Royal family do? They may already be heavily offsetting their air travel carbon emissions, and feel no reason why they should publicise it. I know people who do.

        Also l have never heard Harry ‘preach’, he just does what he believes and does not order or force others to follow him.

    • Yvette says:

      @OriginalLala, I’m curious. How would you expect them to travel? If they flew commercial they would have to practically buy out the plane for privacy and their security detail, wouldn’t they? And then people would complain about how entitled and elitist they were, kicking regular folks off their flight and all.

      And they do give back in their own way, which is part of the reason they’re going to Africa.

      • OriginalLala says:

        Plenty of celebs and even Harry and Meghan have traveled commercial – it’s not up to me to figure out how they can have less of an environmental impact?

        It’s that I’m pretty fed up with celebs and the very rich being so hypocritical about things like this.

      • No one gets kicked off a plane when someone buys a dozen tickets or so, people do it all the time for destination weddings, family reunions etc. That is no defense for flying private.
        Having said that, it’s not exactly a Royal tradition to fly coach so they shouldn’t be singled out. They should all practice what they preach.

      • DD says:

        They could fly first class, or buy out all of first class if they want privacy

      • mint says:

        If they were that concerned about the environment and climate change, they would have asked themselves if it is really necessary to fly to Ibiza for a 5 day private trip. They may aswell boared the royal train and going to the country side. Or go to France by train

      • Fanny says:

        The royal family, including the queen herself, successfully travel commercial first class with no problems or disruptions. British Airways in particular knows how to accommodate them smoothly. They may have to buy a few extra tickets for their security. I don’t believe they need to buy out all of First Class. Nor would they need to “kick out” existing ticketholders.

        As for “privacy” – why are they entitled not to ever have regular people lay eyes upon them? They are fully protected and given a special escorted path through the airport that is out of public view and does not cause disruption.

        They just want “privacy” so people won’t find out how often they go on vacation and how lavish and expensive their hotels and rentals are.

      • Your Cousin Vinny says:

        @fanny, I think you hit the nail on the head!

      • Becks1 says:

        Except regular people DO lay eyes on them. They HAVE been photographed out about in London. They have privacy in Frogmore THE SAME WAY Kate and Will have privacy in Norfolk. William and Kate, who wanted a taller hedge so no one could track their helicopter rides?

        I notice so much of this criticism at H&M for “privacy” completely overlooks the Cambridges.

      • Nahema says:

        Yes this is a silly argument. They’ve all flown commercial flights and usually get praised to the hilt for it. Most likely they also only fly commercial when they have to because of costs or its a public trip and they can get a ton of praise for it. Again, like with all the Royals, why do something if nobody is going to see and praise you for it.

      • bamaborn says:

        Oh no!! Did the Duke and Duchess of Sussex slip out of the country again without informing the RR? Scandalous. What’s going on with Andrew leaving Scotland early? To your point Yvette, they’d perfer Meghan and Harry walk to Ibiza. Then they’d accuse them of trying to be Jesus, Mary and child. smh

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Well the same could be said about people who drive cars and talk about the environment. We are all a bit hypocritical when it comes to the environment because we all do things that are for our own convenience. Flying commercial may not have been an option security-wise for them. Or they may have simply wanted the privacy. Who knows. 🤷🏽‍♀️

      • olive says:

        exactly, i know i don’t listen to anyone who drives a car and wants to talk about the environment. i don’t care to hear any excuses for why they “have to” either. it’s a smaller scale but it’s the same thing. start with your own actions first before pointing out what others need to be doing.

      • Valiantly Varnished says:

        @olive agreed.

      • Silvi says:

        There ist nothing what the human race does, that has no impact on the environment. We all have to face that! But everyone can make good choices which are environment friendlIER! These two are preaching water but drink wine, instead. I am really fed up with those two !

      • MellyMel says:

        Exactly! I drive, which isn’t great for the environment, so I do my part in other ways. I’ll never preach to anyone about how they travel.

      • Valiantly Varnished says:

        @Silvi yes you are SO FED UP with…what exactly?? 🙄

      • Lina says:

        Following the analogy – those of us who drive cars can do a lot to lessen the impact. Buy electric or hybrid or fuel-efficient vehicles. Only drove when it’s absolutely necessary. Take public transportation when possible.

        Flying on a private jet causes WAAAAAAY MORE pollution, per person, than traveling commercial. It’s akin to someone who drives a huge Hummer every single day preaching about the environment.

      • Megan says:

        Every single thing you buy arrives to wherever you buy it by at least one fossil fueled vehicle. The problem with vehicle pollution is not limited to car owners.

      • pinkberry says:

        Silvi-

        “I am really fed up with those two!”.

        Harry, Charles, and William bang on about the environment issues more than Meghan does.

      • Millenial says:

        I’m not sure that it’s fair to compare driving a car daily to taking a private jet flight. I was just reading the other day that one trans-Atlantic flight in coach is the carbon equivalent to 8 months of commuting in a car. Food for thought.

      • Nahema says:

        Really? Your argument stands for people who live in a town or city or somewhere with good transport links but what about those who are in rural areas or work miles from home? What about people who’s job it is to make numerous house calls a day?

        I think if you live in a big city, like London which has excellent transport links, you probably don’t need a car and probably are a hypocrite but for many people, they wouldn’t have a job if they didn’t drive.

        Harry & Meghan could easily have got to Ibiza flying first class on one of the multiple daily flights from London. They almost certainly chartered their flight from an airport which already had commercial flights.

      • PrincessK says:

        If they had flown commercial, newspapers would have sent their spies on the next flight ✈️ out to Ibiza to track them down, and hound the locals to spill out gossip. Ibiza is not as exclusive as Mustique, which is pretty much a private island.

    • minx says:

      Nice work if you can get it.

    • Eliza says:

      It’s practice what you preach and they’re not doing it or even acknowledging they’re a big part of the problem – it’s annoying. They live on private jets and yachts and huge mansions – these eco warrior celebs … but lecture us on our footprints, when our lifetime footprint will be less than theirs in a year. He just talked about ruining the local environment by tourists flocking at the same time and went to Ibiza in the summer? On top of flying private for the second time in a month? Yes they can fly commercial, if Charles can, they can. Sicily to Ibiza of course has planes, and of course has VIP areas for them to wait securely. They think they’re offsetting their footprint by lecturing us to do better instead of changing themselves.

      • Valiantly Varnished says:

        A commercial jet (say a Boeing 737 for example) burns 750 gallon per HOUR of a flight. A private jet (say a Gulfstream G2) burns 233 gallons per hour.
        The variables being how ling the flight is and and how many people are on board said flight. A flight from London to Ibiza is 2 1/2 hours long.
        In the US private jets consumed about 1.62 million gallons of fuel in a year. Compared to 12.3 gallons of fuel by Commercial airlines.
        Cars made up over 60% of all transportation related C02 emissions.
        Now we know that private jet users have a larger carbon footprint than the average airline passenger due to the breakdown of how many people per flight. But the major impact on C02 emissions is CARS. Plain and simple. Which is DOUBLE the ENTIRE Aviation Industry.
        Now I get that people see Meghan and Harry using a private jet as hypocritical. But if you’re finger wagging and own 1-2 cars and drive them everyday then…side eye.

      • Valiantly Varnished says:

        Charles also doesn’t deal with crazy racists and xenophobes on a daily basis and isn’t traveling with a small child.

      • Eliza says:

        They chose to leave London and live outside the city and have to commute to their office now. Their car footprint should be added to not taken away because they use planes a lot. They also use planes more frequent than most, the emissions for a plane is more than a car per trip. Yes overall cars are much worse when added up globally because most people aren’t traveling by plane daily naturally but they’re taking planes more than once a month. If you look at these celebrities personal footprints they’re much much larger than even the person with a long commute. When you start lecturing you open yourself up to criticism. They should at least acknowledge their impact.

      • Your Cousin Vinny says:

        @Valiantly varnished ….except, the royal family also uses cars (quite a lot). I highly doubt they walked to the private hangar.

        Irrespective of how much you admire any of them, I really don’t understand how this is defensible, flying by private jet to ibiza was unnecessary given how many commercial flights there are from continental Europe each day. Perhaps it’s just cognitive dissonance but when you add in the fact they so often preach to the rest of us on reducing our carbon footprints it seems to be hypocritical or at least tone deaf.

        ETA: I don’t own a car and walk almost everywhere I go. I don’t implore anyone else to reduce their carbon footprint but maybe I should …

    • PrincessPistol says:

      Especially the ones who profess they are only having “2 kids maximum” citing environmental concerns. Tone-effin-deaf.

      • Nic919 says:

        What about the ones who tell other people to only have two kids but end up having more themselves?

      • PrincessPistol says:

        Same🤷‍♀️

      • Sassy says:

        PRINCESSPISTOL: Your reading comprehension skills need to improve. Let me go slow for you. Harry’s 2 kids maximum comment was in response to a joke by Jane Goodall nowhere did he say that the environment was the reason why they are planning on having just 2 kids.

      • Rogue says:

        Harry didn’t cite environmental concerns- he said “2 maximum”. That’s it. Opinions about why are being attributed to him falsely.

        Anyway no idea if it’s true they flew private jet or why but if true they deserve criticism just like all royals whose work is centred on environmental issues. I guess this will be the next big furore in the press.

        Unless they just stop talking about conservation and the environment altogether there will be criticism as they fly when doing tours and are driven around loads. I wonder if their carbon footprint has increased because of doing more international travel to greasing the wheels with potential trade partners post Brexit?

        Practically not sure they can do like Greta and sail. I remember reading an article where Hadley Freeman from the Guardian did green travel from London to Ibiza which took 20 hours+- not great with a young baby I imagine.

        They do need to be seen practicing what they preach so should probably highlight what steps they are taking in their own lives around the environment. I think I read Charles had an electric car.And I think speeches on environment at Davos/Google camp etc should be by video conference etc. Use technology more

      • pinkberry says:

        Did you read Harry’s interview? He didn’t say he plans to have two kids to save the planet. Stop listening to the tabloids.

      • MsIam says:

        Harry made a comment about 2 kids maximum, months ago. He was at an event where he said if he had more than 2 kids he should have his head examined. Even that comment was said jokingly. He never mentioned the environment at all, just that he wanted 2 kids. It’s probably what he and Meg decided on for themselves. He has never said how many other people should have, that was his brother.

      • Me myself and I says:

        Bitchy comment @sassy. Shame on you for that, truly no need.

      • Jaded says:

        @Rogue: travelling by boat can be one of the most polluting ways of getting from A to B:

        “Cruise ships have often been described as ‘floating cities’, and as environmental groups have pointed out that they are just as if not more polluting. A passenger’s carbon footprint triples in size when taking a cruise and the emissions produced can contribute to serious health issues. On top of the pollution caused by their exhaust fumes, cruise ships have been caught discarding trash, fuel, and sewage directly into the ocean.

        Last year, the German watchdog Nabu surveyed 77 cruise ships and found that all but one used toxic heavy fuel oil that the group described as “dirtiest of all fuels”. This came a year after the same watchdog blew the whistle on German cruise operators for failing to adhere to their own air quality safety standards. The data collected reveals that standing on the deck of a cruise ship is similar to being in one of the world’s most polluted cities, with health experts warning of the issues surrounding poor air quality.”

      • PrincessK says:

        Harry answered a simple question, he did not call on anyone else to have two children. I have never heard him ‘preaching’ or ‘lecturing’ but rather showing concern and raising awareness and money for environmental causes. The royals do more for the environment than any of us can, even if they occasionally use private planes.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Do you also get angry with Jane Goodall for traveling 200 days out of the year? Isn’t that better than large groups traveling to see her? For all the technology we have, in certain fields more gets done pressing the flesh in person.

      • Rogue says:

        As I said above we don’t even know if this story is true and I can see this becoming big story that will get the commentators that have been quiet so far about Andrew, piping up again.

        someone mentioned above we don’t know what steps royals like Charles, Harry, William are taking in their own lives to be more environmentally friendly. I doubt David Attenborough never goes on a nice holiday abroad and I don’t begrudge these royals their trips. I think it would be a shame if they stopped talking about area they seem passionate about to avoid charges of hypocrisy as by nature of their work they might always have larger than average person’s carbon footprint etc. Each of us could do more&probably more these royals should do to ensure credibility so that’s why I was trying to think of practical things they should do to avoid criticism. Eg where there isn’t a great need to be physically present then hope more technology will be used but get that’s not always practical as point of having royal involved is probably for meets and greets.

        certainly not fair if the Sussexes or Cambridges get called out more than Andrew or the Wessexes for private jet use just because they are more high profile.

        Ibiza is actually really accessible to the average person so whilst I know they would stay in top accommodation- doesn’t add to a “spending lots” narrative to me. I know a colleague and his parents (!) who went just last week – it’s definitely not elite or just raves! they have islands which still have the original chilled vibe and beautiful scenery.

    • A random commenter says:

      Coming off the Camp Google thing, it just looks a little too “do as I say, not as I do.” I don’t begrudge any Royal a vacation but the timing here is a little tone deaf and clashes with their brand messaging.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Pressing the flesh at events like this (if he even went, nobody knows) got him 3 million from Disney for conservation efforts via the Sussex Royal foundation.

      • A random commenter says:

        Please. Harry was there. He and Meghan have both gone prior too. Buckingham Palace’s refusal to deny the story or otherwise comment is practically a confirmation. They can secure donations without having to take private planes, helicopters, and/or yachts to historical ruins (!!!!!) to give speeches to celebrities who only play at environmentalism in between booze-fueled romps on their mega yachts. There’s a lot of mean-spirited and unnecessary criticisms for them these days but this isn’t it.

        also worth noting: they secured the Disney donation prior to showing up at Camp Google, so going out of their way to rub elbows with celebrities isn’t all that necessary

      • Sam says:

        Meghan has never been Camp Google,idk where this false info of her having been there came from but when he was there,she was in Toronto

    • missskitttin says:

      How would you say they get there, instead?

    • Maria says:

      Do as I say, not as I do. Exactly.

  3. Melly says:

    It’s impressive the way they are able to do so many things without people knowing until after the fact. The “royal sources” must not be so well connected.

    • noway says:

      Or most of the “royal sources” aren’t out to get them, and actually working for them. It’s always only a small group of people with loud mouths who make all the fuss. I feel like most of the people close to the Sussexes including family aren’t trying to get them, but are a bit confused at the best way to help them. Cause there is something to the more you say the bigger the story becomes. The Sussexes have gotten more crap than most royals, but I’m not certain it’s not a sign of the times. Meghan is vastly different than any royal ever. It does seem in today’s Trump/Brexit/Anti-immigrant world people seem emboldened to scream their supposed racist truth. Hopefully that will change, but we’ll see what the coverage of the Sussexes is when they have been married as long as Kate and William. Hopefully, it will calm down by then and maybe the crazies won’t feel free to share and probably profit from their so-called knowledge about them.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Meghan isn’t vastly different from other royals in many ways. She’s different from lazy Kate, sure, but Meghan’s more in the mold of Letizia, Maxima, etc. when it comes to pre-royal career and work ethic. She’s doing the job she’s supposed to be doing, but people were used to next to nothing from Kate for eight years.

      • Nic919 says:

        If the UK media covered Sophie and Anne more they would see just how little Kate has done. The numbers show the difference but since neither are really in the paper every time they step out, the amount of engagements gets overlooked.

  4. Loretta says:

    LMAO yet another confirmation that Royal Reporters know nothing about the Sussexes. They assured us that Meghan would spend her birthday at Balmoral and that they were there now.

    • PrincessK says:

      Yes, l love the way the Sussexes are repeatedly one step ahead of the stupid royal reporters. I really hope that Harry and Meghan were able to stroll around Ibiza pushing Archie in a buggy and no one noticed.

  5. Irisha says:

    Surprised to see they’d go to Ibiza! It’s so downmarket these days.

  6. Lisa says:

    Good for them.

  7. Rae says:

    I’m a fan, but it definitely opens them up to easy criticism when they travel private. There could be multiple, valid, reasons but the optics don’t do well for them in this media climate.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Nothing does well for them in this media climate. Because the media is racist and xenophobic. So they should do exactly what they are doing – living their lives. We should not expect Meghan and Harry to edit themselves to cowtow to dog-whistles from the media.

      • bamaborn says:

        Excellent comment, Valiantly!! Harry has to take in to account all the toxic and vile people hating on his wife and baby. And before anyone pipe up “no, the rest of the royals do not get all this garbage spewed at them.” Hope they continue to live there lives as they see fit. Finally, if you drive an auto, you to are contributing to pollution. The solution is to find sensible ways to cut down on carbon emissions.

    • Sof says:

      They got called out in the comments of their post on instagram about the environment a few months ago, apparently on the past year the royal family doubled their carbon footprint! Its not just that, their whole lifestyle goes against the message: new clothes all the time, hunting, eating meat, etc. (The whole family got critized, not just Harry and Meghan).

    • Mego says:

      They should fly private for security reasons.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Where are the complaints about Edward and Sophie always flying private jet for their summer and winter breaks?

      • Maria says:

        Nota, they are not the ones making all this noise about saving the planet. First, Harry lectures a poorly paid hotel worker about the sins of using plastic, then flies to Italy by private jet, preaching to the peasants about carbon emissions all the while he is staying on an enormous yacht. Now they fly privately to Ibiza. Some will say, they don’t have a choice, well if that’s true, they don’t make that such a big part of your platform. They are losing credibility fast.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Edward and Sophie have done conservation work in the past, so that isn’t a pass. They also live in one of the largest homes for royal in the BRF, one completely outsized for their family and order in the succession.

        I think there should be a limit to how much taxpayers pay in security during vacations, but with people actively threatening to kill Harry and Meghan? I still don’t think they’re required to stay locked in The Tower for safety and never travel.

        Harry has been doing conservation work for years, a la Charles and Philip in their own ways. Expecting them to never travel, never press the flesh, never go to conferences to connect with powerful funders who can donate for important causes? Unrealistic, short sighted, and an excuse for some to attack certain royals but not others IMO. We are not required to go back to the stone age, never travel for work, and never take vacation while trying to address how we as a species figure out how to move forward.

        Lectured? He simply asked to please have the coffee cup not wrapped in plastic for his room while he was there, and not to put the plastic bag over his shirt after it being cleaned. Like Charles requesting no plastic straw during a work visit to Italy last year. Meaning less work for the hotel staff, less use of plastic. Not an unreasonable request, not a hypocritical one, and one I’ve made myself.

        “He was there and we were at the hotel where we spent the night before the game,” Figueras said. “He talked to a person and said, ‘This morning I got my coffee and I saw that you have a plastic thing on the coffee. And then I also sent my shirt and I got my shirt in a big plastic bag.’” The prince then added, “Can we please not use the plastic?”

    • bonobochick says:

      No more criticism than the Cambridges for flying private jets to stay at a $27k a week resort but the media barely sniffed at that in their stories. Not to mention, the immediate need to pearl-clutch over it in the comments section for the articles written here about the Cambridges pricey vacation weren’t as strong either.

      • Lexa says:

        Not that it excuses the lavish comped vacation, but it was confirmed by at least one RR that the Cambridges flew commercial to Mustique. I’m sure they’ve flown private to many, many European vacations, though.

      • bonobochick says:

        @Lexa, Doesn’t Mustique only allow chartered and private planes?

      • paranormalgirl says:

        you can only fly “commercial” through to Barbados or St Lucia or Argyle Airport, and from there get a charter to Mustique. The airport at Mustique has a short takeoff runway and really only can service turboprops.

      • TheOriginalMia says:

        @Lexa, there are no direct commercial flights to Mustique. The Cambridges flew commercial to a certain point and hopped on a private plane to land in Mustique. The RRs as usual left part of the story out.

      • Lexa says:

        Thanks for the explainer, everyone. They still made the longer part of the trip on a commercial flight before boarding the smaller plane to get to the island, which was the least they could do. I’m pretty sure we’ve seen Kate, James, and baby George coming off a big commercial flight on their way to that connection in the past. Not sure if that smaller plane was private or if it served other guests this time around—I’m guessing the former, especially since they had a bigger party with the Middletons, Nanny Maria, and security.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Most of the time, W&K borrow the Duke of Westminster’s private plane for their vacations. If they used commercial for one leg this time for Mustique, it would be for PR.

      • Sam says:

        They took commercial flights with 3 kids and werent sighted…sure

  8. E says:

    This little tidbit was definitely released to distract from the Pedophile Prince and Elizabeth’s PR disaster, but let’s not forget the Meghan & Harry like to pontificate about the environment – but in reality they’re no better than the rest.

    • Lexa says:

      Well, it was actually reported by the Spanish press first and the UK papers are only picking it up now. I totally expect it to become a bigger story than it is to distract from Uncle Andy’s antics.

    • Citresse says:

      Charles is bad too-he flies Camilla around on luxury heavy jets overseas with perhaps five passengers onboard, leaving a massive carbon footprint of course.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They also fly separately for some of their tours, because of Camilla’s travel-induced vertigo. She may fly ahead a day to have time to recover.

      • Brandy Alexander says:

        Well, I would say that needs to be called out too. Let’s not say it’s ok because other people do it. Let’s call all of them out.

  9. pinkberry says:

    I am a fan of Harry and Meghan. He needs to stop giving speeches about environmental issues.

    • Le4Frimaire says:

      I hope they had a fabulous trip and got to relax and have fun. Maybe they should be like Trump and Bolsanaro and double down on denying there is any climate change and cut down rain forests and allow more air pollution. Why should the Sussex’s be the poverty Royals? Atlantic had a good article on not expecting the Royals causes and charities to substitute for good government policy. We can’t even build a high speed train in this country without being mocked or the airline industry lining up lobbyists to block it. The Sussex’s can’t fix everything and hope they enjoy their life. It’s like expecting Obama to fix racism. Unrealistic and putting the work on one person while excusing our own lack of action.

    • bub244 says:

      Agreed, Pinkberry

    • PrincessK says:

      @pinkberry …are you for real. I work on environmental issues and there are so many things that l do that are not environmentally friendly but it would be counterproductive for me to stop doing the work l do. I try but there are many things l just cannot stop doing. It requires massive lifestyle changes accompanied by widespread technological innovation.

  10. Becks1 says:

    Good, I hope they had a nice vacation.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I hope they did too. They may go to Scotland too, to stay with Charles and Camilla at Birkhall like last year.

  11. Lala11_7 says:

    We don’t know if they were the only ones on the private plane alone…we don’t know ANYTHING about the logistics…I’d rather they fly private than fly commercial and mucking up everything for everybody else in terms of security and whatnot…

    They’re rich…but they’re good people….period

    • FredsMother says:

      @Lalla11_7 Right? Come at me eco- warriors but my and my child’s secrurity trumps the environment all day long. I can help the earth in many ways but I would not sacrifice my security and privacy. In Meghan’s shoes: Me? No, I am not trying to get mobbed, maimed by racists and have troll reporters follow me just to please the eco-warriors who themselves have 2.5 cars (dont forget the electric scooters, y’all) , a tv in every room, and insist on driving little Kayleigh, Bekkette, or Farleigh, the cat, the dog and the pet hamster to school, day care and day trainer every morning in their Audis while they can carpool.

      And who the hell begrudges a family a 5 day trip to Ibiza—saying they should have gone to the British countryside. Ibiza???? Not Mustique or Bequia or Sandy Lane, Barbados. Friggin Ibiza where you have to past the trash to find the serene spots. GTFH with that!!! We’re not trying to have the Black Duchess live like Becky-pleabs just because she “rubs you the wrong way”. If I were Meghan, I’d have been holidaying all across Europe and rub it in their faces. Swiss mountain chalet for a bit of pumping my heart rate with some cool-hiking, head down to Yvoire for a bit of swimming in the lake, skip off to Cuomo over at George’s and Amal’s for a nice Apero and round it out with a bit of shopping in Milan. Let the Beckies like Lizzie Cundy, Piers Morgan’s wife, that Queen masquerading as everybody’s favourite grandpa on the British morning show and the Emilies stay pressed!

    • Wowsers says:

      Lol yes. They are flying private OUT OF SHEER CONCERN for everyone! They are just great humanitarians, really, and this proves it. LMAO

      • Olenna says:

        @Wowsers,
        Laughing your ass off, hmm. Interesting reaction when you’ve had nothing critical to say about Andrew or the Cambridge’s, or any of the other hypocrites in the BRF, ever.

  12. mk says:

    I don’t understand why anyone would think that posts about Meghan and Harry would distract from the pedo/Epstein Andrew stories. I read them all, don’t most people?

  13. Sarabe says:

    I am honestly surprised by how many people are okay with this disgusting habit of travelling on private planes. Please do not bring up “the other couple” and their multiple hypocrisies, I know, I know, they are equally bad. This is truly an example of do as I say, not as I do. We are already so fucked with regard to the environment, everything we do now to change individual habits is bound to be so so inadequate. But we have to at least try, and flying as little as possible is the least we can do. And flying private shouldn’t even be an option for people who go around lecturing others about doing their part!

    • Le4Frimaire says:

      Demand that private travel be taxed at much higher rates or pay higher fees , or have certain fuel efficiency requirements. Rich people will still travel that way. Petition the FAA. I’m not pressed about this trip at all. Hope she was dripping in diamonds from the vault.

    • Nic919 says:

      The bigger issue with private jets is how lax the security is for them. Epstein used them all the time and was able to traffic girls because they don’t have to go through security like the rest of us.

      Now I don’t think that this applies to the younger royals, but wasn’t one of the victims flown on a private jet to see Andrew?

  14. Andrea says:

    Isn’t Ibiza tacky? I keep thinking of party harders Fassbender and Vikander marrying there or Katie Price at nightclubs there.

    • MissM says:

      My friend calls it “Las Vegas By-the-Sea”. It’s got some really lovely ritzy parts but it also has the tacky party scene. I had a lot of fun when i went and we didn’t party much, we mostly just enjoyed the sun and the beaches.

  15. Sassy says:

    There are pictures of Andy hopping his bloated smug self on a private jet so let’s call everyone out. I don’t care if they’re hopping on jets these people live in palaces for crying out loud and have police escorts.
    Either get rid of them or stop complaining because they are royals they are never going to live like the average person and it’s dumb to expect them to. Yes I think they need to shut up about the environment if they aren’t going to practice what they preach not just Harry but also his pa.

    • Sarabe says:

      @Sassy, Why stop complaining though? Yes, I would like to get rid of them, but I’m quite interested in complaining about all their awful habits while we’re still stuck with them.
      And I do agree with you that they should ALL shut up about the environment.

  16. Aurora says:

    I’m guessing, thanks to the racist US press fanning the flames of radical racists the Sussexes get more death threats than the average royal. I can forgive them flying private. Also, I doubt they’re flying out in a jet every day so their impact is minimal.

    Everyone can take steps to save the environment that fit within the needs of their life. Most of us aren’t giving up our cars.

  17. kerwood says:

    It’s nice that they got a chance to get away for a few days.

    If I were the Duchess of Sussex and knew there were a bunch of lunatics threatening me and my child, I would INSIST on traveling as privately and securely as I could. Why should she give a shit about the ‘optics’ when she’s criticized for EXISTING?

    As for the environmental issue, I see people driving large SUVs with only one person in the car, EVERY SINGLE DAY. A few private plane rides by celebrities isn’t going to make the difference in climate change. WE are the ones destroying our planet and the reason why nothing gets done is because we’re too busy pointing at others. BE the change.

    • olive says:

      did you see the story the other day of the guy that went to board his flight and found out he was the ONLY person on it, and the workers had to load sandbags in the cargo hold to make up for the lack of passenger weight? i don’t know how much celebrities not taking private jets is going to help when that practice is apparently common in the airline industry. it’s probably a subsidized route, too.

  18. DS9 says:

    How often does Meg travel by plane? The last time I remember is her baby shower.

    I’m not about to be upset by rare trips, especially as she does seem to try to limit them.

    I’m not even touching the notion that you can’t advocate for environmental issues if you don’t mind your every step.

  19. MsIam says:

    If this is true, which I doubt, I hope they had a good time. Since the story says that no pictures have emerged of the DDOS or Archie, then it’s anyone’s guess if they were even there.

  20. val says:

    They can’t trust racist white folks with their precious bundle. So, they have to take private planes, also you don’t know what else they are doing to help with mitigate their carbon footprints. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t, so they may as well enjoy their lives.

    • Olenna says:

      This, and I am hoping they had as much privacy and and enjoyment on their vacation as the Cambridges had on theirs.

  21. Mar says:

    Ibiza is not expensive compared to Mustique so I would see the Sussexes are more practical?

  22. Wadsworth the Butler says:

    William has been trying to build his environmentalist credentials for years now, and has been so ineffective at it that his own fans don’t even recognize him as an environmentalist. Farage attacked Charles and Harry for their advocacy, which demonstrates how effectively they have created mental associations between themselves and their causes in the minds of the public. Whether the public agrees with them or not, it knows what they stand for. If Harry is able to “claim” conservation, that will be the reason why.

    • Vv says:

      Sorry,but isn’t it worse? When you become publicly associated with a cause,and people know “what you stand for” ,the bare minimum you can do is behaving following what you preach.. Otherwise,what is the point? Being called out for your hypocrisy?
      I mean,Harry did a one-day engagement in Norway on Valentine’s Day and took a private jet to be in London in the evening.

      • Wadsworth the Butler says:

        No, it’s not worse. Charles has been criticized for thirty years for his environmentalism and organic foods. Diana was criticized for talking about land mines and AIDS. If they had “never put a foot wrong” in the eyes of Daily Mail writers, they would have no legacy whatsoever.

        Fans of Farage, like Daily Mail voters, skew older, while younger people have diametrically opposed political views and different expectations. Most Farage voters will be dead long before William is king. Pandering to them is a poor long-term strategy. Does he really want to be the Duke of Nigel Farage and KT Hopkins? Is that a good strategy for him?

      • Vv says:

        The problem isn’t really taking a stance. Or what people may think of those opinions. It’s behaving accordingly. Otherwise,there’s no legacy to talk about. Being recognized as an environmentalist implies that actions should reflect those values.

    • Wadsworth the Butler says:

      And the same people who are attacking him as a hypocrite for taking a private jet also attacked him when he said he wanted to have fewer children. They attacked them for eco-friendly features at their house. The people who are attacking him are also currently attacking a child, Greta Thunberg, with equal vehemence because they have an ideological agenda to attack anyone who advocates in favor of conservation. There’s no amount of purity that will satisfy these critics, because they’re opposed to any sort of environmental advocacy: if you practice green policies, you’re attacked for being too “woke;” if you don’t, you’re a hypocrite. There’s no “yay environment” option in this game.

  23. Lucylee says:

    Everything in moderation unless we are all returning to sailboats, stagecoaches and walking across continents.

  24. Mel says:

    If I and my family are under constant threat from nutty people and I’m traveling on something where there is NO ESCAPE until we get to our destination, then yeah, we’re going private. When you’re by yourself it’s fine or it’s two adults, but taking no chances with the baby.

  25. Lisa says:

    There is an interesting book, “Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World” that discusses the problem with philanthropy by million/billionaires, and the royals are a perfect example of the book’s points. The problem is that most of the time, these people are charitable, but also participate in entrenching the systems that enrich themselves/keep power over the rest of the world. They want to change THE world, but not anything about THEIR world. The charities themselves might be good, but the elites are benefiting from this unequal system. A lot of times, it would be better for the government to provide social programs so that so many of these charities wouldn’t be needed in the first place. The problem with M&H in particular is that they brand themselves as the Woke D&D, but they participate and benefit from one of the most classist and patriarchal institutions in the history of the world. And, they really don’t have to. Harry is not next in line, he could give up his royal title and be a private citizen if he really wanted to. Meghan was a full grown woman with her own life before deciding to marry into this institution. So they want to live like royals but be seen as one of the people, and support charities and be patted on the back for editing Vogue in between fancy vacations (and they don’t HAVE to go to Ibiza or anywhere else). So Meghan designs work clothes for women that we have to buy for a matching donations and she’s Mother Theresa. Why are these women impoverished in the first place? Why doesn’t she just donate money to them? Would taxes be better spent on programs for unemployed women rather than the BRF so they can have money to buy clothing of their choosing? What about the Grenfell fire- why is there less oversight of housing of minority communities? It’s great to get money for the victims while giving yourself PR, but to ask us to see them as progressive and down-to-earth is a bit rich. Since they can’t say anything political, they have Heads Together with a vague mental health awareness agenda, without being able to advocate for better mental health coverage by the NHS, etc. And Meghan the feminist can’t say anything about Irish reproductive rights laws, just vaguely be pro “women’s empowerment”. And she chose to silence herself on these issues, she could have been an activist or run for office. And yes, it’s valid to criticize her baby shower (also a private flight and a very capitalist and materialist show) when it runs counter to their professed ethics. Same with Harry. I think he does care about the environment and conservation but isn’t willing to give up or radically examine anything that he is personally participating in/condoning if it causes any discomfort. I doubt he likes what Donald Trump stands for, but he shows up for the state dinner anyway because that’s the hand that feeds him, and normalizes Trump and his whole family, then lectures people about racism. I think they drink their own Kool-Aid, and they seem like nice people, but I can’t take their virtue-signaling seriously.

    • notasugarhere says:

      tumblr misses you.

      • MsIam says:

        Exactly Nota. Lisa, the judge and jury of the world.

      • Lisa says:

        This is from their Instagram when they chose to highlight environment causes in July.
        Quote from The Duke of Sussex:
        “Environmental damage has been treated as a necessary by-product of economic growth. So deeply ingrained is this thinking that it has been considered part of the natural order that humankind’s development comes at the expense of our planet. Only now are we starting to notice and understand the damage that we’ve been causing. With nearly 7.7 billion people inhabiting this Earth, every choice, every footprint, every action makes a difference.”

      • notasugarhere says:

        And Harry pressing the flesh at events in person is what got him 3 million for conservation work. This “They must live in the stone age or they’re hypocrites” attitude is obvious.

    • Maria says:

      Well said Lisa!

    • Sarabe says:

      @Lisa, excellent comment. What we also need to realise is that Harry and Meghan have branded themselves as the modern, progressive, woke royals so naturally their behaviours regarding said progressive issues will be scrutinised, hence the commentary on private planes and the like. Kate and William were marketed to us as normal, middle class and modern, which rightly produced gales of laughter. I remember that Kaiser wrote recently that there is so much stupid and unfair criticism of Meghan that it sucks the air out of the room and makes it hard to legitimately criticise her and Harry about anything, and I feel this is very true.
      Lastly, to all the people who are going on about how about the pollution created by your car, or cruise ships or whatever, it’s the kind of whataboutism we really don’t need.

      • Becks1 says:

        And I would say we do need to, to a large extent, Thad “whataboutism” when it comes to the environment. Everyone is so good at pointing out what others are doing wrong but ignoring the things THEY don’t want to give up. If you like to travel by plane, you’re going to argue that the private plane is SO MUCH WORSE. If you like cruising, you’re going to argue that cruise ships aren’t the problem. If you like to eat meat, you’re going to argue that going vegan doesn’t help the environment at all. And so on.

        We all need to do better. We all need to make the changes we can. Harry and Meghan can do better. So can every single person on this board.

    • TyrantDestroyed says:

      @Lisa: Those are very interest points. I will look for the book since it’s a subject that fascinates me.

    • Becks1 says:

      Harry didn’t attend the state dinner. But nice try!

      • Lisa says:

        My mistake, he attended a luncheon and then the tour of the Royal Collection with the Trump family, which was photographed. The point still stands.

    • Linda says:

      Well said Lisa.

    • Guest says:

      Wow this comment is spot on! Everyone writes paragraphs like these when it comes to the other couple. Every comment section on the other couple has people saying the very same things Lisa just said. I guess it’s wrong for her to talk sense about the Sussex she needs to talk like this about the Cambs and everyone will agree with it. Tumblr is full of crazies like you, reading it everyday. Lisa’s thoughtful comment doesn’t belong with the frothing of the mouth world of tumblr you love so much.

  26. Jaded says:

    This is a tempest in a teapot. The absolute worst polluters are cruise ships. Environmental groups have pointed out that they are more polluting than airplanes, cars, farm equipment, race cars, etc. etc. A passenger’s carbon footprint triples in size when taking a cruise and the emissions produced can contribute to serious health issues. On top of the pollution caused by their exhaust fumes, cruise ships have been caught discarding trash, fuel, and sewage directly into the ocean.

    Last year, the German watchdog Nabu surveyed 77 cruise ships and found that all but one used toxic heavy fuel oil that the group described as “dirtiest of all fuels”. Data collected reveals that standing on the deck of a cruise ship is similar to being in one of the world’s most polluted cities, with health experts warning of the issues surrounding poor air quality.

    Why doesn’t everyone gather up their righteous indignation and go after cruise ships and container boats to clean up their acts instead of singling out Meghan and Harry for taking one f*cking short trip to Ibiza?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Because they all want to go on cruise ships, line up in the wireless area, and spend their time onboard going online and criticizing Harry and Meghan for using oxygen.

    • Nadja Natascha says:

      Cruise ship burn “dirty quality” near-crude oil which is why their fumes are so dangerous.

      But flying actually burns a lot more carbon calories per mile than a cruise ship.

      People just tend to stay longer on cruise ships both in time and in miles and their iphones and tablets and whirl pools are ultimately powered with near-crude oil generator electricity as well.
      Transport by ship is actually a lot more energy-efficient than flying. But they need to do something about ship fuel aka dirty near-crude oil.

      As for Harry and Meghan: suppose going by ferry and train wasn’t an option? Holidaying in Britain wasn’t an option either? William and Kate: you too.

      Last but not least their choices of holiday are telling:
      William and Kate like to holiday in Mystique or they once went to some place in France. Classy places where you can mingle with the rich and the movers and shakers. The top dogs of british high society. Few tourists as those who holiday there actually own the place. Paupers or people with no connections can’t afford Mystique.
      Ibiza isn’t classy. Party island. Boozing. Plenty of tourists. Euro-trashy. Not for british high society except perhaps for the young rich student booze brigade.

  27. Myra says:

    Same group masking their hate with pseudo concerns for the environment to passive aggressively criticize Meghan and Harry…we see you!

    • Olenna says:

      Thank you, Myra. They’re as transparent as glass, and acting like their sh*t (and the rest of the royals) doesn’t stink.

  28. HeyThere! says:

    Good for her!!!! I hope she was able to visit a spa and get an amazing massage!!

  29. intheno says:

    wth???

  30. Maria says:

    It’s obvious that the madam tussaud cover up story for Andrew pedogate didn’t run for few days like they hoped, so they created something different and random. H&M went to Ibiza few weeks back, since when is the media known to hold M story for this long.
    First of all if H&M went to “Ibiza” does it equal to the 50k that Taxpayers that was spent on W, K their kids and HER FAMILY considering they barely work unless it’s for photo ops to boost their image through their media friends puppets Camilla T, Katie, Emily Andrews, John Jobson. Andrew and his soon to be wife fergie made 4 trips back n forth by private jet from london to Scotland. what has both of these two done for the last year to justify their outlandish spending other than Eugenie and her bartender husband wedding?
    The work shy couple Wiliam took Kate for lunch two months ago by private jet that landed on the garden of the posh restaurant they went to, yet every pleb was happy praising them for being romantic.
    Most time the Q herself uses the private jet from london to Scotland
    Charles and Camila hates public transport, that’s why they use private jet or train. Edward does the exact same thing but let M&H breath. The whole world goes into melt down but don’t have the same energy on a royal predator.
    My wish is when the Q clocks off, H will leave the RF and the country for the sake of his wife before they do the Diana on her. I don’t trust them being around British people inside or in the public. People think UK is not racist, it’s rampant and worse than USA. They’re just as vocal as the Americans. Always read in between the lines.

    • Nadja Natascha says:

      Renting a private jet for a flight is easily a five-figured sum.
      Flight tickets are four-figured sums or less.

  31. blunt talker says:

    Security is the focal point here. The many threats made against this couple makes it absolutely necessary to travel without anyone knowing when they are coming or going unless it is a tour. They have a small child now and will not risk his life around people who may want to do harm. I do not care how they travel as long as they are protected and safe.

  32. Rogue says:

    @jaded thanks for the info about ships.

    I knew this was going to be the big story now and lo and behold Harry and Meghan are on uk tabloids front pages being blasted as hypocrites. Predictable. Funny thing is when they went to south of France with commercial flight and just bought out some seats those same papers mocked them for buying out a row and that they were sat by the toilet so flying commercial won’t lessen criticism. Currently they are damned either way.

    @Lisa I agree on the contradictions of being in the elitist BRF but there are many wealthy philanthropists whose wealth is based on ill gotten gains but have helped provide much needed support to charitable programs. should every wealthy person who professes concern about eg child poverty give up say 98% of wealth to be credible?

    sure many commentators on this site are concerned about the environment. How many will never go on holiday again except by say train, walk everywhere if feasible, won’t use Amazon Prime for fast delivery etc? Only buy new clothes say once every 6 months to avoid fast fashion? As someone said we can ALL do better.

    Yes Meghan cannot talk about abortion laws but her increased profile being in the BRF means she can help empower women in other ways eg the women of Hubb community kitchen behind the Together cookbook have gained certificates and have set up their own businesses so there is a knock on effect. Look at promotion that SmartWorks and Luminary Bakery is getting from Vogue. Omid said that there were loads of Sussex fans when he profiled this East London bakery for GMA (!). They will launch a cookbook and open another site and sure they will both do well out of this increased profile.

    I don’t think Harry or any of the younger royals legitimised Trump as they were barely seen with them. Whilst Teresa May invited him for the state visit and was criticised for that, I don’t see people saying she legitimised Trump’s racism. Most people know UK will always work with the US no matter who is president.

    It’s a sad reality that people tend to listen to the famous more than your average pleb. That’s why charities get celebrities on campaigns. If Harry was just plain captain Wales in the army would anyone have even listened to his thoughts on unconscious bias? His Vogue comments resulted in national tv dialogue about unconscious bias which as I’ve mentioned previously was ironic as many POC have been talking about this for years without it resulting in a national debate.

    Harry and Meghan talk about the same issues that others in the royal family have so not sure “they” have set themselves apart as “woke”- I think that’s the media. So not sure why they should be held to higher standard. Philip, Charles, William, Edward all patrons of charities relating to conservation or the environment. Sophie’s work with London College of Fashion looks at sustainability. All have/used to fly frequently and with private jets so if we are going to label people as hypocrites it will probably apply to all of them.

    Meghan also isn’t only one talking about women’s issues. Camilla and Sophie have a focus on gender equality and women empowerment. Princess Anne works on getting more women into engineering and I think supports women in business. Sophie (successful business woman who willingly joined the royal family and had to give up the business eventually) made a speech at UN assembly about women leadership and participation recently. Camilla works with charities supporting female rape and domestic violence victims.

    I think William and Camilla and sure there are others are patrons of charities focused on homelessness. But would there be more resources to help rape/domestic violence victims where refuge centres are closing because of lack of funding and the homeless etc if the Queen, who only has to voluntarily pay income tax on her private estate, didn’t use tax havens as revealed in the panama papers?

    Entire notion of the royal family being focused on charity work could be regarded as a contradiction& money spent on them diverted to the causes they support, so criticism can’t be just for Harry and Meghan. However, until monarchy is kicked out, I think most of the BRF do a good job of raising awareness about causes and I’ve certainly learnt about and donated to many smaller charities through them.

    • Lisa says:

      Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I agree, the whole RBF doing charity is a contradiction. I just don’t see how the fact that others do it too doesn’t mean individual people and cases shouldn’t be discussed, as examples of broader trends. That’s like saying why talk about a good movie, when there are other good movies in the world and it’s not fair to not talk about all of them at once. This isn’t an post about Sophie or the Queen so that’s why I’m taking about H&M.

      I’m not doubting the worth of each individual charity. The problem is that while these people support charities, they also prop up a system that benefits them while making these charities necessary in the first place.

      It’s probably not useful for me to get into your individual points, but briefly: Harry talks about “unconscious bias” and yes that’s a part of racism, but it’s also a set of policies (current and historic which have effects for generations), obvious and more subtle, that serve to privilege certain kinds of people. He didn’t mention that, nor his family’s part in it, he just made it sound as if it’s just a bias that comes from the individual out of nowhere.

      In terms of the private jet use, it’s not about this one trip to Ibiza, or even their use of jets in particular. It’s when you get 114 individual private jets flying in to a conference about climate change that people will mention the overall hypocrisy. It’s also a false equivalency to say that we are the same as the people at that conference, and us taking a plane a few times a year means that we are just as bad, etc. They have a lot more power, money, access, and opportunity to make change, opportunity that we don’t have. Plus they are choosing to focus on this issue.

      In general I don’t feel it’s fair to offload the responsibility and funding for causes onto people that have so much less than they do. The support of charities by having regular people pay for things is a sort of regressive tax, and “awareness” is vague. I totally agree about your point of homelessness and the Queens taxes as an example. Another example, asking people who shop at Marks and Spencer to contribute to a charity M likes again puts the onus on people in a worse economic position. Homelessness and poverty are symptoms of larger issues, and I do believe real change is made at the policy level and not through celeb awareness raising. If Amazon paid their taxes, California could pay off all its debt and provide more for its citizens, instead it pays nothing and Jeff Bezos gives a relatively tiny amount to charity and is praised. Same issue.

      A really boring example but one I’m working on: making cement is one of the largest contributions to CO2 emissions, as well as polluting topsoil, etc. Green cement exists but is 3x more expensive right now. Subsiding producers of cement to convert the factories to green cement makers, and making laws that only green cement can be used, would massively help curb warming within 10 years. Passing that one law would dwarf all the individual changes we are asked to make (Not that we shouldn’t make them).

  33. Rogue says:

    I just saw Prince Andrew has also supported women empowerment issues. Including this project launched in 2012 called Keys to Freedom which helps sex abuse and trafficking victims. This was after he was seen with Epstein after his release. Doubt we will see article lambasting this. Another interesting fact is think the women helped by that project were selling jewellery etc via Topshop- owned by Philip Green who is facing allegations of sexual harassment.

    • Nadja Natascha says:

      Of course Andrew supports charity women empowerment stuff. Because such support enables him to claim he supported women empowerment stuff. While at the same time he rapes minor enforced prostitutes. This crime can be lessened in the eyes of the public by supporting women empowerment stuff. Because the public can be told that Randy BumBum Andy ain’t that bad because he supports women empowerment stuff.

      All rich people have a wider-ranging portfolio of charity stuff. Because it enables them to claim they supported all these worthwile causes: progressive traditional conservative conservational environmental child-wellbeing ….
      And last but not least they meet their own ilk at these charity gatherings. Networking and building relationships for business and for socialising …

  34. AG-UK says:

    Who said up thread they can take a train to the countryside they LIVE in the country side and they are close to LHR so could take a commercial flight but European flights don’t have first class only business which is slightly bigger seats than economy but maybe 8-10 seats. They could be last on and first off. They all will do what they want as they have ££ but tired too of lets do this/that. Living in London you don’t really need a car but so many do and big ones and makes me laugh as you have to pull to the side of the road to let someone pass roads are so small. We haven’t had a car in 3 years. I hate driving here prefer to wait until I go visit family in the US and drive.

    • Nadja Natascha says:

      So true.
      Environmentalists over here want to tax carbon (gas, diesel) and want to ultimately abolish privately-owned cars. In big cities that would not be a problem as they have plenty of public transport. But here in the countryside … There are villages where no bus and not train will go. Without cars how are people who live there expected to get to work in the next city which might be just 30km away but you can’t seriously go by bicycle. In the countryside you do need a car.
      And I am talking about Germany which is a relatively small and densely populated country and where public transport is generally considered important and supported. I live in one of the geographically bigger German Federal States and we have a population of about 18 Mio people here. But 25 km outside my hometown (80.000 inhabitants) you will have difficulties getting a bus or finding a bus stop. There are lesser populated areas in Germany and there it gets really difficult to go anywhere.

      Abolishing / limiting / taxing private car traffic in bigger cities inner-cities? Possible.
      Abolishing private car traffic in the villages and in the countryside? Impossible. Unless you accept that people will leave the countryside and move into the big cities making them even bigger.

  35. Ravine says:

    Not every royal news item is released to “distract” from something else, jeez. People want mindless royal gossip, so newspapers give it to them.