Hardman: The Queen is still ‘very fond’ of Prince Harry & they talk all the time

We’ve discussed excerpts from Robert Hardman’s latest book, Queen of Our Times, in previous weeks. Hardman’s book doesn’t seem to have any major tea, although I’m consistently curious to see the sourcing for all of these new royal books. Like, it’s clear that Tina Brown has sources within Kensington Palace and Clarence House, and they’re both leaking sh-t like crazy. But Hardman seems to be focused more on his Buckingham Palace sources, meaning the Queen’s aides. Hardman even admitted that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s exit from the UK happened because of institutional failures at every level, that it wasn’t just “Harry is bad, the Queen and her aides are perfect.” Well, Hardman recently gave an interview to the Daily Beast to promote his book, and some of these quotes are notable.

Whether the Queen was angry about the acrimonious departure of Harry and Meghan: “Anger isn’t her style. Of course she was terribly disappointed and saddened by it. But she is also very fond of Harry, she loves Harry, and there was a lot of dialogue. Her position throughout was that on an institutional level you cannot be half in and half out. It just doesn’t work. You just can’t have somebody who is royal for half a year and a half year is not. No matter how much she loved Harry, that was not going to happen. He still rings her and they chat and she is very proficient on Zoom, and she loves talking to him.”

The Queen hated their sussexroyal.com site: “There has not been a personal break there on a grandmother to grandson level. But when it came to the nuts and bolts of things like having a website called sussexroyal.com, which hadn’t been cleared with the official bodies there was nothing else she could do. These are just hard and fast rules. Harry and Meghan like to present it as the palace establishment versus poor Harry and Meghan, but you can look this stuff up, it’s not hard to find. So they did hit a fairly formidable institutional brick wall. The queen couldn’t just make an exception and allow them to set up a quasi-Royal website when they were not royal. If she did, then other people would start doing the same thing. Subsequently they put out a very peevish statement saying that while the British monarchy had no ‘jurisdiction’ over the word royal, they would go along with it. They were effectively dismissing the institution. That didn’t go down well, obviously. But she is very forgiving.”

Whether the Queen is broken up about not meeting Lilibet: “There is a tendency to extrapolate and paint onto her what we assume she ‘must’ be feeling about, for example, not having seen her granddaughter. But she has seen so much, and been through so much that she won’t be lying there at night awake wishing she could see Lilibet. What I have tried to do is stand back, look not just at the entire reign but her entire life. That’s when you appreciate all the influences and forces that have shaped the queen we see today. Just reading her father’s war diaries—I was given access to all of them for the first time—you can see what the whole family were going through. I’m sure she would love to meet Lilibet—but she would be much more likely to take the view of, ‘I’m very lucky to see so much of my other grandchildren.’ She is an upbeat person.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Yeah, I kind of agree with him about how the Queen has maintained her relations with Harry, and how she’s probably not all that broken up about not meeting Lilibet in person. The whole “the Queen must meet her great-grandchild” thing is mostly just the British media trying to lay a guilt trip on Harry. It’s a national emotional blackmail effort, to somehow convince Harry that he “needs” to bring his children to the UK. Not so much for the Queen, but for the media, so they can write about it and have photos.

As for Hardman’s complaints about the sussexroyal.com site and all of that… man, what chaos that was. I actually understand (to this day) when the royal establishment was so peeved about the website. But long-term, I also understand why Harry and Meghan went that far, and why they tried to explain their vision for their half-in, half-out life. And ultimately, I do think that the royal establishment (especially Charles) has regrets that they couldn’t work out a deal to keep Harry and Meghan in the fold. There was a chance to make a deal and the Windsors fumbled the bag and decided to bang their heads against a wall for two-years-plus, whining about “the website.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, WENN.

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

66 Responses to “Hardman: The Queen is still ‘very fond’ of Prince Harry & they talk all the time”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Elizabeth Regina says:

    Her Majesty once left her own children for 6 months so I’m sure she’s not that cut up about not meeting Harry’s children. However, I do think she loves Harry and likes Meghan and remains in contact with them. The one thing we do know is that Charles and TOB fumbled the bag very badly and have to live with the consequences.

    • Mel says:

      When Harry had his appearance on The Late Show, he did say that he would Zoom with his grandparents and joked about his Grandfather just closing the laptop to end the zoom. I thought it was weird the way these “royal reporters” would carry on like he didn’t speak to her. Just because it’s not made your business, doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

    • equality says:

      I don’t think she is the type to bond with young children. She probably is more into her grandchildren as they get older and have more adult interests.

  2. Lady Digby says:

    Charles only has 2 sons, why would he want to be estranged from him, Meghan and two lovely grandchildren? I will never understand how he could not have made more of an effort to listen and be supportive of them because he is Harry,’s dad and it would have everything to them.This is such a weird family!

    • molly says:

      Because he can’t NOT be the Prince of Wales. Like his mother before him, he’s a royal first and maybe a person second. The Firm will always win, no matter who gets hurt along the way.

      • Izzy says:

        And a father last.

      • Carrie says:

        But his mother puts her role as Queen, and Head of the Church of England to one side time and again for Andrew who is credibly accused of raping a trafficked minor. He paid that money to Virginia because why?

    • Miranda says:

      I’ll never understand this, either. Like Harry, I was raised by a single dad after losing my mom at a young age, and I’m incredibly close to my dad because of that. There is nothing I could ever do that would disappoint him to the extent that he’d let it come between us. He would never allow my half-brothers to sabotage or disrespect me or my fiancé (constructive criticism? Sure, but nothing like the way W&K have treated Harry and Meghan). Things like that are the BARE MINIMUM of what a parent is supposed to do, especially a single parent who kinda has a double workload when it comes to emotional support. I agree with molly that Charles likely sees himself as a royal first and a person second, and you know what? That sounds like yet another reason that the monarchy needs to go. Any institution that demands a father put aside his relationship with his son out of some warped sense of duty isn’t worth keeping around.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      That is because Charles is self-absorbed to a pathological degree.

  3. Cinders says:

    I can believe that TQ is very fond of Harry. I can also believe that TQ and PC have regrets about throwing Harry out. Things have only been downhill (rather rapidly) for the BRF since then, and the next generation is now a charisma-free disaster.
    BUT: the half-in half-out thing is absolute crap. Most of the BRF are half-in half-out. And anyway, they change rules all the time when it suits them. They could have made it work.

    • Snuffles says:


      Ah, but 99.9% of these royals are low grade and are of no threat to the heirs and their fragile egos. Harry and Meghan’s mere existence is a threat.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Liz markets gin, races/buys/sells horses, as does Anne, who rents out part of her estate for races/competitions), Chaz has his Duchy Organic line, and God only knows what the Lamebridges have skimmed from the f*cked up financials of their “Royal Foundation” (*how* many charities have closed doors because of lack of funding from them??).

        We know about Peter Philips selling himself as royal (got (Chinese) milk, anyone?) as well as being the ONLY “bid” for that block party for TQ that he got £750K to “plan” then charged the charity workers £25 for each box of food (that contained basically *nothing*). Zara plays off her royal connection for her sponsorships, and let’s not even go to the cash for access of TQ’s cousin, Prince Michael, the Russian asset, or Pedo’s cuts from his Trade Ambassadorship and Pitch at the Palace show.

        They ALL do it. They just didn’t want H&M to do it (and still outshine them all).

    • Oh_Hey says:

      Yeah I don’t get the rush from folks to agree with that when you have supposed private citizens Zara and her weird hubby out doing all sorts of adverts. Like come on folks – why is she in the ad if she’s not a technical princess in blood if not in name.

      Also what about all the other hangers on like Princess Michael that get royal housing and protection…

      • Becks1 says:

        Zara does not officially represent the monarch and she does not officially receive sovereign grant money, so there’s a BIG difference between her status and Harry’s former status.

        Of course she’s getting the advertising and all that bc of who she is, that’s the reason we all know her name, but she’s not officially receiving public money (although she does live on her mother’s publicly-secured estate.)

        Princess Michael is a different story though.

      • Amy Bee says:

        Prince and Princess Michael are basically what Harry and Meghan wanted, “half in half out”. The Royal Family didn’t agree to it because they wanted Harry to remain as a full-time working royal. Harry was given a choice of full time or nothing and he chose to leave.

      • MsIam says:

        Yeah refusing half in/out was so stupid on their part. Just from a logistical standpoint, they need more bodies. I don’t know why they don’t let B&E be half in/ out just to give them more options to send people to work. But Charles and William wanted the whole show and now they have it. Stop complaining, you got your slimmed down monarchy.

    • Christine says:

      To your point, Cannot and Willnot have always been half in/half out, and he’s the FFK. Refusing Harry and Meghan was just spiteful and stupid.

    • PrincessK says:

      Of course they have regrets, but as I have said so many times before, the succession comes before family every time. TQ and C could not risk upsetting Billy and had to throw H under the bus.

  4. Rick says:

    She prolly not to broken up about meeting a baby. How much personality do they really have anyway? Lol

    • FC says:

      I agree she probably doesn’t care, but I do think H&M will pop in for one last visit while they are in Europe. I mean, what better time? The whole family will likely be together and TQ’s health isn’t great. Also Will and Kate bounced and are on holiday, so they won’t have to be near that mess.

    • Also, COVID?!!?!?!

      I bet the queen understands that they might not want to bring a baby on a full freaking airplane!?!?!? And god knows, even though they have friends with planes and would pay for the fuel (The normal thing to do when you “borrow” a plane) they CAN’T fly private cause someone who always leaks will leak it to press.

    • Jennifer says:

      Let’s face it, a baby isn’t going to remember the experience or do much of anything interesting.

  5. Noki says:

    Harry said he used to facetime with his Grandpa,i am sure the Queen did have some tech savvy at some point but something tells me she probably needs help setting up now and her vipers probably block Harry from getting to her. They dont notify her and make it seem like Harry doesnt check up.

  6. Snuffles says:

    I do agree with the Queen on point. Half in and half out was never going to work. Harry and Meghan’s goals were always going to clash with the monarchy’s goals.

    The Sussex’s naively believed the institution would adapt, but the institution is intractable.

    Now do I think the Queen was like “I wish you well Harry and Meghan! Stay in touch!”

    No. I think she, along with the rest of the institution thought they would fall flat on their face and come crawling back. They threw up every obstacle they could think of to ensure that. But it didn’t work.

    I think it’s possible at the point the Queen grudgingly respects what Harry has accomplished, even though she wants him back.

    As for Harry, I think he much prefers relating to her as granny and not his boss.

    • Yvette says:

      @Snuffles, who wrote: “No. I think she, along with the rest of the institution thought they would fall flat on their face and come crawling back. They threw up every obstacle they could think of to ensure that. But it didn’t work.”

      SO this! They took everything they could possibly take from Harry, thinking it would soon force the Sussexes to return to the fold. I believe the Queen and Charles went along with it for that reason, but Baldamort went along out of spite.

    • PrincessK says:

      In future I am very sure we will see more half in and half out, the monarchy has to change or die.

  7. Oh_Hey says:

    Unpopular opinion – the queen and a Harry may be talking and more than he does with his father and brother but if she wanted him back in the fold he’d be back without the courtiers grey men bothering him.

    Look how well she protects Prince Nonce but she let’s them beat Harry and Meghan to a pulp. I think Harry knows that, loves her anyway, and is smart enough to to realize he can’t say anything close to that and not be crucified even though it’s true.

    • Elizabeth says:

      Yeah, I agree. The queen is capable of completely cold-blooded decisions regarding Meghan and Harry and simultaneously capable of being smotheringly, inadvisably over-protective with Andrew. She just does what she wants, which a monarch typically does. And, I think she really doesn’t care that much about great-grandchildren or want desperately to see them. Another kind of person might, but she doesn’t. If she did, she could. I am guessing the unending tension and hostility within Charles’s family (an intergenerational trauma stemming from her own personal parenting choices, of course) didn’t help.

    • Elizabeth says:

      It’s really sad

    • equality says:

      Maybe she knows that H&M have the sense to take care of themselves but that Andrew definitely does not. Of course, that doesn’t excuse her supporting him publicly; she could be doing so quietly. Whether any of them intended to or not they did H&M a favor by denying the 1/2 in.

      • Tessa says:

        The Queen enabled Andrew, she was ostriching until things got out of control and Andrew had to pay up, Only HM paid up the money and she did not have to push him front and center in that Memorial service.

  8. Lizzie Bathory says:

    Ooh–the king’s war diaries! I bet that’s interesting reading.

    • Elizabeth says:

      I would be interested if they mention the Nazi connections at all.

      • SarahLee says:

        Depends on how far back they go. I know Churchill was aware of Edward’s Nazi support, which is why he sent him to the Bahamas. Whether or not he shared that with George would be fascinating to know.

      • Tessa says:

        Philip’s sisters were married to Nazis.

      • CourtneyB says:

        It’s more nuanced than that. The only hardcore Nazi was Christoph Hesse. He was SS and died in the war. The other sisters— Theodora married Berthold of Baden and were closely linked to Jewish Kurt Hahn and his school at their home Schloss Salem. He finally had to flee Germany and established Gordonstohn. They kept their distance from the party and Berthold only enlisted in the Wehrmacht when war broke out. Cecile married George Donatus of Hesse and they both died in that horrible crash in 1937 with 2 of their 3 children and Cecile heavily pregnant. Their remaining daughter died 2 years later. They had joined the party a few months prior. Margarita married Gottfried of Hohenlohe Langenburg. They joined the party in 1937 but weren’t involved members. His two single sisters were though.
        There’s a very good book Royals and the Reich detailing connections especially with Christoph. Most of Philip’s brothers in law only joined nominally when it was pretty hard to avoid. But Christoph and his brother Philip were in the tank early and enthusiastically.
        And of course Philip’s mother was recognized as Righteous Amongst the Nations for saving Jews in Greece during ww2.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    There was no other way for Harry to get his point across. Charles and BP slow walked him for months and then when he put his proposal on paper, it was promptly leaked to the Sun. The Palace and by extension the press have no right to be upset about the website. I have doubts if Charles has any regrets. To have that, he has to believe that he did somethings wrong and I don’t think he believes he did. In the end, Charles got what he wanted which was control of the situation, William on his side and Camilla declared Queen Consort.

    • it's all your fault says:

      “when he put his proposal on paper, it was promptly leaked to the Sun.” – I always believed it was Charles that leaked that.

      Charles is King Royal-in-Waiting. Royals don’t make mistakes or have regrets.

      • Becks1 says:

        I don’t think there’s a chance in hell Charles would have gone to Wootton. I think William gave him that as payback for keeping his mouth shut about other activities.

        had the Mail leaked it, maybe through Richard Kay (Jobson would have been too obvious), I would have thought it was Charles.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        I always thought it was Elegant Bill.

        It was reported that Harry didn’t want to put the half in/half out proposal in writing because of issues with prior leaks (or of stories about H&M originating within the firm). After finally agreeing to put their proposal in writing, he warned them if he learned of a leak, he’d go public. Well, it was leaked, and Harry did exactly as he’d promised.

        And those previous negative stories that caused Harry’s distrust were mostly orchestrated by Kensington Palace, not Clarence House. Between that and Wootton being the one to get the half in/half out leak, I’m convinced it was Bill that did it. Chuckie was probably fine with the leak, but he didn’t need to get his hands dirty, because he knew the FFK would take care of it for him.

      • It's all your fault says:

        But how did William get Harry’s proposal to give to rootton, If it was sent to Charles?

        Unless Charles gave it to William or William has an agent working in Charles’ house.

      • it's all your fault says:

        In short Charles fed the information to William knowing he would leak it.

        One thing i will never understand is risking your child’s life to cause harm and profiting of it. That’s just pure evil.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I loved their line about the BRF having no jurisdiction over the word royal, because its true. It’s a word. There are lots of royals in the world. Lots of things called “royal” that aren’t actually royal. Lots of romance novels with “royal” in the title (how scandalous!)

    but I can see why the BRF did not like the Sussex Royal website, and I can REALLY see why they didnt like Harry’s statement, and why they made them shut down Sussex Royal IG and all that. Everything else aside, they didn’t want H&M to be able to talk directly to the public. Their post about Sussexit on Sussex Royal IG and their website threw the Firm for a LOOP. They weren’t supposed to take control of the narrative like that.

    I know we joke on it here a lot, that it seems the royals and press are basically whining now about having no control over the Sussexes when half in/half out would have given them that control, but I agree with others than it wouldn’t have worked. The Firm would always have been invested in holding H&M back, in telling Meghan in particular to be 50% less, and they never would have supported them the way the should have. H&M are really so much better off now, and the Firm is so much worse off.

    • Christine says:

      I agree, and I find it delightful that in trying to retain that absolute control over their most popular member, they lost him entirely. Harry is so much better off, and he never would have discovered how much better if they had kept any measure of control over him.

      • kirk says:

        What appeared to be mind numbing viciousness in removing all of the military associations may have helped PH come to understand the true vituperative hostility of the institution. It’s been interesting to see his evolution. Ellie Hall (Buzzfeed 6/1/21) wrote PH is contradicting himself by first claiming Billy was helpful in urging him to seek mental help, then revising story to say he never really got help until Meghan came along to help him get the support he needed. Methinks PH is smart enough to discriminate between Billy’s self-interested mouthings and backstabbing and Meghan’s authentic care and concern.

    • Lucy says:

      I thought it was interesting this guy said the website hasn’t been cleared by official bodies and that you could look up the correct way to get a website out. I don’t think they have a written process for anything not tea or food related, and he says this knowing that “official bodies” wouldn’t have allowed it.

      It just sounds like sour grapes that they weren’t in control, so I believe that the website and Instagram was a huge deal to the palace. And they thought taking their Instagram would be a great way to shoot them down.

      I just really love how H & M were able to get out of there. It feels like Katie Holmes escaping Tom Cruise.

    • equality says:

      Apparently in the UK you need permission to use “royal” in a brand name. I wonder how many companies in the US use the word. The RF would get the vapors if they ever researched that.

  11. Lizzie says:

    If the queen was so understanding but couldn’t okay the half in half out plan, couldn’t she, and the entire rf, just said ‘Good luck Harry, we will be rooting for you in your new life.’? The big smear wouldn’t have happened if the queen had said no to it. There was a lot that didn’t have to happen (stripping military honors) but was intended to insult Harry.

    • TigerMcQueen says:

      Not just insult Harry, but hurt him. Stripping his military honors when he among all of that d**n family deserves them most, was meant to hurt. Denying the wreath, that was meant to hurt him, and it was obvious to me that it was personal.

      And, whoooo boy, but it must have sucked for them when they couldn’t parade around in their peacock feathers (sorry, fancy dress uniforms) at Phillip’s funeral while Harry wore civies. I’ll bet you had smarter heads not prevailed, the Colonial costplay criticism seen over the Caribbean Tour O’ Doom would have started then instead. The optics of the veteran prince in a suit while the others were covered in more un-earned medals than a Fascist dictator would have been incredibly bad for the monarchy, so bad I almost (almost) wish it had happened.

    • It's all your fault says:

      Understanding?! Nah! This is a woman who still had her fake birthday during a pandemic.

  12. tamsin says:

    The half-in would have had courtiers interfering in every business decision the Sussexes make. It would possibly have committed them to failing in the real world. The institution unknowingly did them a favor by their decision. Now, they are on their own, and their decisions are theirs and theirs alone. I hope they continue to go from strength to strength. The Brits used to sneer at other European monarchies as “Bicycle Monarchies” but the British monarchy has lost a lot of prestige in this century and have no reason at all to lord it over the others.

    • 809Matriarch says:

      Half in half out would have been a nightmare! I remember how “sources” in the palace were telling the UK press they were going to be paying close attention to Netflix deals to see if they aligned with her majesty’s “values.”

      Turns out they can’t do anything but whine about how Netflix is JUST PUTTING OUT FICTION! Oh boy! Those royals wish so hard they had the control they lost!

  13. Jaded says:

    Maybe someone should have edited his comment…“There is a tendency to extrapolate and paint onto her what we assume she ‘must’ be feeling about, for example, not having seen her granddaughter.” Its her great-granddaughter.

    That being said I can understand the not wanting a half-in/half-out situation that would be precedent setting and confusing, but nothing ventured nothing gained. Keen and Mean would have popped a collective blood vessel if that had been allowed. As far as Lilibet is concerned, I’m sure the Queen has met her many times on Zoom calls, but her ultimate prerogative has always been to uphold the monarchy and all it stands for, good or bad.

    • equality says:

      Princess Madeleine of Sweden lived in the US and went back for royal things. Other monarchies seem to manage many things the Brits can’t.

  14. Rnot says:

    Sussexroyal.com was totally unacceptable but Andrew’s Pitch-a-Palace personal enrichment scheme was allowed to operate out of Buckingham Palace itself? That cash-for-passports operation was still ongoing at the time Harry and Meghan left.

  15. ABritGuest says:

    The reason that Meghan & Harry even wanted to be financially independent is because the press was using taxpayers money & public interest to justify things like printing Meghan’s letter to her dad etc. The press had also created resentment over any public money spent on Meghan. I mean daily express had an actual headline before Archie was born- “who will pay for Meghan’s child”. When have you seen that before with a royal?

    If the family had shown support to Meghan the press would still have done their dog whistling but it wouldn’t have got as nasty or invasive. The press knew they had free reign to bully Meghan. That they didn’t was because they didn’t want Meghan to marry in so half in wasn’t a real option for that reason.

    if half in half out wasn’t a thing how was William doing duties & working as a rescue pilot? He only became a full time royal in 2017. Which points to another issue- a lot of the insecurity about Meghan & Harry wanting to work etc wouldn’t have been an issue if William & Kate had stepped up earlier. Plus principals briefing against each other when they should be united front was a lack of discipline. So a lot of the damage of the recent years is failure of management which falls on Elizabeth & Charles.

    I do understand why the website upset the firm & maybe strategically if the firm had been genuinely willing to compromise on half in- it wasn’t the best move to put a position upfront. But im not convinced the firm wanted half in to work with Meghan still on the scene. so I’m inclined to think it was good they published the site so a record of their objectives is available especially as the press put: out so much misinformation on their exit.

    • It's all your fault says:

      “who will pay for Meghan’s child” – Ouch! What!!

      “The press knew they had free reign to bully Meghan. That they didn’t was because they didn’t want Meghan to marry in so half in wasn’t a real option for that reason.”

      – Their silence and lack of support for Meghan just reinforced that saying “You can help them, But you don’t bring them to the TABLE”.

      Elizabeth is a racist. She can tolerate “ethnic minorities” for a few minutes/hours/days but to have them in her face constantly is the problem. That’s why Buckingham palace banned ethnic minorities from office jobs.

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, this is the reason “half-in” wouldn’t work. Because the RF didn’t want “all-in” to work, either.

  16. Jan says:

    Tampon said there was no money to support Meghan, who bought her own clothes, and her shoe closet in Toronto had most of the shoes she wore.
    Glad the Sussexes paid for the servant’s quarters.
    Harry is going from strength to strength, Google is going to use the App from Travelyst??
    Better Up is doing wonders, triple in value, have a contract with the U S military.
    This is FREEDOM, with their Rugrats, everyday is a new discovery.
    Jane Goodall said Harry told her Archie was not going to be doing any of that waving stuff.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “there was no money to support Meghan”

      Did Charles say that or did one of the courtiers make that statement?

      • C says:

        She herself said it to Oprah, no? That she was told there was no money to support her.

      • equality says:

        Harry said in the Oprah interview as “members of my family” wanted her to keep acting. I think they wanted him full time “working” royal still trailing W&K and Meghan off acting somewhere. I guess, they thought she would be in the US or Canada working and he would be in the UK, like when they were dating. That shows how sharp RF ideas are.

      • Gee says:

        Does it matter WHO said it exactly? Bc it was Harry himself (not Meghan) that said it was the family that said that in the interview. Yet they have £12 million to pay a woman Pedrew has never met. SMDH

      • Tessa says:

        I think their wanting Meghan to continue acting in Canada, was their “hope” that the separation would erode the marriage. Dysfunctional family

  17. Wtf says:

    The fact that she is queen, but she can’t make exceptions for stuff like websites is to me is a perfect illustration of how the monarchy has outlived its usefulness.
    Henry VIII was out in these streets beheading sidepieces and whatnot. And when the “institution” tried to stop him he changed everybody’s religion.
    We talking about websites tho?

  18. blunt talker says:

    Just think today all the Uk media do is bellyache about what the Sussexes are doing-Harry and Meghan are no longer working royals-whether they see Dutch royals or not doesnot matter-they are not on the payroll of the British royal family-I just want to see them doing their thing with charities and projects they care about-they really mistreated Meg horribly and there by mistreated Harry and their children-when the royals give genetic pain they really do it-Harry has a job now meeting and greeting other royal families is not necessay when doing their charity work. If the British royal family has all this so-called soft power why in the world did they allow the Sussexes to be mistreated by the media and then claim they are beloved members of the family-BULLSHIT