The “apology” part of the current royal storyline has gotten extremely stupid. Three years ago, five years ago, six years ago, we were all in agreement: the Windsors had treated Prince Harry and Meghan terribly, and at the very least, the Windsors owed the Sussexes an apology, if not an acknowledgement of their grievances and accountability for all of the harm. Harry even said versions of that in interviews, especially as he promoted Spare: that the Windsors needed to apologize, especially to Meghan. Then all of that just disappeared from Harry’s end. I guess he realized he was never going to get his father or brother to apologize, acknowledge their harm or show any accountability. Whatever shifted, I thought that it was between Harry and his therapist, But now, close to seven years after the Sussexes barely escaped the UK with their lives, suddenly they’re on their way back to live for an extended period of time. And all anyone can talk about in royal media is how Harry and Meghan are the ones who need to apologize to the Windsors, how Harry and Meghan cannot expect to simply waltz back into Britain without groveling, scraping and apologizing for telling their stories. From the Royalist Substack:

The campaign to secure Prince Harry state-funded security is well underway this Monday, backed up by senior government figures, despite the fact that just 2 percent of the British people think the government should be responsible for paying Harry’s security bill.

It might seem incredible that Harry and Meghan, who less than four years ago were roundly criticizing the British royal family (with Harry at one point telling The Telegraph: “You know what you did, and I now know why you did it. And you’ve been caught, so just come clean and we can then all move on…they just couldn’t help themselves”), now appear, without having issued any apology or even an expression of regret for having upset people, to be coming back to the United Kingdom with many of the benefits of being members of the royal family.

Any idea that the King is not nodding this through is, frankly, absurd.

It’s going to go down incredibly badly, the notion that these two people who think the monarchy is terrible, cruel, duplicitous, deceptive, uncaring (pick your own pejorative adjective) are now back in a better position than any non-working members of the family have ever been in, and we are now being softened up for them to be given full security, at huge cost, as we saw in the newspapers this weekend.

Even the most basic level of protection is going to cost serious money. Round-the-clock cover with one officer on duty at all times means three eight-hour shifts a day, seven days a week (21 shifts a week), which requires a team of at least five officers once you allow for weekends, leave, and sickness. At £80,000 ($109,000) a year each, that’s £400,000 ($545,000) in salaries alone, and once you add employer costs, vehicles, and overtime, you’re looking at something closer to £700,000 ($950,000) a year. For one guy on the door.

This doesn’t seem to bother Emily Thornberry, a Labour MP who chairs the foreign affairs select committee, who told The Telegraph: “We have to remember [the Duke of Sussex] has made a contribution to this country through his public service and heroism. He is the son of the King, he has made a big contribution to our country through public service (that puts him and his family at risk).”

…Then came an even more significant contribution to this general establishment softening-up program, from David Blunkett, the former home secretary who carries a great deal of moral authority. Blunkett is quoted in The Times saying the Sussexes should be given a “medium level” of government-funded protection when they move back to the UK, calling this a “happy medium.” Another former home secretary, unnamed in the same piece, said it was “hard to imagine how he and his family would not receive some protection.”

And by a huge, huge coincidence, RAVEC (the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, the body responsible for determining security protection in the UK) has finally completed its long-awaited risk management board review. Don’t forget that this review was carried out in defiance of a court ruling which said it did not have to be done, and it was done after Harry personally lobbied the current home secretary, Shabana Mahmood. You’d have to have fallen off the back of a bus yesterday not to suspect that there is now a concerted effort by Harry’s allies in the establishment to get him back his security.

That this being enabled by the King is made very clear by the complete lack of censure the King has applied over the past six years in respect of Harry, despite all the negative effect he has had on the monarchy. The massive destabilization caused by this return alone is insane and yet there has been no censure from the King at all for the destruction Harry and Meghan have wrought.

[From The Royalist Substack]

It’s sort of a fascinating cultural case study of how British people perceive British citizenship. Is Harry, a prince of the realm, the son of a king, a veteran of a foreign war and an international statesman, allowed to come back to his home country without apologizing for leaving? Is Harry still British if he criticizes his family? Is a terrorist target allowed to have royal protection even if he made his angry-egg brother cry bitter tears? Anyway, I actually agree with Tom Sykes in one small way, which is that King Charles seems to be making some interesting, pro-Sussex moves all of a sudden. I wish there was more focus on that side of it rather than the hysterical crying over “why doesn’t Meghan apologize for calling us racist??”

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.