Royal sources say there is now ‘no way back to official duties’ for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as the couple agree to 90-minute tell-all Oprah TV special
- Harry and Meghan are set to lose all their remaining royal patronages, the Daily Mail can reveal today
- Revelation follows an announcement that the couple have recorded a ‘tell-all’ TV special with Oprah Winfrey
- It is understood the Queen is to ask them to relinquish links with bodies passed down through Royal Family
- The move would see Harry stripped of his three remaining honorary military titles, while Meghan would have to step down as patron of the National Theatre, unless she can negotiate another position with them
PUBLISHED: 22:11, 15 February 2021 | UPDATED: 01:58, 16 February 2021
Harry and Meghan are set to lose all their remaining royal patronages, the Daily Mail can reveal today.
The revelation follows an announcement that the couple have recorded a ‘tell-all’ TV special with Oprah Winfrey.
It is understood the Queen is to ask them to relinquish their links with any organisations passed down through the Royal Family.Read More
Her 36-year-old grandson would be stripped of his three remaining honorary military titles and, potentially, his patronages with the Rugby Football Union, Rugby Football League and the London Marathon. +12
Harry and Meghan are set to lose all their remaining royal patronages, the Daily Mail can reveal today+12
The revelation follows an announcement that the couple have recorded a ‘tell-all’ TV special with Oprah Winfrey
Meghan would have to step down as patron of the National Theatre, unless she can negotiate another position with them. When she was handed the role in 2019, it was seen as a major gesture of support and affection because the Queen had been patron of the London institution for 45 years.
One grey area is expected to be the couple’s links with the Commonwealth, but sources suggested that these are likely to go as well.
It was confirmed last night that Meghan, 39, had agreed to a ‘wide-ranging’ interview with Miss Winfrey, who is one of the most powerful women in US showbusiness. It is believed the programme has already been recorded.
The two women are friends and near neighbours in California, with Miss Winfrey attending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s wedding in 2018 and plugging a range of vegan lattes that Meghan has helped finance.+12
It is understood the Queen is to ask them to relinquish their links with any organisations passed down through the Royal Family. Pictured: Oprah Winfrey interviewing Sarah Ferguson+12
Pictured: Oprah Winfrey arriving at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding in 2018 Oprah Winfrey attends Meghan and Harry’s wedding at Windsor CastleLoaded: 0%Progress: 0%0:00PreviousPlaySkipMuteCurrent Time0:00/Duration Time0:32FullscreenNeed Text
- Watch videoOprah Winfrey attends Meghan and Harry’s wedding at Windsor Castle
- Watch videoRevellers flee across rooftops after police raid illegal nightclub
- Watch videoProfessor Azra Ghani talks about coronavirus summer wave
- Watch videoSpooky moment triplets seen on baby monitor scream at ‘a ghost’
ROYAL AUTHOR: INTERVIEW IS A ‘BETRAYAL OF TRUST’
Royal author Robert Jobson said he thought the interview was a ‘betrayal of trust’ and Meghan and Harry ‘seem hell bent on causing the Queen more discomfort and possible embarrassment’.
‘Buckingham Palace were quick to say the Queen, Prince Philip and Prince Charles and the rest of the family wished the couple well on the news. They were apparently told about the baby bump before Harry and Meghan went public,’ he said.
‘But now, just after smoothing over the cracks caused by ”Megxit’ – just over a year ago – the Sussexes seem hell bent on causing the Queen more discomfort and possible embarrassment.
‘Given the way the media focus on such royal interviews, one word out of place will be jumped on to confirm on-going feuds in the Royal Family.
‘If Harry or Meghan talk openly about the fall-out with William and Kate it will cause uproar. If they don’t even mention them, it will be seen as a snub to his brother or just another silky PR exercise – something their friend and interrogator Oprah Winfrey won’t like.
‘Sources in the royal household say ”Megxit” is not talked about by senior royals. ”It is a subject the family want to move on from,” one senior figure told me.
‘But how can anyone move on when Meghan and Harry continue to drone on about the difficulties of royal life and being part of the Royal Family.
‘This interview is a betrayal of trust whatever way you look at it. Harry, who claimed he wanted to escape the publicity of being a front-line royal, has swapped duty for a cash bonanza deal with Netflix. We are not told if money has been paid for this interview.
‘The army veteran, who serviced with distinction in Afghanistan, often talks about respecting the Queen.
‘But to be blunt his decision to join his wife’s tell all on US television interview after they exited the royal family so noisily and dramatically, is another act of disrespect.
‘The Queen has always lived by the mantra of ”never complain and never explain”. With her husband’s 100th birthday celebrations approaching the Harry and Meghan loose cannon continues to fire.’https://3f5f86f3588bcf88159cd6dcf9c0b45a.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
One source described the interview as ‘one of the most inevitable and, sadly, predictable consequences’ of the ‘Megxit’ saga.
Harry will also feature in the 90-minute show. It will air next month on CBS and the couple will discuss their move to the United States. It will be the first time the pair have spoken publicly about their bombshell decision to leave Britain and step down from their working roles in the Royal Family.
It follows news that the couple are expecting their second child. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said they were ‘overjoyed’ at their pregnancy, revealed on Valentine’s Day.
The decision to take part in the interview risks angering – and embarrassing – the Royal Family.
It could also widen the divisions between Harry and his brother, Prince William, and William’s wife, the Duchess of Cambridge.
The interview will be staged in two parts, with Meghan first speaking about everything from ‘stepping into life as a royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure’.
She will then be joined by Harry and the couple will speak about their move last year and their future ‘hopes and dreams for their expanding family’. Titled ‘Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special’, the programme will air on March 7.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment last night about the interview, which will be aired six weeks before the Queen’s 95th birthday and in advance of celebrations for Prince Philip’s 100th.
A royal source said that as the couple were no longer working royals, any decisions taken with regard to ‘media commitments are matters for them’. They were ‘under no obligation’ to inform the Royal Household of their plans. The interview was announced by CBS in a press release.
While there was no angry reaction from the palace – it has taken great pains not to get into a public slanging match with the Sussexes – the coldness of the response was evident. The decision to strip the couple of their last remaining royal titles is not being done as a reaction to the interview.
It is being perceived that the televised chat was agreed because the couple could ‘see the direction of travel’ of future royal roles.
Sources have stressed that a 12-month review of their new status was not put into place last year with a renegotiation of terms in mind, but as a safety net in case they moved abroad ‘and didn’t get a dime in the bank’.
Harry and Meghan have since secured multi-million deals with companies including Spotify and Netflix, meaning that their futures are now assured. But their decision to pursue commercial tie-ups has made their position as quasi-royals simply impossible, courtiers believe.
Patronages the Sussexes hold
Harry’s honorary Forces titles:
- Capt General of Royal Marines
- Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington, Bury St Edmunds
- Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command
He is also patron of:
- The Rugby Football League WellChild charity
- The London Marathon Charitable Trust Sentebale
- Rugby Football Union
- Invictus Games Foundation
- (Jointly with William) The Henry van Straubenzee Memorial Fund
Meghan is patron of:
- Mayhew animal welfare charity
- Smart Works
- The Association of Commonwealth Universities
- The National Theatre
- The couple are president and vice president of The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust
One source has said: ‘You can’t have one of the head of state’s representatives flogging cups of coffee, it’s as a simple as that.’
Just days ago friends of the prince signalled his determination to fight in particular for his military titles: Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Bury St Edmunds, and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
But it seems as if that battle, at least, has been lost.
The father of one will be allowed to keep anything that is a private patronage – and he still has several, such the Invictus Games and WellChild. Meghan holds two personal patronages, the Mayhew animal charity and Smart Works.
It is not clear when an announcement on the patronages will be made but the Mail understands that it could even be earlier than March 31, when the couple’s review period concludes.
One source told the Mail that it was hoped that the interview with Miss Winfrey would provide the couple with the chance to ‘get whatever it is they want to say off their chests and move on’.
Another added: ‘The interview has clearly come about because there is an understanding [with Harry and Meghan] that all remaining formal links with organisations will cease to exist.’
The deal has echoes of Princess Diana’s 1996 Panorama interview with Martin Bashir, which she negotiated behind the backs of the Royal Family and caused widespread damage. Miss Winfrey interviewed Sarah, the Duchess of York, in 2010.
The interview announcement comes just days after Meghan won a High Court privacy claim against the Mail on Sunday. A judge ruled it breached her privacy by publishing extracts from a letter she had sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry’s intimate baby bump photo proves they don’t want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them
First, let me offer my sincere congratulations to Meghan and Harry on the news that they’re going to have another baby.
Any pregnancy is a wonderful blessing, though as Jerry Seinfeld once cautioned: ‘Make no mistake about why babies are here – they are here to replace us.’
It’s an especially joyful moment for a couple who suffered the pain of a miscarriage last summer, and as a father-of-four myself, I wish them nothing but happiness with their new addition when he or she arrives.+12
Meghan and Harry (pictured with son Archie) announced that they are expecting their second child on Valentine’s Day
But I can’t have been the only one who was somewhat surprised by the manner in which we learned of this delightful development.
The statement from their spokesman, saying the couple are ‘overjoyed to be expecting their second child’, was perfectly standard.
However, accompanying it was a photograph of Meghan lying in Harry’s lap under a tree in the Californian sunshine, with her Hobbit-like bare-footed husband grinning broadly as he cradled her bump.
Like everything they do, this picture had been very carefully choreographed.+12
News of their second pregnancy came on the 37th anniversary of when Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, announced that she was pregnant with him
They hired an old friend to capture the ‘spontaneous’ intimate moment – Misan Harriman, a Nigerian-born British photographer who a few months ago became British Vogue’s first black male cover photographer in the magazine’s 104-year history.
He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: ‘With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn’t need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it’s like reading the pages of a book.’
So true… if your library’s stacked with Barbara Cartland swoon-busters!
The date of the photo’s release was very deliberate too: Princess Diana and Prince Charles had also chosen Valentine’s Day to reveal they were having Harry, 37 years ago in 1984.
But it was the fact this photo was given to everyone in the media, via the Press Association, that raised my eyebrows in disbelief.
Ten months ago, Meghan and Harry declared they would now have a ‘zero engagement’ policy with four British newspapers in one of their many furious tirades against the press whenever they are criticised for doing stuff like preaching about the environment as they use Elton John’s private jet like a taxi service.
They loftily announced they would no longer have anything to do with The Sun, the Daily Mirror, the Daily Mail or the Daily Express, and all their Sunday and online versions, because of their supposed ‘salacious gossip’ about them which they apparently know to be ‘distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason.’
They insisted ‘this policy is not about avoiding criticism, shutting down public conversation or censoring accurate reporting’, in a letter to those publications (that the couple leaked to the Guardian) – although that was exactly what it was about.
The letter ended by saying the motivation for this unprecedented and heavily criticised royal attack on press freedom was that the couple no longer wished to ‘offer themselves up as currency for an economy of click bait’.
Today, the front pages of most British newspapers carried the baby announcement news along with the couple’s tree photo.
The Sun headline was ‘HARRY & MEG BABY No2’, the Daily Mirror’s was ‘Meghan & Harry: We are having baby No2’, the Daily Mail’s read ‘MEGnificent! Baby No2 for Harry and Meghan’ and the Daily Express screamed: ‘MEGHAN AND HARRY: We’re overjoyed, Archie is going to be a big brother.’
All very positive publicity, from the same papers that Meghan and Harry supposedly detest, and a perfect illustration of the couple choosing to ‘offer themselves up as currency for an economy of click bait’ when it suits them.
Why were these papers allowed to publish such an intimate photo given the ban?+12
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced that they are expecting their second child – who will become eighth in line to the throne (order of succession pictured)
It seems especially baffling when you consider that last Thursday, Meghan won a legal action against the Mail on Sunday over a letter given to them by her father Thomas – and used the victory to launch a fresh attack on the paper, its sister outlets and its parent company, for what she said were its ‘dehumanising practices’, ‘moral exploitation’ and a ‘business model to profit from people’s pain’.
In a furious rant, she raged: ‘For these outlets, it’s a game. For me and so many others, it’s real life, real relationships and very real sadness. The damage they have done and continue to do runs deep.’
(Full disclosure: I write a weekly column for the Mail on Sunday along with the columns I write like this for the Mail Online)
I personally think the case should have gone to a trial where Thomas Markle, the father Meghan has disowned, could have had his say on the matter, and we could have also got to the bottom of exactly who may have helped Meghan write the letter, or who she may have revealed its contents to.
But the judge didn’t agree, so Meghan got to have yet another whack at the press.
Which makes it even more baffling as to why, just a few days later, she would then want an incredibly revealing private photo of her and Harry and their unborn child to appear on the front page of the Mail and the front pages of all the other papers she claims to hate.
Or rather, it’s not baffling at all.
For this is yet another example of Meghan and Harry’s brazen hypocrisy, and further evidence that they don’t have any real desire for privacy.
They just want the right to use the media to promote themselves when it suits them, and trash and ban them when it doesn’t.
In fact, it’s quite clear that the pair of them crave attention and publicity like ravenous jackals gorging on the carcass of a freshly slain gazelle.
Since they quit Britain and royal duty 13 months ago, barely a week has gone by without a new grainy self-promoting Zoom chat, statement or interview being released from their Santa Barbara mansion, or announcements about their latest lucrative multi-million-dollar commercial deals with the likes of Netflix or Spotify, or leaked details of power-broker meetings with top politicians like California’s governor Gavin Newsom.
They know all this publicity is key to their success and bank balance, and they depend on the media they profess to loathe to deliver it.
In this regard, they’re no different to reality TV celebrities like the Kardashians who don’t actually do anything for a living other than sell their ‘brand’ to the highest bidder.+12
In Meghan’s New York Times article about her miscarriage, pictured, she urges people to ask others if they are ok, adding: ‘In being invited to share our pain, together we take the first steps toward healing’
It’s a self-promotional hustle and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have proven to as effective at it as Kim and her sisters.
I just find it contemptible that they continue to exploit their royal titles in such a ruthless greedy way without doing any of the hard graft that other royals back home in the UK have to do to earn their keep.
As I’ve said many times, they want to have their royal cake and eat it, and they shouldn’t be allowed to trade off their royal connections like this.
As for privacy, do they even know what it means?
One of the numerous reasons they attracted criticism in the UK before quitting was their weird refusal to share details of their son Archie’s birth with the British public who’d just paid millions for the refurbishment of their new home.
They briefed that this was to safeguard his privacy.
Yet they didn’t give a damn about Archie’s privacy when it came to recently launching their new podcast – releasing tapes to the world of him giggling and gurgling to his parents in an effort to stimulate media interest in their otherwise rather boring woke meanderings.
In fact, they were cynically invading their young son’s privacy purely for click-bait and personal financial gain.
Just as they were happy to sign a $100 million contract with Netflix who, with latest series of The Crown, have invaded and gnawed over more royal privacy, including that of Harry’s parents, than any tabloid ever did.
And now they’re marketing their own privacy.
I’m thrilled for Meghan and Harry that they’re having another baby.
But not as thrilled as they will be feeling about their very private photo adorning the front page of every paper that they banned for intruding into their privacy.
As I write this, I know their diehard fans – including many of the most horribly abusive people on social media – will already be screaming ‘LEAVE THEM ALONE!’ at me.
But the one thing Meghan and Harry want least is to be left alone, which is why it’s just been announced they’re giving a ‘wide-ranging’ interview about their private lives to Oprah Winfrey for a 90-minute prime-time special on March 7. That’s just the kind of thing people do when they want to be private!
As for the baby bump photo, they could have refused to let the papers they despise have it. That would be consistent with their ban.
But they wanted it splashed all over their sworn enemy’s front pages because it will boost the Sussex brand and earn them even more money.
This decision made them look like the perfect expectant parents.
It also made them look like a right royal pair of shameless hypocrites.