Buckingham Palace reaction after Harry and Meghan’s Oprah interview

LONDON – All eyes are on Buckingham Palace on Tuesday following the explosive interview given by Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex to Oprah Winfrey alleging racism in the palace and lack of support from the royal family over health issues mental and media intrusion.

So far, there has been a wall of silence on the part of the royal family after the interview, which aired on CBS on Sunday and the British station ITV on Monday night, which drew millions of viewers aside and side of the Atlantic.

According to British media reports, including the BBC, the palace has held “crisis talks” with members of the royal family who have held urgent discussions on how to limit the consequences of the interview, in which Harry and Meghan alleged that a member of the royal family had wondered what shade of skin his then unborn child might have.

Meghan, the first mixed-race member of the modern British royal family, did not reveal who had made the comment and said: “It would be too harmful for them.”

The Palace made no comment on the interview when CNBC was contacted on Tuesday.

Oprah Winfrey later clarified that the royal who had made the comment was not Queen Elizabeth II or Prince Philip. The two-hour interview, skillfully handled by veteran broadcaster Winfrey, was watched by 17.1 million viewers in the United States. Up to seven million viewers were expected to have seen the UK broadcast, and the final figures will be released on Tuesday later.

In addition to allegations of racism, the interview contained damaging claims that the Palace had been unable to support Meghan when she experienced mental health issues that left her suicidal.

The Sussex spoke of the pressures of royal life and also said they had been forced to leave the UK and withdraw from their roles as royal workers early last year, due to hostility from the United Kingdom. British tabloid press who said the Palace had failed. to defend them.

However, the couple also said the royal family had been welcoming Meghan when their relationship began in 2016. Meghan also said the queen had always been “wonderful” to her.

The British press responded on Tuesday with a mixture of recognition of how harmful the interview had been and also some defense.

While many newspapers reflected on the “bomb” accusations that had left the palace “cornered,” others said the interview was self-serving for the couple and disrespectful to the queen. The headline of the Daily Mirror said the interview had caused “the worst royal crisis in 85 years”, while the Daily Express headlined: “So sad it has come to this”, alongside an image of the queen. The Daily Mail, meanwhile, headlined its newspaper this morning with the words, “What have they done?”

The interview left commentators and royal correspondents questioning the harm of the allegations to the royal family, an institution that has worked to maintain a public image of duty and decorum and has always tried to keep out the internal affairs of the royal family. family, let alone cracks and controversies. of the spotlights.

After the American broadcast of the interview, there was widespread public support for Meghan among the couple’s commentators and friends. In the UK, a country where most people tend to have a lot in the queen, if not always in the general monarchy, the reaction has been more mixed.

A live YouGov poll on Tuesday asked the public “who they have their sympathies with” after the interview and current results showed that 40% of respondents felt more sympathetic to the queen and the royal family, and a 24% more with Harry and Meghan. Perhaps another 24% said “neither.”

It remains to be seen whether the revelations will spark a lasting fascination for the British royal family at home and abroad. However, the dispute will rekindle the debate over the value of the monarchy and Republican sentiment.

It has already sparked discussion in Australia, which is part of the Commonwealth and where the Queen is still head of state, over whether it is time to change, as reported on Tuesday, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told ABC TV that “our head of state should be an Australian citizen should be one of us, not the queen or king of the UK”.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, meanwhile, said Monday that the country is unlikely to stop having the queen as head of state soon.

There has long been a debate about the value and cost of the monarchy, which entails tourist revenue for the country, but also comes at a cost to British taxpayers.

The Royal House receives revenue from what is known as its Crown property: lands and properties belonging to the Queen, such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle, open to the public at normal times and providing income, as well as what is called the Sovereign Grant.

The only grant is money paid by the government to allow the queen to “perform her duties as head of state,” the government says, but it also supports the official functions of other senior regents, such as visits to the foreign, hospitality and public commitments.

In exchange for these public funds, however, the Queen has to hand over the Crown Estate’s revenue to the government, which in turn calculates how much money makes up the grant.

Explaining the operation of the sovereign grant, the government noted last year that: “In exchange for this public support, the Queen delivers The Crown Estate’s revenue to the government, which for 2018-19 was 343 .5 million pounds. The sovereign grant for 2020-21 is 85.9 million pounds, which is 25% of 343.5 million pounds. “

The sovereign grant for the period 2018-2019 amounted to £ 82.2 million ($ 107.1 million), compared to £ 76.1 million in 2017-2018, which was equivalent to £ 1.24 per person per year. United Kingdom. Currently, the royal family will cost each British population a total of 66.8 million) £ 1.28 per year.

Not much is known about the royal family attracting visitors to the UK, and tourism agency Visit Britain reported in 2017 that tourism linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle totals 2.7 million of visitors a year. However, it is difficult to pinpoint how many visitors come specifically to the UK because of the monarchy.

Royal weddings, including Prince William and Kate Middleton in 2011, and the weddings of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in 2018, were also seen as boosting British tourism, attracting hundreds of thousands of visitors and boosting domestic product. dirty. The wedding of both princes brought about a fortune for tourism and the economy of the United Kingdom. Again, however, weddings entail additional security and expenses that ultimately fall on the shoulders of taxpayers; Harry and Meghan’s wedding reportedly cost about $ 42.8 million, with a large portion of the budget devoted to additional security and policing, while William and Kate’s 2011 wedding came at a cost to taxpayers. of £ 20 million, or about $ 27 million.

The Republican anti-monarchy campaign group disputes the idea that the monarchy is a blessing to British tourism, saying there is no evidence to support these claims.