MaltaToday previous editions

MT 22 January 2020 Midweek

Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1202670

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 10 of 23

11 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 22 JANUARY 2020 OPINION PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step back from royal duties has been de- scribed as a crisis for the mon- archy, but they are the ones who are most likely to suffer the dam- age. Members of the royal fami- ly are in a conflicted position. They lead lives of great privi- lege, but they also lack funda- mental freedoms. They aren't free to choose a career, they cannot speak freely and they have limited freedom to pri- vacy and family life, which the rest of us take for granted. Harry and Meghan are not alone in finding that frustrat- ing, Prince Laurent of Belgium is another who is visibly un- happy in the role. The harsh reality is that younger sons are spares who are ultimately dispensable from a hereditary monarchy: it is only those in direct line of succession who count. As spares they are subject to the same personal restrictions as the immediate heirs, without either the prospect of succes- sion or the freedom to develop truly independent careers of their own. Other European monarchies (encouraged by parsimonious governments and legislatures) have learned to keep the core team as small as possible. It can be just four people – in Norway and Spain it is the king and queen, the heir and their spouse. In 2019, the King of Sweden removed five grand- children from the royal family, under parliamentary pressure to reduce its size and its cost. The UK has a larger pop- ulation – over ten times the size of Norway – and it could therefore be contended that it makes sense for its royal family to be larger to carry out nec- essary duties. A bigger team is also required given the realms: the queen is head of state of 15 countries other than the UK, and Prince Charles and his sons make regular visits to countries such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand. In total, 15 members of the Brit- ish royal family conducted al- most 4,000 royal engagements in 2019 alone. Cutting the spares Prince Charles is said to want a smaller, streamlined mon- archy, perhaps just the core team of the queen, Charles and Camilla, William and Kate: but with a smaller team they could accept fewer royal patronag- es and fulfil far fewer engage- ments. It is not clear how far Prince Charles has thought through such consequenc- es any more than Harry and Meghan have thought through the consequences for others of what they want. The media has portrayed this as a crisis for the monarchy, and it is indeed a family crisis, but the monarchy as an insti- tution will suffer no serious or lasting damage. Opinion polls consistently show between 70 and 80% support for preserving the monarchy – popularity rat- ings politicians would die for. The damage is more likely to be suffered by Harry and Meghan, who may have mis- judged the extent to which their celebrity is independ- ent of their royal status. Their plans to carve out "a progres- sive new role", and to "work to become financially independ- ent" have been widely criticised as unrealistic. Initial polling shows some public sympathy for their aims but strong objection to their continuing to receive public money. Royal officials have been tasked to find a compro- mise, but it is hard to see how they can be half in, and half out of the royal family and reside regularly abroad. Can you ever really leave? There are two levels of diffi- culty. The first is sharing the load. All members of the roy- al family who carry out public duties do so on behalf of the queen, and must be willing to undertake their fair share of the duties assigned to them. The second is the risk that be- coming financially independ- ent will involve exploiting their royal titles and royal connec- tions for commercial ga The Sussexes nevertheless de- serve our sympathy. In a com- parative study of the European monarchies, due to be pub- lished in our upcoming book The Role of Monarchy in Mod- ern Democracy, we argue that it should be possible for minor royals to opt out of the gilded cage if they find the restric- tions too great. But opting out would need to be total: giving up not just their public duties but their public funding, their royal titles, their security – try- ing as far as possible to become private people. It would not be easy to under- go such a complete change of lifestyle. And it may not prove possible: the public might still consider them to be a royal couple, and the media might continue to portray them as such – keeping them in the spotlight, whether they want to be or not. Robert Hazell & Bob Morris Prince Harry and Meghan: why half in, half out just isn't an option for royals The British royal family is larger than most – by necessity Robert Hazell is Professor of British Politics and Government & Director of the Constitution Unit, and Bob Morris is Honorary Senior Research Associate, Constitution Unit, at UCL

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of MaltaToday previous editions - MT 22 January 2020 Midweek