It all looked very 'royal' after all, even though Harry and Meghan are officially no longer 'working royals'. A cheering crowd welcomed the couple on Thursday in Nottingham, where the two appeared together in public for the first time since their return to the United Kingdom.
Selfies with the public, flowers, and Meghan in burgundy, who said it was "great to be back." It was also boring without her, concludes tabloid Daily Mail.
It is now four years after 'Megxit': the dramatic departure of Harry and Meghan from the British royal family. This was followed by an American celebrity life, with Netflix productions, podcasts and cooking shows, a much-discussed interview with Oprah Winfrey, and Harry's book Spare, in which he did not spare his family. Yet they returned in August to the English life they had criticized so much in recent years.
Palace spokespeople emphasize that Harry and Meghan, even now that they are back in the country, are not working royals, so they will not carry out activities on behalf of the royal family. They are private individuals, it is said. Prince Harry will focus on his charity work and Meghan on her lifestyle products and acting career.
Actually, no one can really explain why they returned so suddenly. Even Harry's father King Charles was reportedly informed only a few days in advance. Does the couple perhaps want a half-in, half-out model, a kind of quasi-royal life? Do they want to reconcile with the royal family, or be closer to Charles, who is still being treated for cancer? Do they want to put their children in a British school, or were they inspired by their friends Beyoncé and Jay-Z, who also bought a house in the beautiful English Cotswolds?
The questions about their intended lifestyle and 'non-royal' public appearances coincide with another prominent issue: their security.
That matter is currently being reassessed by the RAVEC (Royal and VIP Executive Committee), a committee under the British Home Office that evaluates who is entitled to security at the taxpayer's expense. It is a difficult dossier, with many complications and high sensitivity.
When Harry and Meghan were still working royals, their security was paid for by the state. After their departure from the royal family, that arrangement ended. Since then, Harry has been advocating, also in court, for security for his family when they are on British soil.
After all, Harry remains the son of the king; that was never a choice. And, like them or not, Harry and Meghan are world-famous and controversial ratings magnets worth a lot of money if someone wanted to kidnap them. Their security would cost the state an estimated over five million pounds – with a daily operation in which all their routes must be checked for safety. The risks range from stalkers and dangerous individuals to even the Taliban, after Harry revealed in his book Spare that he killed 25 Taliban fighters during his military service in Afghanistan.
The other side of the argument is that state-funded police protection belongs to people with an official function and public responsibility, which Harry and Meghan currently do not have as non-working royals. The couple runs commercial projects through which they earn their own fortune, so why should the taxpayer pay for their costly security? On the other hand, former prime ministers are entitled to state security after their office. This also applies, for example, to Liz Truss, who was prime minister for only 49 days. Why her and not Prince Harry, who has been a prince his entire life? That is indeed a difficult question.
Harry offered to pay for his own police security, but that was rejected: with the reasoning that 'the police are not for sale.' According to experts, their situation calls for police protection rather than private security, partly because officers are allowed to carry weapons.
According to a recent YouGov poll, a majority of Britons think the state should not pay for Harry and Meghan's security. Their return to the United Kingdom is met with some skepticism: 46 percent view it negatively. Older Britons are especially critical of the couple, while Harry and Meghan are relatively more popular among young people.