The king has put it writing

He's done the right thing IMO so no one's left in doubt and hopefully there will be an end to any speculation. I would think William will be pleased about the clarification.

Harry keeps on about their security but surely they had some in the USA which they had to pay for so why is it different in the UK.

Because the USA is a different country with different laws about carrying arms and hiring armed security.

In UK it's illegal to hire/pay private armed gunmen.

It also indicates how this pair need to be kept in their place.
They may or may not wish to run an "alternative" Royal Family in the media but cannot be trusted in anyway whatsoever - they monetise everything.

Good move from the King. For the avoidance of doubt etc., etc.

I wonder if they have pushed their luck in the last week, to have prompted this official comment🧐

There's still a discrepancy here though.
Why does the company he visited today go overboard about welcoming Prince Harry to their studios and getting him to sign their wall. He isn't exactly a celebrity recording artist, so what is he exactly? Other than a royal having photos taken.

I get what King Charles is saying. It makes sense.

No, King Charles III has not issued a letter banning Prince Harry from armed protection. [1] (https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/2246325/buckingham-palace-letter-prince-harry-return)The confusion stems from a formal guidance letter issued on September 7, 2026, by the Lord Chamberlain on behalf of the King. The letter was sent to government departments, military officials, and Lord Lieutenants to clarify Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's official status following their recent relocation back to the UK. [1] (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/no-royal-duties-king-charles-clarifies-harry-and-meghan-remain-private-citizens-after-uk-return/articleshow/133889823.cms), [2] (https://www.gbnews.com/royal/king-charles-prince-harry-meghan-royal-status-letter)The actual details regarding security in that letter and the current situation include:What the letter actually says: The correspondence explicitly reiterates that Harry and Meghan remain non-working, private citizens whose "HRH" (His/Her Royal Highness) titles remain in abeyance. It emphasizes that any charity work they do is entirely personal and does not represent the Sovereign. [1] (https://www.facebook.com/hello/posts/breaking-king-charles-has-confirmed-theres-no-change-to-harry-and-meghans-royal-/1501614588679762/), [2] (https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/2246363/king-charles-letter-prince-harry-meghan-markle), [3] (https://www.gbnews.com/royal/king-charles-prince-harry-meghan-royal-status-letter), [4] (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/no-royal-duties-king-charles-clarifies-harry-and-meghan-remain-private-citizens-after-uk-return/articleshow/133889823.cms)The stance on armed protection: The letter explicitly states that security decisions are not the responsibility of Buckingham Palace. Instead, it notes that any security queries must be directed to individual police forces and the relevant executive committee

MartavTaurus

There's still a discrepancy here though.
Why does the company he visited today go overboard about welcoming Prince Harry to their studios and getting him to sign their wall. He isn't exactly a celebrity recording artist, so what is he exactly? Other than a royal having photos taken.

I get what King Charles is saying. It makes sense.

Whether we like it or not, Prince Harry is still a Prince, he’s still in succession (for now).

I think it’s a good move from the King, stops speculation, might shut the media up, clarifies the situation.

What they do privately, all of them, as a family is no one of our business, but I hope they manage to heal and form some kind of ongoing relationship.

This is simply a formal letter clarifying for public and state related bodies exactly what the position of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is. There are a lot of protocols and rules governing the status of different members of the the Royal family and this just clarifies the position of 2 members of the RF who have returned to the UK after living abroad for some years.

They are, however, whether we like it or not 'celebrities' and are going to be attractive as sponsors, 'names' etc to the kind of people and organisation where having a celebrity to front their publicity is advantageous. This letter just makes it clear to official bodies where the dividing line is.

Clarification and a reminder- yes., helpful.

We all know H and M are not working Royals- as do they. They have kept a relatively low profile so far but are indeed celebrities, will have charitable and commercial interests as private citizens and will have their photos taken. HRH out but still a Prince.

Well, I guess you could call him a celebrity for writing a best selling memoir. They all seem to do that these days!
I wonder whose books are lined up for this Christmas, only to end up in the charity shops?

I can just imagine Meghan stamping her feet and having a tantrum.
In fact, I'm going to get myself in a real tizzy, thinking about it. 🤭🤭

Will they attend the Trooping of the Colour or Remembrance Sunday at the Cenotaph?

Why have they come back? I haven’t followed anything on them.

ixion

Will they attend the Trooping of the Colour or Remembrance Sunday at the Cenotaph?

No. Why would they? They are not working Royals.

getting from trum he will hassle them evetually
he only wants 'REAL'royals .and fake medals

I can just imagine Meghan stamping her feet and having a tantrum. - and that is exactly what it is - imagination.

The letter says nothing that is not already known and established a long time ago. H &M did not leave the firm in order to be a part of it.

The DM loves to do a bit of stirring. Let us not succumb to it.

It's on the BBC Luckygirl3

I checked the story out reading The Times yesterday tea time, and the very photo I used was in the Times!

merlotgran

ixion

Will they attend the Trooping of the Colour or Remembrance Sunday at the Cenotaph?

No. Why would they? They are not working Royals.

I think this letter is clarifying that attending such events is definitely not on the cards, despite H&M somehow hoping this return would signify their comeback.

Harry is royal by birth and always will be, but refuses to accept his demotion in status despite demanding it himself six years ago. His subsequent behaviour has dented his popularity way beyond his limited understanding that actions have consequences.

I thought it was just saying that any event they attended was going to be in a private, not royal, capacity.

They may well attended things privately that (say) William or Catherine attended as well - representing the crown.

They have to get an invitation first, and no access to the red carpet.

Good on King Charles, he did great!

Hairy and Migraine are a pain in the bum to both his English and her American people.

So Charles's actions were definitely a poke in the eye and an ego deflation for them!

Nice one, Charles!