The Royal Family: a litany of errors
In 1992 she had her “annus horribilis”, said Penny Junor in the Daily Mail. That year, the Queen endured a host of catastrophes and embarrassments, from the fire at Windsor to the photographs of Sarah, Duchess of York having her toes sucked by her “financial adviser”, and the separation of Charles and Diana. So far, 2019 is not shaping up to be as bad as that, but at Balmoral this summer, Her Majesty must have had a “sickening feeling of déjà vu”. Damaging revelations about her family have kept coming, with those concerning Prince Andrew’s friendship with the billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein only the most obviously “distasteful and alarming”.
The man known as Randy Andy and Air Miles Andy has had his share of PR disasters, said Caroline Davies in The Guardian. But the “optics” are particularly bad now. In a statement last week, the Duke of York denied wrongdoing and said he was “appalled” by the allegations against Epstein, who killed himself in jail earlier this month. But it won’t wash, said Marina Hyde in the same paper. Even if Andrew really was unaware that Epstein seemingly groomed and assaulted dozens of underage girls, the Duke did know that his friend had been convicted of procuring a minor, and sentenced to 18 months in jail. If he is appalled by the allegations against Epstein now, why wasn’t he appalled by his conviction then? It’s not as if Epstein had only one accuser: there were around 50 of them, and he had been under investigation for years. At that point at least, the Duke should have cut his friend off. Instead, he attended a party to celebrate Epstein’s release from jail in 2009, and then in 2010 he stayed at Epstein’s New York home for almost a week.
At best, he has been guilty of an astonishing lack of judgement – and alas, he is not the only one, said Jan Moir in The Spectator. Earlier this month, it emerged that Zara Tindall had accepted a £100,000-a-year stipend from the Hong Kong businessman Johnny Hon. What was she thinking? Then there’s Sarah Ferguson, who was paid £300,000 by one of Hon’s firms (to add to the £15,000 she once borrowed from Epstein). Neither receive money directly from the public purse, and you could argue that they should be commended for finding alternative sources of income. But it would be “more admirable still” if they chose a “frugal existence on the wooden bench of royal life”, rather than using their royal status to remain on “the overstuffed sofa”. Which brings us to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who accepted £2.4m in public money to do up their new home, but act like intruded-upon A-listers when people show a “good-natured interest” in them and their baby. Harry and Meghan are trying to have it both ways – living off the public purse, while enjoying the privacy of ordinary citizens; and it’s causing all sorts of tensions.
As is their campaigning, said Sarah Arnold in The Independent. It’s great that they want to promote causes close to their hearts. But when it comes to green issues, there is a problem. While it is unrealistic to demand that people who speak out on the climate crisis live perfect zero-carbon lives, you can’t tell your millions of Instagram followers that their “every choice makes a difference”, then take four private jets on holiday in less than two weeks. The double standard is glaring, and it doesn’t help when your celebrity friends start accusing anyone who points it out of racist bullying. Like most members of the Royal Family, Meghan has been subject to unfair attacks in the press, said Tom Sykes on The Daily Beast; some of it has had a “racist edge”. But the latest criticism was entirely legitimate: those four private jet flights are estimated to have emitted 19 tonnes of carbon, three times more than the average Briton’s emissions over a year. As for the claim (made by friends such as Elton John, but not, surely, without their permission) that it wouldn’t be safe for them to fly any other way, this was just spurious: the next week, Prince William and his family flew economy on a budget airline to Aberdeen, en route to Balmoral.
“One reason the Queen is popular is that she is not seen sunbathing with the rich and famous”
I don’t begrudge the couple their luxury travel, said Charles Moore in The Spectator, even if it is laughably at odds with their eco-principles. With the current level of interest in them, it is hard to imagine they would get much peace on a commercial flight. But Harry and Meghan are making other familiar mistakes. The first is the nature of their holidays – at Elton John’s mansion on the Riviera, for instance. One reason the Queen is popular is that she is not seen sunbathing with the rich and famous; she heads to Balmoral each summer, and “the worm of public envy” does not stir. Their second mistake is “to take moral stands”, on issues such as sexism and the environment, that make ordinary people feel inferior. “Until recently, Prince Harry’s magical gift was just to be obviously warm-hearted and open to all... So much better to embody virtue than to signal it.”