Charles to fund Sussexes for a year
The Prince of Wales is planning to review the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s ‘‘abdication’’ deal within a year, amid fears over the mounting costs of their proposed lifestyle.
While the couple have severed all official ties with the Royal family, Prince Charles is to continue to offer ‘‘private financial support’’ to his son and daughterin-law as they embark on a new independent life in Canada.
The substantial cash injection is expected to come from his own private investment income rather than revenue generated by the Duchy of Cornwall estate, which has traditionally funded the heir to the throne and his two sons.
However, a source close to the Prince of Wales suggested that this was not an inexhaustible source of funds.
As such, The Daily Telegraph understands that any agreement reached concerning the Sussexes’ finances is being viewed strictly within the parameters of the initial one-year period before the family reconvenes to review the arrangement next spring.
The warning was sounded as grave concerns were expressed over the couple’s security arrangements, which one wellplaced source described as a ‘‘mess’’ which could cost millions.
Questions also remained over whether the couple will still be allowed to use the potentially lucrative Sussex Royal branding that features on their social media platforms and new -website, amid concern it could be viewed as exploiting the connection with the family.
A security source told The Telegraph: ‘‘You can’t expect the Met Police to provide the security. They don’t have the powers to operate in Canada. They would not be allowed to be armed. Security will have to be locally provided. The Canadians will have to pay and then bill it back to the UK Government.’’
Staffing costs have been estimated at a minimum of £500,000 (NZ$980,000) per individual but that does not include travel, reconnaissance and home security.
‘‘The security is a complete mess,’’ the source said. ‘‘It’s a huge mess.’’
Another suggested that the costs might have to be partially met by the couple themselves, and therefore potentially by the Prince of Wales. One senior former officer said: ‘‘If they increase the risk on themselves while doing all sorts of exciting things that make them a large amount of money, should that be part of the security deal or should the costs be borne by them rather than the state?’’
The exit deal announced by the palace at the weekend confirmed that the duke and duchess had been banned from using their HRH titles.
However, as a former Apache helicopter pilot who served in Afghanistan – and therefore a terror target – the UK is unlikely ever to be fully free of security costs for the duke.
The couple will be allowed to make millions from commercial deals with no oversight from Buckingham Palace, which will be reliant on their word that any deals they strike will ‘‘uphold the values’’ of the Queen. However, how much additional funding they require will be determined by how successfully they forge their new careers, which are likely to be anchored by commercial deals and public speaking engagements. They will need a -substantial new property and will -expect to live in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.
An aide said that outstanding issues such as the Sussex Royal branding were ‘‘in the gift of the family to decide’’.
Prince Harry, 35, will continue to perform royal duties until the spring. Last night he attended a private event for supporters of Sentebale, his Lesotho charity, at the Ivy Chelsea Garden in west London, where he delivered a speech.
Today he will attend private meetings at a summit for African leaders in London and is then expected to return to Canada to be reunited with his wife and son on Vancouver Island.
Meanwhile, discussions involving outside stakeholders, such as the Home Office and the Canadian authorities, will continue. While most of the couple’s UK-based staff will be redeployed within the royal estate, the fate of senior advisers such as Sara Latham, their communications secretary, and Fiona Mcilwham, their newly appointed private secretary, hangs in the balance.
Aides were at pains to point out that negotiations over the Sussexes’ future had been friendly and constructive but it is understood that the Queen made it clear from the outset that the Sussexes were not going to get their ‘‘cake and eat it’’ wish by keeping one foot in the royal fold.
The Queen is said to have made her personal disappointment clear. While she acknowledged the Sussexes’ feelings, she told them that the deal they wanted was simply not deliverable.
It is understood that the Queen reminded the couple of their royal obligations, reiterating that they served the monarchy and that the monarchy did not serve them. – Telegraph Group