We will use your email address only for sending you newsletters. Please see our Privacy Notice for details of your data protection rights.

Last month, Express.co.uk revealed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had pumped thousands of pounds originating from a royal charity into a limited company owned by Harry. The couple’s non-profit organisation Sussex Royal and sustainable travel initiative Travalyst each received a huge payout last year from The Royal Foundation, the charity they previously ran with Prince William and Kate Middleton, a payout which finalised their professional separation. A source told Express.co.uk that, upon the closure of Sussex Royal, the funds in that pot would also be transferred to Travalyst, which is registered as a limited company as of April 3, 2020.

The day after that report was published, the anti-monarchy group Republic wrote to the Charity Commission, accusing the Sussexes and Cambridges of “inappropriate use of charitable funds, conflicts of interest and lack of independence”.

The Charity Commission said they would “assess the information provided to determine whether or not there is a role for the Commission”, as they do with any complaints raised.

A spokeswoman for the Royal Foundation responded that the grants were within the rules.

They said: “The grants made to Sussex Royal were to support the charitable work of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

“They were fully in line with governance requirements and were reported transparently.”

Meanwhile, Harry’s legal team launched an angry tirade in response, accusing Republic’s letter of being “deeply offensive” in an 11-sentence denial of wrongdoing.

The spokesperson said: “The Duke of Sussex has always and continues to remain deeply committed to his charitable work.

“This is his life’s focus, and his devotion to charity is at the very core of the principles he lives by, and is obvious through the impact and success of his many charitable projects throughout the UK and beyond.

“To this point, it is deeply offensive to see false claims made about The Duke of Sussex and his charitable work.

“It is both defamatory and insulting to all the outstanding organisations and people he has partnered with.”

Royal commentators have since pointed out that Harry’s furious response arguably just gave more publicity to the criticism.

Royal correspondent Hannah Furness claimed in The Telegraph that Harry massively overreacted, “wielding a sledgehammer to crack a republican nut”.

DON’T MISS
Princess Anne’s ONE golden rule at royal events revealed [REVEALED]
Prince Philip’s staggering confession about Prince Andrew exposed [INSIGHT]
Zara Tindall’s astonishing comments about Princess Anne: ‘Annoying!’ [QUOTE]

She compared the Cambridges’ succinct, non-dramatic response with Harry’s over-the-top response, in which he claimed there was an “attacking agenda”.

Ms Furness wrote: “The complaint may be investigated, it may well be dismissed within days.

“To which the only sensible response is words to the effect: it’s completely legitimate for high-profile charities to be scrutinised, please go ahead, but you won’t find anything amiss here, guv.

“The Royal Foundation ‒ representing the Cambridges ‒ replied with two sentences roughly to that effect, briefly explaining how they were ‘fully in line’ with rules.

“Prince Harry issued a statement via lawyers detailing how insulting, defamatory, salacious and unjust it was, with a promise it will be dealt with ‘the weight of the law’”

She added: “This time, it seems a sledgehammer to crack a nut (and that’s not to cast aspersions on the people of Republic, misguided though many might find their cause).

“The campaign group – which hardly makes a secret of its anti-monarchy aims – could not have hoped for better publicity.”

Pod Save the Queen is hosted by Ann Gripper and features Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers.

In an episode a couple of weeks ago, the pair discussed this row, and Mr Myers agreed with Ms Furness’ analysis.

Mr Myers said: “I really, really don’t think this statement that they put out, a rather aggressive statement by the Sussexes’ lawyers, is doing them any favours.”

He added: “The Royal Foundation said, ‘Absolutely no problem, we’ve got nothing to hide, it was all above board.

“Then Harry launches into this absolutely – anyone would think a catastrophic situation had occurred – and he launches this tirade of 12-15 paragraphs from the lawyers that there is a vendetta about them, that there is going to be, that they’re being attacked from all sides.

“And I think it’s just an absolute sledgehammer to crack a nut.

“When The Telegraph are one of the more friendly members of the press the Sussexes deal with, when they’re calling into question your judgement call on this, I think Harry has something to worry about.”

In this way, both Ms Furness and Mr Myers insisted that Harry’s response to Republic’ letter was disproportionate and only gave more attention to the criticism ‒ in other words, it seems to have backfired.

Source: Read Full Article