Buckingham Palace comment after an interview with Harry and Meghan in Oprah

LONDON – Buckingham Palace is all set for Tuesday following the explosive interview that Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex gave to Oprah Winfrey in which allegations of racism within the palace and lack of support from the palace were raised. royal family on mental health issues and media satire.

So far, there has been a wall of silence from the royal family after the interview, which was broadcast on CBS on Sunday and British broadcaster ITV on Monday night, attracted millions of viewers on both sides of the West Bay.

The Palace is said to have held “emergency talks,” according to British media reports, including the BBC, with senior kings reporting urgent talks on how to limit the outcome of the interview. , which saw Harry and Meghan claim that a member The royal family had questioned what skin tone their child might have at the time.

Meghan, the first member of a mixed race of the British royal family today, would not reveal who made the idea, saying: “It would be too much harm to them.”

The Palace did not comment on the interview when they were contacted by CNBC on Tuesday.

Oprah Winfrey made it clear that neither Queen Elizabeth II nor Prince Philip was the royal family who came up with the idea. The two-hour interview, skilfully handled by former broadcaster Winfrey, was watched by 17.1 million viewers in the US More than 12 million viewers watched the UK broadcast, according to figures released by ITV on Tuesday.

In addition to accusations of racism, there were damaging allegations in the interview that the Palace failed to support Meghan when she inquired about mental health issues that left her feeling suicidal.

The Sussexes spoke about the pressures of royal life and also said they had been asked to leave the UK, and step back from their positions as work royals early last year, due to hostility from the British tabloid media who said the Palace failed to protect them from.

However, the couple also said that the royal family had welcomed Meghan when their relationship began in 2016. Meghan also said that the queen had always been “ wonderful ”for her.

British journalists responded on Tuesday with a mixture of acknowledgment of the devastation of the interview, as well as some defense.

While many papers reflected on the “bombshell” allegations that left the Palace “reeling,” others said the interview was self-serving to the couple and disrespectful to the queen. The Daily Mirror headline described the interview as “the worst royal crisis in 85 years,” while the Daily Express rallied: “So sad it came to this, ”Accompanied by a photograph of the queen. Meanwhile, the Daily Mail ended its paper this morning with the words: “What did they do?”

The interview has left royal reporters and writers questioning the devastation of the allegations to the royal family, an institution that has worked to maintain and enhance the public image of duty and decorum. always tried to keep internal family affairs at bay, not to mention conflicts and disputes. of the spotlight.

Following the U.S. broadcast of the interview, there was widespread public support for Meghan among the couple’s reporters and friends. In the UK, a country where most people are highly respected, if not always the monarchy in general, the reaction has been more mixed.

A live YouGov poll on Tuesday asked the public “who does your sympathy lie most with” after the interview and current results showed that 40% of respondents felt more sympathetic to the queen and the royal family, with 24% more sympathetic to Harry and Meghan. Surprisingly perhaps, another 24% said “gin.”

It remains to be seen whether the British royal family has a keen interest at home and abroad. The controversy is about to govern a debate about the value of the monarchy, however, and republican sentiment.

It has already debated in Australia, part of the Commonwealth and where the queen remains head of state, over whether it is time for change, with former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ABC TV reported Tuesday that “our head of state should be an Australian citizen, we should be one of us, not the Queen or King of the United Kingdom.”

New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, meanwhile, said on Monday that the queen’s country was unlikely to cease to be head of state any time soon.

There has long been a debate about the value and cost of the monarchy, which will bring tourism income to the country, but will also come at a cost to British taxpayers.

The Royal Family receives income from the so-called Crown Estate – land and buildings owned by the queen, such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle, which are open to the public at normal times and which provide income -in – in addition to what is known as the Swedish Grant.

The single grant is money paid by the government to allow the queen to “fulfill her duties as head of state”, the government says, but it also supports the official duties of other sovereign kings such as visiting abroad, hospitality and public duties.

In exchange for these public funds, however, the queen has to hand over income from the Crown Estate to the government, which itself measures the amount of money it makes. up the donation.

Explaining how the Swedish Grant works, the government noted last year: “In return for this public support, The Queen is surrendering the revenue from the Crown Estate to the Crown. government which was for £ 343.5 million for 2018-19. The Swedish Grant for 2020- 21 is £ 85.9 million which is 25% of £ 343.5 million. “

The sovereign grant for 2018-2019 amounted to £ 82.2 million ($ 107.1 million), up from £ 76.1 million in 2017-2018, which equated to £ 1.24 per person in the UK. all Brit (on its total population of 66.8 million) £ 1.28 per annum.

That’s not much because the royal family is attracting visitors to the UK, with tourism body Visit Britain reporting back in 2017 that tourism is linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. contribute up to 2.7 million visitors annually. It is difficult to say how many visitors come specifically to the UK because of the monarchy, however.

Royal weddings, featuring Prince William and Kate Middleton in 2011, and the nuptials of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in 2018, were also seen as supporting UK tourism, adding hundreds of thousands of visitors, and invigorating full-fledged domestic produce. The two princes’ weddings boosted UK tourism and the economy. Again, however, weddings involve added security and spending that ultimately falls on the shoulders of taxpayers; Harry and Meghan’s wedding appears to have cost around $ 42.8 million with a large part of the budget spent on extra security and policing, and William and Kate’s wedding in 2011 was reported to have cost the individual £ 20 million. -payment of taxes, or about $ 27 million.

The campaign group against the Republican monarchy opposes the idea that the monarchy is a place for tourism in the UK, saying there is no evidence to support such claims.