The reaction of Buckingham Palace after Harry and Meghan’s interview on Oprah

LONDON – All eyes are on Buckingham Palace on Tuesday after Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which allegations of racism were made within the palace and lack of support from the royal family about mental health issues and media intrusion.

So far, there has been a wall of silence from the royal family after the interview, which aired on CBS on Sunday and on British broadcaster ITV on Monday night, attracting millions of viewers on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Palace said it had held “crisis talks”, according to British media reports, including the BBC, with royals having had urgent discussions on how to limit the consequences of the interview, which saw Harry and Meghan claim that a member of the royal family questioned what skin tone their unborn child could have.

Meghan, the first mixed race member of the modern British royal family, did not reveal who made the comment, saying, “It would be very damaging to them.”

The Palace declined to comment on the interview when contacted by CNBC on Tuesday.

Oprah Winfrey later clarified that the king who made the comment was not Queen Elizabeth II or Prince Philip. The two-hour interview, expertly conducted by veteran announcer Winfrey, was watched by 17.1 million viewers in the United States. Up to seven million viewers are expected to have watched the broadcast in the UK, with the final numbers expected to be released on Tuesday.

In addition to allegations of racism, the interview contained damaging claims that the Palace had not supported Meghan when she had mental health problems that left her with a feeling of suicide.

The Sussex talked about real-life pressures and also said they were urged to leave the UK and step back from their roles as royalty early last year, because of the hostility of the British tabloid press, which they said the Palace he had failed to defend them.

However, the couple also said that the royal family welcomed Meghan when their relationship started in 2016. Meghan also said that the queen was always “wonderful” with her.

The British press responded on Tuesday with a mixture of recognition of how damaging the interview had been and also some defensive attitude.

While many newspapers reflected on the “bomb” allegations that left the palace “reeling”, others said the interview was selfish for the couple and disrespectful to the queen. The Daily Mirror headline said that the interview had caused “the worst real crisis in 85 years”, while the Daily Express said, “It’s so sad that I got to this”, next to a photo of the queen. The Daily Mail, for its part, headlined its newspaper this morning with the words: “What did they do?”

The interview left commentators and royal correspondents questioning how damaging the allegations are to the royal family, an institution that has worked to maintain a public image of duty and decorum and has always sought to keep out the family’s internal affairs, let alone fights and controversies. the spotlight.

After the broadcast of the interview in the United States, there was widespread public support for Meghan among commentators and friends of the couple. In the United Kingdom, a country where most people tend to hold the queen in high regard, if not always the broader monarchy, the reaction was more mixed.

A live poll from YouGov on Tuesday asked the audience “who their sympathy resides in” after the interview and the current results showed 40% of respondents feeling more sympathetic to the queen and the royal family, with 24% more sympathetic with Harry and Meghan. Revealingly, perhaps, another 24% said “neither.”

It remains to be seen whether the revelations will cause a lasting fascination for the British royal family at home and abroad. The dispute is bound to reignite the debate over the value of the monarchy, however, and the Republican sentiment.

This has already fueled discussion in Australia, part of the Commonwealth and where the Queen is still head of state, about whether it’s time for a change, with former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull reportedly telling ABC TV on Tuesday that “our boss of state should be an Australian citizen, must be one of us, not the Queen or King of the United Kingdom. “

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, meanwhile, said on Monday that the country is unlikely to stop having the queen as head of state anytime soon.

The value and cost of the monarchy, which brings tourism revenues to the country, has long been debated, but it also has a cost for the British taxpayer.

The Royal House receives income from what is known as the Crown Estate – lands and properties belonging to the Queen, such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle, open to the public during normal times and which bring in revenue – as well as what is called Sovereign Grant.

The one-time grant is money paid by the government to allow the queen to “fulfill her duties as head of state,” says the government, but it also supports other official duties of royalty, such as visits abroad, hospitality and public commitments.

In exchange for these public funds, however, the queen has to hand over the Crown Estate’s revenue to the government, which in turn calculates how much money makes up the donation.

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

The sovereign grant for 2018-2019 totaled £ 82.2 million ($ 107.1 million), up from £ 76.1 million in 2017-2018, which was equivalent to £ 1.24 per person in the UK. Currently, the royal family will cost each Briton (out of a total population of 66.8 million) £ 1.28 per year.

This is not much, as the royal family attracts visitors to the UK, with the tourism agency Visit Britain reporting in 2017 that tourism linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle reaches 2.7 million. visitors per year. However, it is difficult to pinpoint how many visitors specifically come to the UK because of the monarchy.

Royal weddings, including Prince William and Kate Middleton in 2011, and Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s nuptials in 2018, were also seen as an incentive to tourism in the UK, aggregating hundreds of thousands of visitors and boosting gross domestic product . The weddings of both princes have brought a blessing to the UK’s tourism and economy. Once again, however, marriages involve extra security and expenses that ultimately fall on the taxpayer ‘s shoulders; Harry and Meghan’s wedding cost about $ 42.8 million, with much of the budget spent on security and extra policing, while William and Kate’s wedding in 2011 cost the taxpayer £ 20 million, or about of $ 27 million.

The anti-monarchy campaign group República disputes the idea that the monarchy is a blessing for tourism in the UK, saying there is no evidence to support such claims.