Sunday, October 13

Harry and Meghan cosying up to banks makes me queasy


 

 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have every right to earn their keep if they are going to become financially independent. They can’t be expected to live on air.

In fact, if the past is any guide, they are going to need an awful lot more than air to get by, since they are both used to the good things in life though Meghan’s enjoyment of them is obviously more recent.

But if they intend to go it alone, how can they earn the sizeable sums of money they will need to sustain what is, by anyone’s measure, a highly enviable standard of living?

Is it even possible for them to enrich themselves without causing embarrassment, and even damage, to the Royal Family, to which they will inevitably remain connected in people’s minds whatever separate furrow they plough?

Although it’s still early days, they haven’t got off to a brilliant start. We learned last week that Harry and Meghan flew from Vancouver Island to Miami (some 2,800 miles), where Harry gave a speech at an exclusive function organised by J.P. Morgan, America’s largest bank.

The firm reportedly provided a private jet for the couple, despite them having repeatedly called for the world to embrace more environmentally friendly ways to travel. They could have gone by commercial airline and left a far smaller carbon footprint.

We don’t know for certain if the Duke was paid by J.P. Morgan, but the suggestion that he received up to £400,000 hasn’t been denied by royal spin-doctors. If he had done it for free, they probably would have told us.

Meanwhile, today’s Mail reports that the Duke of Sussex’s representatives held talks with U.S. investment bank Goldman Sachs last November in connection with his charities.

Neither the speech nor the reported discussions amount to a hanging offence. But it’s impossible to forget that both banks have experienced a fair amount of controversy over the years. They are not renowned for caring for widows and orphans.

Goldman, in particular, has drawn spirited criticism and been described as a ‘vampire bank’.

n 2008, it was at the centre of the scandal of sub-prime mortgages being packaged as solid investments with a good return, and sold on to unsuspecting investors.

Yet a year later, when the world was reeling from the aftershocks of predatory capitalism, Goldman Sachs was paying thousands of its staff bonuses amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

You may still ask: why shouldn’t Harry speak at a J.P. Morgan event, even in return for payment? And what is wrong with his team talking to Goldman about his charities?