“I do not think Meghan fully appreciated the consequences of royal protocol and when she realized what it is really like it was never going to work in the UK,” Matthew Gordon-Banks tells the Tehran Times.
In 2020, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced in an Instagram post that they were taking a “step back” from the royal family.
The couple wrote they would split their time between the United Kingdom and North America and that they planned to be financially independent.
Meghan and Harry are among the most controversial royal couples in the UK.
“She has ambitions, which can only be fulfilled in the United States,” Gordon-Banks notes.
Following is the text of the interview:
Q: What is your comment on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s problems with the royal family?
A: I think it is very sad what has happened, but I do not think Meghan fully appreciated the consequences of Royal protocol, and when she realized what it is really like it was never going to work in the UK. She has ambitions, which can only be fulfilled in the United States. Whether Harry will feel fulfilled in a few years’ time remains to be seen. It is going to be a very different life for him no matter how much money Meghan or the pair of them make.
Q: To what extent does the royal family and the queen have influence in Britain’s political sphere?
A: I consider that in the UK, HM The Queen has very considerable influence but no power. She is only in control of her private property. Apart from her Royal Patronages including charities, as a Constitutional Monarch, she acts on advice from the government. This includes her visits to overseas countries and receiving other heads of state in London.
Q: Meghan revealed ‘concerns’ within the royal family about her baby’s skin colour. Isn’t it a case of racism?
A: I think this is much over-blown. The British royal family is not racist – look at their work in the Commonwealth countries – I think Meghan has been over-sensitive to an alleged innocent remark; if indeed one was ever made.
Q: What are the main sources of authority in the UK? Parliament or government or royal family?
A: In theory the British Parliament is sovereign, but in practice, for as long as I can remember and more, the executive branch, that is the government, is all-powerful. Often the UK Parliament acts as a rubber stamp for the executive, but from time to time, both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the Upper Chamber, can amend legislation or even force the government to act or similarly withdraw proposals it does not like. This is in the minority of cases, in my view.
Q: According to Telegraph, Britain is set to increase the number of nuclear warheads it can stockpile. What is your comment?
A: There are those that say there may be a temporary increase in nuclear weapons in the UK whilst routine maintenance takes place and some equipment is temporarily taken out of service. However, recent remarks by an anonymous government source, quite clearly authorized to speak, did not make any such scenario clear and presented it as if it was increasing its nuclear arsenal. It came across very badly and in a fragile and dangerous world, we need to be reducing nuclear proliferation not increasing it. I am hoping dialogue in this area within UN and international organizations between countries will see some success. Also, we cannot have one set of countries telling others what they should and should not do, whilst not following their own advice. It requires greater dialogue and a willingness to sign new treaties and importantly, stick to them.