Prince Harry: Pro-Republican group’s charity claim ‘insulting’

Questions from a pro-Republican group over Prince Harry’s use of charity money labelled ‘offensive and defamatory’.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Picture: AFP

Prince Harry has rounded on a pro-Republican group which has questioned his receipt of charity moneys, accusing the organisation of deeply offensive false claims which insult his “philanthropic devotion’’ and “moral compass’’.

Harry’s fury has been levelled at the anti-Royal group called Republic, which has asked the UK’s Charity Commission to investigate funds which were transferred from one royal charity to Harry and Meghan’s foundation, Sussex Royal.

Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic said he had raised legitimate concerns about the finances of the royal charities.

He believes that funds were transferred from one royal foundation to another because of the “personal relationship” between William and Harry. In his complaint to the Charity Commission Mr Smith raised issues about inappropriate use of the charitable funds, conflicts of interest and lack of independence.

The query relates to the Royal Foundation – held by Prince William and Kate, which on December 18, 2019, gave £145,000 to Sussex Royal to fund its set up and launch, and £144,901 to Travalyst, Harry’s sustainable travel project that at the time was under the umbrella of Sussex Royal. Travalyst has since been registered as a private limited company.

In the 2019 accounts, signed off in June this year, it says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to leave the Royal Foundation charity in order to set up their own Sussex Royal philanthropic organisation.

Prince William and Prince Harry. Picture: AFP

“The Royal Foundation agreed to provide financial and operational support during the period of transition, as well as providing a home for legacy projects set up by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex,” the Royal Foundation annual report says.

Within weeks of that transfer of moneys, Harry and Meghan moved to North America and the Sussex Royal foundation is being wound up.

In the letter to the Charity Commission, Mr Smith said: “In both instances it appears the only rationale for the decision (for payments) was the personal relationship between two patrons, the Duke of Sussex (Harry) and the Duke of Cambridge (William).

Why we reported royal charities to the Charity Commission. On Republic's YouTube channel
https://t.co/m9afFSnebm

— Republic (@RepublicStaff) July 20, 2020

Which is why some of us were less than impressed by the condescending Queen’s message. https://t.co/IsZ73PLwTH

— Graham Smith (not that kind of republican) (@GrahamSmith_) April 9, 2020

“ … the main objective of the grants appears to be supporting a patron’s brother rather than the Royal Foundation’s objectives (in the first instance) and supporting a trustee’s own pet project (in the second instance).

“Maybe I’m missing something here, but I find it difficult to believe that a charity making an independent and impartial decision would decide to make these payments.”

He added: ”The Royal Foundation has lost almost £300,000 to Prince Harry’s pet projects. Harry’s own charity is now closing and he appears to be taking the charity’s money with him. I can’t see how that isn’t a breach of charity law.

“People donate money to a charity expecting it to be used to fund the charity’s objectives, not to be given away to support a patron’s other projects.

“Harry and William aren’t trustees of the Royal Foundation, so this also raises questions for the Foundation’s board. Are they focused on delivering the charity’s objectives or serving the princes’ interests?”

Harry’s legal team, Schillings, issued a strongly worded statement, saying: “His (Harry’s) 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 today 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.”

They said the company Travalyst (which was founded within Sussex Royal) is a non-profit organisation for which The Duke receives no commercial or financial gain, “as is the case with all of his charitable commitments”.

They said the Duke’s charitable endeavours were transparent and above board.

The lawyers added: “To suggest otherwise is unequivocally wrong and will be acted upon accordingly with the weight of the law. The avenue through which this was publicly and salaciously created only suggests a hunger for media attention as well as a shared and attacking agenda, which is neither right nor just.”

The Charity Commission said it was assessing the information to determine if it was appropriate to investigate the claims made by Republic.