Prince Harry, 36, and his father Prince Charles, 72, publically locked horns in recent days after Clarence House issued a statement that seemed to contradict the Duke of Sussex’s assertion her received no financial help from his father following Megxit. During his March interview with Oprah Winfrey, Harry told the chatshow host that he and Meghan Markle, 39, signed lucrative deals with streaming companies after they were cut off financially from the Firm.
The Duke said: “[The Netflix deal] was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.
- Prince William has 'moments of self-doubt' about future royal role as King
- Meghan left feeling 'hurt' by Kate who 'never gave her benefit of the doubt', says source
- Meghan Markle pays tribute to Princess Diana in new speech about prioritising women
- Meghan talks in 'the style of the Queen' in first appearance since Oprah, says expert
- Diana and Prince Charles' Greek honeymoon cruise was devastated by secret 'blow'
- 'Stunning': Kate Middleton in bright blue £60 blazer for International Day of the Midwife
- Prince William hit with backlash from Harry and Meghan Markle supporters after boycott
- Princess Beatrice has ‘unique’ engagement ring from Edoardo with sweet meaning
“[They cut me off] in the first quarter of 2020.”
However, following the publication of the Sovereign Grant Report on Thursday, a Clarence House spokesman claimed Charles gave the Sussexes a “substantial sum” to help settle in their lives in the USA after they quit the Firm.
He added: “The funding ceased in the summer of last year. The couple are now financially independent.”
- Kate Middleton parenting: Inside the Duchess of Cambridge's lavish royal nursery
- The Kate effect: Duchess regularly wears ‘affordable’ jewellery to appear more ‘relatable’
- ‘Frostiness that was horrible to watch’: Harry and William 'brutal' - ignoring one another
- Pregnant Meghan Markle celebrates Mother’s Day with donation to homeless women's group
And when asked if Harry and Clarence House’s accounts were at odds, said: “All I can tell you are the facts.”
A Sussex spokesperson was quick to respond with a statement claiming the two accounts did not contradict one another as they referred to “two different timelines.”
They said: “You are conflating two different timelines and it is inaccurate to suggest there is a contradiction.
“The Duke’s comments during the Oprah Winfrey interview were in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal year which starts in April.”
They added: “The same date the transitional year the Sandringham agreement began and that is in alignment with the Clarence House accounts.”
Nonetheless, one royal commentator has claimed Harry’s misleading statement in the Oprah interview was “a cruel distortion of what actually happened.”
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told Express.co.uk: “Though the Clarence House position and the statement on behalf of the Sussexes regarding funds are not really contradictory as many believe if you examine the timeline, the damage has already been done.”
Mr Fitzwilliams added: “Millions around the world saw the interview on Oprah and believe that Princes Charles brutally cut off the Sussexes from funds, thus forcing them to seek employment with the deals with Netflix and Spotify, followed by others.”
Given the Sussexes sought financial independence in the wake of Megxit, Harry’s claim was “outrageous”, Mr Fitzwilliams argued.
He added: “Since they initially announced they were seeking financial independence and have found it because of their royal status, it is simply outrageous that they presented such a totally false view of the situation on Oprah.
“No doubt it is another version of ‘their truth’. The intricacies of exactly when support ceased will obviously elude almost everybody following this.”
Mr Fitzwilliams wished the Sussexes success in their life outside the royal bubble but questioned why they “do such unnecessary damage to the Royal Family.”
He said: “One wishes them well in their careers which are likely to flourish, but the pretence that they were ‘literally cut off financially’ and reduced to living off what Harry inherited from Diana is a cruel distortion of what actually happened.
“They wanted financial independence, they have it in spades and good luck to them but why do such unnecessary damage to the Royal Family and why attack them so often and so publicly?”
Harry is currently on his way back to the UK in order to attend a poignant engagement on July 1.
He is due to join forces with his brother Prince William to unveil a new statue of the mother Princess Diana at Kensington Palace.
Source: EXPRESS CO UK