logo
Sussexes ‘did not leak details of meeting with King's aide'

Sussexes ‘did not leak details of meeting with King's aide'

Telegraph21 hours ago
Team Sussex was not responsible for leaking the details of a 'peace summit' to a tabloid newspaper, sources insist.
Senior aides working for the King and Prince Harry took the first steps towards rapprochement by holding sensitive talks last week.
The meeting at a private members' club in central London, was an extraordinary development in relations between the two Royal households, which in recent years have been almost non-existent.
Details including the venue, timings and nature of the talks were leaked to the Mail on Sunday. This led to the aides being 'papped' outside the club, and even during the meeting, as they enjoyed drinks on a balcony.
The leak has jeopardised the fragile peace operation, creating further suspicion and distrust on both sides and potentially sending them back to square one.
Sources close to Prince Harry insisted that the Sussexes were not responsible. They acknowledged that having the details of the meeting splashed across newspaper front pages was hardly an ideal way to start what they had hoped would be a new period of peace.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
Meredith Maines, the Duke's new chief communications officer based in California, was joined at the meeting by Liam Maguire, who runs the Sussexes's UK-based PR operation, and Tobyn Andreae, the King's communications secretary.
The meeting was orchestrated in a bid to start afresh, with both sides recognising that an open communication channel would benefit them all.
A source told the Mail on Sunday: 'There's a long road ahead, but a channel of communication is now open for the first time in years.
'There was no formal agenda, just casual drinks. There were things both sides wanted to talk about.'
The meeting came weeks after the Duke told the BBC that he wanted to 'get my father and brother back'.
It was hoped that the peace summit, at the Royal Over-Seas League near Clarence House, would be a line in the sand.
Ms Maines and Mr Maguire arrived at the meeting by taxi on Wednesday afternoon, followed by Mr Andreae.
The trio were seen on the club's first-floor garden terrace before moving inside.
The source described the summit as the 'first step towards reconciliation between Harry and his father' and a 'a step in the right direction', adding: 'It was finally the right time for the two sides to talk.'
The feud began when the Sussexes left their royal duties and moved to America, amid furious negotiations over the terms of their 'exit deal'.
Since leaving for the US the Sussexes have shared intimate family revelations and made damaging allegations in a series of television interviews as well as in Spare, Prince Harry's memoir.
Senior royals became 'wary' of talking to the Sussexes for fear their words would be repeated in public.
The rift widened significantly following the Sussexes' 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, during which they alleged a member of the Royal family was concerned about their son Archie's skin tone before he was born.
Then the Duke claimed in his controversial memoir that his brother had physically attacked him and that the King put his own interests above Harry's and was jealous of Meghan.
Prince William, in particular, was angry about how the Princess of Wales had been portrayed and at his brother's betrayal for commercial gain.
When the King was diagnosed with cancer in January 2023, Prince Harry was shaken enough to make a transatlantic dash to see his father.
But the Duke's decision to take on the Government in the High Court over his access to state-funded police protection deepened the rift.
The Duke believed the King could intervene on his behalf to negotiate an arrangement, but the King was said to have been so worried about being dragged into the case that he was hesitant to engage with his younger son in case his words were repeated in public. Harry lost his appeal in May.
The 2027 Invictus Games in Birmingham is one opportunity for a public reconciliation being discussed by both sides.
The Duke is said to have sent email invitations to Buckingham Palace in the hope that it will give the King sufficient time to fit the event into his busy schedule.
The prospect of the monarch's attendance is understood to have been discussed by senior palace aides, aware that the Games could prove a timely opportunity to mend bridges.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Shoddy that Donald Trump can't address MPs, says Nigel Farage
Shoddy that Donald Trump can't address MPs, says Nigel Farage

BBC News

time23 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Shoddy that Donald Trump can't address MPs, says Nigel Farage

Nigel Farage has said it is "shoddy" that Donald Trump will not have the chance to address Parliament during his unprecedented second state comes after it was announced the US president will begin a three-day trip on 17 September, a day after the House of Commons breaks for the traditional party conference Reform UK leader said the "cowardly" timing of the trip showed the Labour government's "real priority" was to favour relations with Street denied the trip had deliberately been scheduled for the recess, saying questions on timing were for Buckingham visits, however, are traditionally organised in conjunction with government. Last week France's President Emmanuel Macron gave an address to both Houses of Parliament during his three-day state visit to the such speeches are not automatic. Only around one in four state visits since 1952 have included a formal address to Parliament. Trump did not address Parliament during his first state visit in April, Labour MP Kate Osborne reportedly wrote to Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle asking him to stop Trump from addressing Parliament.A parliamentary motion urging the same thing had also been signed by some MPs, mostly from Labour and including some to the BBC, Farage, a prominent British supporter of the US president, acknowledged it would be controversial for Trump to address MPs and peers, as "anything to do with Donald Trump results in a row".But he said Trump was "more pro-British" than Macron, and the UK's alliance with the United States was key to trade and the Nato military a contrast with the "full ceremonial visit" offered to President Macron, he added: "This just tells you what this government's real priorities are."It's European Union above everything else, including America - who of course are not only our most important ally, but without whom we are defenceless. So I think the whole thing is shoddy". The government is not planning to change the parliamentary schedule to allow Trump to speak to MPs and Keir Starmer's official spokesperson told reporters: "Questions on the timings and dates are for the Palace. They've obviously agreed dates with the President"."I would firmly steer you away from the idea the timings of a visit are anything to do with Parliament recess dates," he Downing Street has confirmed Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer will meet Trump when the US president visits his golf resort at Menie in Aberdeenshire later this 10 said Sir Keir had accepted an invitation to meet during the "private" trip to Scotland. State visits Invitations for state visits are formally issued by the monarch, but on the advice of government - normally organised through the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). Dates are set jointly by the government, the Palace and visiting House of Lords will still be sitting during Trump's visit, but under long-standing parliamentary rules, a joint address to both houses can only take place when both are in session. The final decision rests with the Speakers of the Commons and Lords, though in reality any speeches are agreed with the government of the day. The Royal Family confirmed that Trump's visit will be based at Windsor Castle, with Buckingham Palace unavailable due to ongoing refurbishment. The ceremonial elements of the visit, including a state banquet and Guard of Honour, are expected to go ahead as planned. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

A review finds a BBC Gaza documentary breached editorial guidelines
A review finds a BBC Gaza documentary breached editorial guidelines

The Independent

time33 minutes ago

  • The Independent

A review finds a BBC Gaza documentary breached editorial guidelines

A BBC documentary about children's lives in Gaza breached editorial guidelines on accuracy because it failed to disclose that the program was narrated by the son of a Hamas official, according to a report published Monday. The broadcaster removed the program, 'Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone,' from its streaming service in February after it emerged that the 13-year-old narrator, Abdullah, is the son of Ayman Alyazouri, who has worked as Hamas's deputy minister of agriculture. A review found that the independent production company that made the program did not share the background information regarding the narrator's father with the BBC. It said that the production company, Hoyo Films, bears most responsibility for the failure, though it did not 'intentionally' mislead the BBC. The review, conducted by the corporation's director of editorial complaints and reviews, found no other breaches of editorial guidelines, including impartiality. There was no evidence of 'outside interests' impacting on the program, it said. Earlier this year, Britain's Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy questioned why no one at the BBC had lost their job over the program's airing. The broadcaster's Director-General Tim Davie had told lawmakers that the BBC received hundreds of complaints alleging that the documentary was biased against Israel, as well as hundreds more criticizing the program's removal from its streaming service. Davie said Monday that the report identified 'a significant failing' in relation to accuracy in the documentary. Hoyo Films apologized for the mistake. Both firms said they would prevent similar errors in the future. Separately, more than 100 BBC journalists wrote a letter to Davie earlier this month criticizing its decision not to air another documentary, 'Gaza: Medics Under Fire." They expressed concerns that the broadcaster was not reporting ''without fear or favour' when it comes to Israel." The decision suggested that the BBC was an 'organization that is crippled by the fear of being perceived as critical of the Israeli government,' that letter said. The BBC has been under intense scrutiny for its coverage touching on the war in Gaza. Last month, Prime Minister Keir Starmer and others condemned the corporation for livestreaming a performance by rap punk duo Bob Vylan, who led crowds at Glastonbury Festival in chanting 'death' to the Israeli military. The 21-month Israel-Hamas war started after the militant group attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostage. Most of the hostages have been released in earlier ceasefires. Israel's offensive in Gaza has killed more than 58,000 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. The ministry, under Gaza's Hamas-run government, doesn't differentiate between civilians and combatants in its count. The U.N. and other international organizations see its figures as the most reliable statistics on war casualties. ___

BBC's Gaza documentary breached accuracy guideline, review finds
BBC's Gaza documentary breached accuracy guideline, review finds

Reuters

time42 minutes ago

  • Reuters

BBC's Gaza documentary breached accuracy guideline, review finds

LONDON, July 14 (Reuters) - A BBC documentary about children's lives in Gaza narrated by the 13-year-old son of a Hamas official breached its editorial guidelines on accuracy, an internal review by the British public broadcaster said on Monday. The investigation, however, found there were no other breaches of the BBC's editorial guidelines, including on impartiality, and no evidence that outside interests "inappropriately impacted on the programme". The BBC removed "Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone" from its online platform in February, five days after it was broadcast, saying it had "serious flaws". The documentary was made by independent production company HOYO Films. A review found the programme breached a guideline on accuracy that deals with misleading audiences. The background on the narrator's father — a minister in the Hamas-run government in Gaza — was "critical information", which was not shared with the BBC before broadcast, the review found. Gaza's health ministry says more than 58,000 people have been killed since the start of the war on Oct. 7 2023, when Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages into Gaza. The BBC's coverage of the war has been heavily scrutinised throughout the conflict, with both supporters of Israel and its critics saying the broadcaster had failed to strike the right balance. "Regardless of how the significance or otherwise of the Narrator's father's position was judged, the audience should have been informed about this," said the report by Peter Johnston, BBC Director of Editorial Complaints and Reviews. BBC Director-General Tim Davie said the report identified a significant failing in relation to accuracy. "We will now take action on two fronts – fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated," Davie said in a statement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store