Meghan Markle sparks buzz over possible Down Under blunder

This summer, Prince Harry is planning a trip back to the UK to kick off the one-year countdown to the 2027 Invictus Games set to take place in Birmingham.

He is eager to make this occasion a family event and, if the government approves his request for taxpayer-funded police protection—a decision still pending—he hopes to bring along his wife Meghan Markle and their children, Prince Archie, six, and Princess Lilibet, four.

Harry has expressed a desire to take the kids to Sandringham for some “family time” with their grandfather, the King. 

Nevertheless, he insists it isn't safe to move his family from California to the UK without comprehensive armed security.

But could Harry and Meghan’s recent semi-royal tour to Australia—with Meghan blending charitable activities and business opportunities—affect the ongoing security review?

The review of the level of security the Sussexes should receive is ongoing after Harry contested a High Court decision supporting a Home Office verdict that reduced his security level. 

The RAVEC (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) concluded that the round-the-clock Metropolitan police security Harry received when he was an active royal was not appropriate, considering his current residence in the US and his exit from royal duties.

Harry believes that as the King's son, complete security is his birthright and that due to the significant risks to him and his family, they warrant no less.

However, the couple’s visit to Australia has made things more complicated. When Meghan disclosed her partnership with an AI-powered shopping site called OneOff to promote the clothes she wore during their trip, allowing her to earn a percentage from the sales, it raised some eyebrows.

Her wardrobe choices included an outfit she wore to a homeless shelter and a stylish shirt and trousers she chose for meeting survivors of the past year's Bondi Beach terrorist incident—items which were quietly taken down from the site after criticism surfaced.

Should Harry regain the privilege of taxpayer-funded protection for his family, what would be the implications when he and Meghan come to the UK? Will Meghan utilise those trips—likely packed with charitable endeavors—as a platform to earn money like during their Australian journey?

If she does, critics might question whether taxpayers should shoulder the burden of their security costs.

The Home Office might have more considerations to ponder over. This was precisely the scenario the late Queen endeavored to circumvent when she told Harry back in 2020 that a "half-in, half-out" arrangement was not feasible for royals undertaking official duties.

She realised that Harry and Meghan's strategy to create “progressive new roles” within the monarchy and seek financial independence while engaging in charity work was laden with pitfalls, and she informed her grandson it was unworkable, leading them to opt to part ways with the royal family.

Now living independently of royal funding, they have to manage their own finances, including covering their significant security expenses. 

After their multi-million dollar agreements with Netflix and Spotify concluded, Meghan is occupied with developing her lifestyle brand As Ever. Sharing her fashion sense with fans could certainly become a profitable venture.

But with a final decision about security still pending, some might view her choice to monetise her public roles as a misstep during their trip Down Under.