Harry shouldn’t be invited to the coronation

The Duke of Sussex says that he and his wife can never return to live in the United Kingdom. They will never again perform royal duties. By the same token, surely, they should not be invited to the coronation in May. There has to be a price for publicly attacking the King, the Queen Consort and the heir to the throne, attacks in which he gave accounts of private occasions when he must know that the people he condemns can never give their version of the events. If the Sussexes were invited, that would imply that their behaviour was condoned, which would in turn imply that the manner and content of their criticisms were justified. If they accepted, their presence would disrupt the ceremony. If they refused, they would also grab attention. I believe this is officially recognised, and so an invitation will not be sent. But it should not have to reach this point. If Prince Harry understood the logic of his position and the consequences of his actions, he would write and say that he and Meghan do not seek an invitation. He is indeed spare, and so he should spare us.

Critics have suggested that Harry’s boast about killing 25 Taliban displays his stupidity. This cannot be ruled out. But remember that one of the Prince’s main obsessions is that he lost his taxpayer-funded security when he gave up his duties. If his claims about what he did in the service of the Crown attract the interest of Islamist fanatics, might he be able to demand British taxpayer-funded protection in Montecito?

In the audio version of Prince Harry’s book, you can hear him denouncing Rupert Murdoch’s right-hand woman, Rebekah Brooks, whom he describes as a ‘loathsome toad, a pustule on the arse of humanity’.