From the desk of Roland Rocchiccioli – 21 May

If he cut a solitary figure at the coronation of his father, King Charles, Harry has no-one to blame but himself, and his wilful petulance.

IN the beginning I was imbued with sympathy for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. While I did not agree with the basic premise of their unremitting griping, I understandingly heard the persistent wittering through the jaundiced prism of their unhappiness.

Alas, I have run out of compassion. I could not give a tinker’s cuss – a fat rat’s clacker, for either of them, or their imagined plight. Comparatively, they are ingrates – by any standard of reasonable, societal reckoning.

I recall a luncheon with a familiar married to a member of the royal family. It was a private meeting – just we two, in a London restaurant. When talking about being part of the family, they commented how seductive is the existence. “When the lift door opens, you get-out. The car waiting at the front door of the theatre is for you! A battalion of dedicated people work tirelessly to make your life as seamless as possible.”

I remain a true-blue, died-in-the-wool, card-carrying monarchist. Conversely, I accept Australia will, one day, become a republic. It is inevitable. Please God, it does not happen in my lifetime. Our continuing status baffled The late Duke of Edinburgh.

I grew-up singing God Save The Queen; consequently, my loyalty is to The Crown. The process of inculcation was complete and thorough. We were not permitted to use the personal pronoun when referring to The Queen. It brought a stinging reprimand, “I’ll give you, she! She’s the cat’s mother, and he’s behind the door!” The content made no sense, but the intent was unambiguous.

To write censoriously of Harry and Meghan affords no pleasure; however, with time sympathy evaporates when the incessant, prevailing conduct becomes insupportable.

Reflecting, I suspect, were it not for an accident of birth, Harry would not be enjoying the same life of unparalleled luxury. If memory serves, he was not academically gifted. He would, in all probability, be serving in the armed forces, living on the salary of rank, and struggling to pay a mortgage.

Consequently, Harry does, by hereditary osmosis, threaten our system of government. Such is the solipsism, I suspect it is not something to which he has applied his mind, or concern. Seemingly, both are so obsessed with each other’s megalomaniacal paranoia, they have lost sight of more important issues. No-one cares whether or not his children have a royal title.

Harry is one of only two individuals who call King Charles their father. By birth, he was gifted the facility to change the colour of other people’s lives; to serve his country and the Commonwealth; to

shine a light into the darkest areas of society; to help wrought lasting change; and most importantly, to place the needs of others before his own.

In return: deference and gratitude, together with the certain knowledge all he owns, eats, drinks, and wears, is the best money can buy. He has no financial concerns. The Bank of England will not dishonour his cheque: “refer to drawer, insufficient funds”.

Citing a child’s fourth birthday party for hastily leaving London following his father’s coronation is contemptible! Indeed, spiteful and deeply hurtful.

It is my fervent wish an act of parliament will strip them of their titles, and they will fade into the oblivion they claim, fervently, to seek.

Harry and Meghan had their chance. They squandered it!

Roland can be contacted via [email protected].