The idea that his little brother is going to swan back in to steal William’s thunder must be enraging: SARAH VINE
Daily Mail columnist Sarah Vine writes that Prince Harry's reported decision to move his family back to the UK from California will be unwelcome news for Prince William, arguing it risks overshadowing the Prince of Wales just as the royal landscape is shifting. She questions the sincerity of the move, noting Harry's past statements ruling out a return, and suggests the change of heart stems less from a wish to reconnect with family than from the couple's fading commercial appeal in America.
Vine recalls several episodes she says undermine the Sussexes' credibility, including disputed claims about their wedding, the Oprah interview allegations regarding the family and Archie's title, and inconsistencies in Harry's memoir Spare. She argues that with lucrative US deals drying up, Harry and Meghan need to reassert their royal status by returning to Britain, where she predicts they will seek greater prominence — to the likely irritation of William and Catherine, given the long-standing rift between the brothers.
- Columnist claims Harry and Meghan are relocating to the UK from California
- Vine says the move contradicts Harry's earlier vow never to return
- She argues fading US deals, not family ties, are driving the decision
New here? Start with this
Prince Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex, stepped back from royal duties in 2020 and moved to California, a decision that followed years of tension with the rest of the royal family. Since then Harry has spoken publicly about strained relations with his brother, Prince William, and their father, King Charles, including through his memoir Spare and various interviews. Reports now suggest Harry and his family may move back to the UK, reopening questions about his place within the family and the monarchy.
Prince William, as heir to the throne and Prince of Wales, has been taking on a more prominent public role as the monarchy adjusts to King Charles's health and a changing royal landscape. Any return by Harry raises questions about how the brothers, whose relationship has been publicly rocky for several years, would coexist in the public eye.
This piece is an opinion column, reflecting the personal views of the writer, Sarah Vine, rather than a straight news report.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A defender of the piece would argue that questioning the Sussexes' motives is fair comment given the public record: Harry himself once said a return was inconceivable, and the couple's brand deals in America have visibly cooled, so it is reasonable to ask why the timing has changed now. Royal commentators have long tracked tension between the brothers, and pointing out that a high-profile homecoming could complicate carefully managed public perceptions of William and Catherine is a legitimate observation about institutional dynamics, not a personal attack. Robust, even sharply sceptical, commentary on public figures who have themselves written memoirs and given televised interviews about their family is a normal part of a free press holding public figures accountable for their own public claims.
The case against
A critic would counter that this piece dresses up speculation and personal antipathy as analysis, attributing motives – jealousy, mercenary calculation, insincerity – to Harry and Meghan without any direct evidence, which is the hallmark of unfair character assassination rather than reporting. They would note that a family wanting to live closer to relatives is a normal and sympathetic human decision, and framing it as a cynical ploy to 'steal thunder' denies the couple the same good faith routinely extended to other returning expatriates. Given the sustained hostility of parts of the British press towards Meghan in particular, critics would argue this kind of column perpetuates a pattern of assuming the worst about the couple while giving William's camp the benefit of every doubt.