The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s representatives have hit back after more than 35,000 people signed a petition demanding no taxpayers’ money be spent on their upcoming visit to Australia.
Critics have been calling for Harry and Meghan to pay for themselves on their quasi-royal trip next month and urged government officials not to contribute.
Today there were more than 35,000 signatures on the online petition set up by advocacy group Beyond Australia, titled ‘No Taxpayer-Funding or Official Support for Harry and Meghan’s Private Visit to Australia’.
But a spokesman for the couple has now responded, insisting the trip would be privately funded and pinpointing how many Australians had not signed up.
He said: ‘It’s a moot point. The trip is being funded privately, so I’m not sure what this petition hopes to achieve.’
The group spearheading the campaign against the visit said on the petition site: ‘The activities are private and commercial and must be treated strictly as a private visit.
‘At a time when Australians are facing significant cost-of-living pressures, including rising grocery bills, fuel prices, mortgage stress driven by interest rate hikes, and increasing energy costs, public resources must be used responsibly and applied fairly without special treatment for high-profile individuals.’
Harry, 41, and Meghan, 44, previously visited Australia in 2018 when they were both senior working members of the Royal Family.
The couple had a police escort wherever they went, and also stayed at the Governor-General’s residence, which overlooks the world-famous Sydney Harbour.
Harry and Meghan’s spokesman also responded by contrasting the numbers signing the new petition with the overall Australian population.
He said: ‘Of course, if you wanted to dive into the ridiculousness of this petition as an agenda for spreading misinformation, then one could equally hypothesise that there are approximately 26.5million Australians (99.98 per cent of the population) who haven’t signed it, who must therefore agree with the taxpayer picking up the tab for their visit.
‘Of course, that is another equally stupid assertion to make.’
There had been speculation as to whether taxpayers would fund Meghan and Harry’s visit, as both the federal and state governments in Australia had previously declined to confirm who would be responsible for their protection.
The latest petition comes after an Australian ‘ultimate girls’ weekend’, where Meghan was billed as the star guest, encountered more trouble in recent days.
Last week, it was revealed that the hotel’s pool and spa are not finished, and the beach below has been battling effluent ‘poop balls’ for more than two years.
On March 19, a spokesman for the Duchess confirmed she will still be appearing at the inaugural ‘Her Best Life Retreat’ in Sydney despite setbacks.
The all-women event, dubbed ‘Meg-stock’, is set to welcome around 300 guests to the three-day luxury retreat between April 17 and 19.
The event has sold out, with VIP ticket holders able to bag front-row seats as well as a group photo with Meghan herself at the gala at the Intercontinental Hotel.
But the establishment overlooking Sydney’s Coogee beach, which describes itself as a ‘new era of beachside elegance’, is rushing to finish works in time for the event.
Recently, it emerged that the new infinity pool overlooking the Tasman Sea is still under construction. And the spa, bar and ‘leisure deck’ are also due to be completed next month.
One guest who stayed at the hotel last week called the refurbishment of the pool ‘a work in progress’ and a ‘blot on the view’, the Daily Mail can reveal.
And those wanting to relax on the beach below will also have concerns because, since 2024, foul-smelling balls made up of a mixture of chemicals, soap scum, cooking oil, hair and human excrement have been washing up.
A spokesperson for the InterContinental Sydney Coogee Beach said: ‘Construction at InterContinental Sydney Coogee Beach is in its final stages as part of our planned dual-phase opening.’
The Daily Mail previously approached the organisers for comment.
