Omid Scobie suggests Prince Harry shouldn't be flying by private jet while championing eco-travel – after he a – Daily Mail

By Tom Cotterill


Prince Harry has been criticised by the author of an explosive new book on the Royal Family for flying by private jet while championing eco-travel. 
Omid Scobie has questioned whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should be using luxury private planes to zip around the globe. 
It comes after the royal pair came under fire for flying from California to Las Vegas and back in an oil tycoon’s jet just to watch a Katy Perry gig last month.   
Scobie’s comments, given to the Standard, appear to reference Harry’s links with sustainable tourism project Travalyst, which the Prince helped launch in 2019.
Speaking to the Standard ahead of the publication of his book Endgame, Scobie questioned whether the prince ‘should be flying on private jets when he is championing a sustainable travel initiative’. ‘These are things if I was their publicist I would be telling them not to do,’ he added.
Harry and Meghan came under fire for reportedly using a private jet to fly out to Las Vegas to watch a Katy Perry gig (pictured)
Omid Scobie has questioned whether Prince Harry should be travelling by private jet 
According to research by the campaign group Transport & Environment, private jets are five to 14 times more polluting than commercial planes per passenger (file image)
According to research by the campaign group Transport & Environment, private jets are five to 14 times more polluting than commercial planes per passenger, and 50 times more polluting than trains. 
In 2019, Harry said he ‘spent 99 per cent of my life travelling the world by commercial’ flights but that he ‘occasionally’ had to travel by private jet to ‘ensure my family are safe’.
Showing his support for environmental-friendly travel, Harry used a Maori TV channel in New Zealand last May to launch a campaign urging holidaymakers to prioritise sustainability when planning their getaways.
Mr Scobie’s book, Endgame, will be released on Tuesday and is billed as a look ‘inside’ the royal family and the monarchy’s ‘fight for survival’.
Among some of the bombshell claims in the 400-page read is a suggestion that there is a rift between the King and Prince of Wales – who Scobie has described as ‘hot-headed’ and in ‘heir mode’. 
Mr Scobie says the monarch and his oldest son William are ‘pursuing selfish agendas’ and ‘one-upmanship’ that threatens their relationship, Elizabeth II’s legacy and the future of the Crown.
Scobie calls it a Shakespearean tragedy of ‘scheming and backstabbing’ between ‘the favoured prince and an unpopular king’.
But potentially one of the most explosive claims in Scobie’s book is that Meghan  told King Charles there were two ‘royal racists’ who spoke about her son Archie’s skin colour. 
And today, the book was thrown into crisis after the two Royal Family members appear to have been inexplicably named as the ‘royal racists’ in the Dutch translation of Scobie’s prose. 
Omid Scobie appears on ABC programme Nightline which aired early this morning in the US
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with their children Archie and Lilibet in December 2021
Dutch royal journalist Rick Evers revealed on ITV‘s Good Morning Britain that the first name was ‘very specific’, while the second one was ‘a little bit vague’.
It comes after Mr Scobie’s book was pulled from sale in the Netherlands on Tuesday after it apparently named one of the ‘royal racists’. The author’s Dutch publishers said they had been ordered by US bosses to put sales ‘on hold’ at the eleventh hour.
Thousands of copies of Endgame, which was published globally yesterday to withering reviews for its vindictiveness toward the Royal Family, face being pulped.
In the English-language edition Mr Scobie does not name the royal accused by Meghan of expressing ‘concern’ about the skin colour of her future son Archie.
But the book alleges that in her letters to discuss the situation the duchess claims similar remarks were made by a second person in the Royal Household.
Dutch royal journalist Rick Evers revealed on ITV’s Good Morning Britain today (pictured) that the first name in the book was ‘very specific’, while the second one was ‘a little bit vague’
In the English version, Mr Scobie says he knows the names of both individuals but ‘laws in the United Kingdom prevent me from reporting who they were’. The same sentence is in the Italian edition.
Omid Scobie’s new book Endgame about the Royal Family has been released this week
However a page taken from a review copy of the book sent to Dutch journalists this week clearly points the finger at a senior royal.
Referring to the letters discussing the issue, it reads dramatically: ‘But in those private letters an identity was revealed and confirmed: [The Mail has redacted the name concerned and will not be repeating it].’
It is unclear why one foreign language version of the book would name a specific individual when no other editions appear to do so. And it should be stressed that there is no evidence the claim itself is even true.
Mr Evers, who first revealed yesterday that the book had identified one of the ‘royal racists’, told Good Morning Britain today: ‘Names of two senior royals are mentioned during the book.’ 
Host Richard Madeley then asked: ‘Can I be clear about this, there are two names in the book?’
Omid Scobie is pictured outside the Good Morning America studios in New York yesterday
William, Harry, Meghan and Charles speak together at Westminster Abbey in March 2019
And Mr Evers replied: ‘Yes, the first one is very specific. The second one is a little bit vague, if this person is really involved in the story. But the first one is very clear and the official way was that it was a translation issue. There are some debates about how these passages were stated in the book. I would say how could you translate a name wrong?’

Mr Madeley then said: ‘Well, I was going to ask you, how do you mistranslate a name. You can mistranslate a word or a sentence, but a name? Do you buy that explanation from the publishers that it’s a translation error? 
Mr Evers responded: ‘I can’t believe it. I got through the book with a colleague of you and we saw some passages were missing in the English version. Like a sentence, five sentences between the first and the third part that was in the Dutch version. 
‘So something has been erased during the work that has been done for the book. So my suggestion is that… the official words from Omid were that it was “never in the production of Omid”. 
‘Which is way of saying, well if it’s a production, then it is produced – well, it’s my theory – but then a manuscript has never been produced, but it has been used of course. So I think it was in the manuscript but legal agents said it’s not a good idea to mention these names because of, well, that’s where we are.’
The Dutch version doesn’t just include the specific royal’s name but contains no mention whatsoever of Mr Scobie’s claim in the English version that he is prevented by law from repeating it.
A spokesman for the Dutch publisher, Xander, told the Mail: ‘You are right but I can’t talk about the details. We have, however, received a request to put the title on hold and that is what we have done.’
Asked when that request was received, she explained: ‘Just now. We are awaiting further instructions. I do not know how long this will be. You should speak to the US agent.’
They later claimed it was an ‘error’ and was ‘currently being rectified’.
Adding to the confusion, Mr Scobie told Dutch chat show RTL Boulevard that he did not mention a name in his manuscript.
He added: ‘The book is available in a number of languages and unfortunately I can’t speak Dutch so I haven’t seen the copy for myself, but if there have been any translation errors I am sure the publisher has got it under control.
‘For me, I edited and wrote the English version, there has never been a version that I’ve produced that has names in it.’
HarperCollins in New York, Mr Scobie’s publishers, did not respond to requests for comment. 
Share what you think
The comments below have been moderated in advance.
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
We are no longer accepting comments on this article.
Published by Associated Newspapers Ltd
Part of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday & Metro Media Group


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *