The anticipation was high, the start of the first episode delivering on the drama.
It includes videos filmed by the couple, Harry and Meghan wanting to give us a front row seat into how they were really feeling in those frantic weeks at the start of 2020 when they announced they’d had enough.
Harry is on a crusade as he explains: “I feel as though being part of this family, it’s my duty to uncover this exploitation and bribery which happens within our media.
“This has always been so much bigger than us. No one knows the full truth. We know the full truth. The institution know the full truth and the media know the full truth because they’ve been in on it.
“And I think anyone else in my situation would have done exactly the same thing.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:37
‘Are you putting money before family?’
A traumatised man now unleashed
Advertisement
We’ve heard him say a lot of this before, but he does speak at greater length than previously.
It feels like you’re watching a man who has clearly been heavily traumatised by what happened to him, now unleashed, and using this as some kind of cathartic experience to get it all out once and for all.
After the racism claims that blew things up around the Oprah interview, it was always going to be fascinating to see if we heard any more on that from the couple.
The furthest they go in these episodes is to talk about how the UK press allegedly made an issue of Meghan’s race, with her mother Doria speaking for the first time about the struggles her daughter faced.
‘The race element’
That section in episode two also features one of the more difficult claims against the Royal Family.
Harry suggests it was brushed over by his relatives, and they were expected to just get on with it.
“What people need to understand is as far as a lot of the family were concerned everything she (Meghan) was being put through, they had been put through as well, so it was almost like a rite of passage,” he says.
“Some of the members of the family were like, ‘my wife had to go through that, so why should your girlfriend be treated any differently, why should you get special treatment, why should she be protected?’.
“And I said, ‘the difference here is the race element’.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:33
Prince Harry on ‘race element’
‘Weary’ royals will likely keep their head down
The suggestion that the Royal Family were not taking seriously racist abuse levelled at Meghan is not a good look.
But this is not like the Oprah interview. There is no new evidence – there aren’t any particularly damning new claims.
For a family who I’m told are generally “weary” and feel “sadness” more than anything about all this, I suspect they will keep their heads down and not feel the need to react.
Harry and Meghan’s videos ‘feel peculiar’
It is the couple’s own videos that stand out the most and feel peculiar.
Harry explains that a friend suggested they should personally document what happened to them.
Yes, we may all now record our lives to a degree through photos and videos.
But was it paranoia that made them film themselves at this traumatic time, or the knowledge that the videos would later, down the line, have some monetary value? Which they have, both for the couple and for Netflix.
A global audience is now poised for the next three episodes to be released next week.
The UK is on a “slippery slope towards death on demand”, according to the justice secretary ahead of a historic Commons vote on assisted dying.
In a letter to her constituents, Shabana Mahmood said she was “profoundly concerned” about the legislation.
“Sadly, recent scandals – such as Hillsborough, infected blood and the Post Office Horizon – have reminded us that the state and those acting on its behalf are not always benign,” she wrote.
“I have always held the view that, for this reason, the state should serve a clear role. It should protect and preserve life, not take it away.
“The state should never offer death as a service.”
On 29 November, MPs will be asked to consider whether to legalise assisted dying, through Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
Details of the legislation were published last week, including confirmation the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
14:46
Minister ‘leans’ to assisted dying bill
Ms Mahmood, however, said “predictions about life expectancy are often inaccurate”.
“Doctors can only predict a date of death, with any real certainty, in the final days of life,” she said. “The judgment as to who can and cannot be considered for assisted suicide will therefore be subjective and imprecise.”
Under the Labour MP’s proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
However, Ms Mahmood said she was concerned the legislation could “pressure” some into ending their lives.
“It cannot be overstated what a profound shift in our culture assisted suicide will herald,” she wrote.
“In my view, the greatest risk of all is the pressure the elderly, vulnerable, sick or disabled may place upon themselves.”
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who put forward the bill, said some of the points Ms Mahmood raised have been answered “in the the thorough drafting and presentation of the bill”.
“The strict eligibility criteria make it very clear that we are only talking about people who are already dying,” she said.
“That is why the bill is called the ‘Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill’; its scope cannot be changed and clearly does not include any other group of people.
“The bill would give dying people the autonomy, dignity and choice to shorten their death if they wish.”
In response to concerns Ms Mahmood raised about patients being coerced into choosing assisted death, Ms Leadbeater said she has consulted widely with doctors and judges.
“Those I have spoken to tell me that they are well equipped to ask the right questions to detect coercion and to ascertain a person’s genuine wishes. It is an integral part of their work,” she said.
In an increasingly fractious debate around the topic, multiple Labour MPs have voiced their concerns.
In a letter to ministers on 3 October, the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed “the prime minister has decided to set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “therefore remain neutral on the passage of the bill and on the matter of assisted dying”.
She talks about a “slippery slope towards death on demand”. Savage. The state should “never offer death as a service”, she says. Chilling.
So much for Sir Keir Starmer attempting to cool the temperature in the row by urging cabinet ministers, whatever their view, to stop inflaming or attempting to influence the debate.
Ms Mahmood talks, as other opponents have, about pressure on the elderly, sick or disabled who feel they have “become too much of a burden to their family”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:41
Details of end of life bill released
She hits out at a “lack of legal safeguards” in the bill and pressure on someone into ending their life “by those acting with malign intent”.
Advertisement
Malign intent? Hey! That’s quite an assertion from a secretary of state for justice and lord chancellor who’s been urged by the PM to tone down her language.
It’s claimed that Sir Keir ticked off Wes Streeting, the health secretary, after he publicly opposed the bill and launched an analysis of the costs of implementing it.
Will the justice secretary now receive a reprimand from the boss? It’s a bit late for that. Critics will also claim Sir Keir’s dithering over the bill is to blame for cabinet ministers freelancing.
Shabana Mahmood is the first elected Muslim woman to hold a cabinet post. Elected to the Commons in 2010, she was also one of the first Muslim women MPs.
She told her constituents in her letter that it’s not only for religious reasons that she’s “profoundly concerned” about the legislation, but also because of what it would mean for the role of the state.
But of course, she’s not the only senior politician with religious convictions to speak out strongly against Kim Leadbeater’s bill this weekend.
Gordon Brown, son of the manse, who was strongly influenced by his father, a Church of Scotland minister, wrote about his opposition in a highly emotional article in The Guardian.
He spoke about the pain of losing his 10-day-old baby daughter Jennifer, born seven weeks prematurely and weighing just 2lb 4oz, in January 2002, after she suffered a brain haemorrhage on day four of her short life.
Mr Brown said that tragedy convinced him of the value and imperative of good end-of-life care, not the case for assisted dying. His powerful voice will strongly influence many Labour MPs.
And what of Kim Leadbeater? It’s looking increasingly as though she’s now being hung out to dry by the government, after initially being urged by the government to choose assisted dying after topping the private members bill ballot.
All of which will encourage Sir Keir’s critics to claim he looks weak. It is, or course, a private members bill and a free vote, which makes the outcome on Friday unpredictable.
But the dramatic interventions of the current lord chancellor and the former Labour prime minister are hugely significant, potentially decisive – and potentially embarrassing for a prime minister who appears to be losing control of the assisted dying debate.
Red Bull driver Max Verstappen has won the Formula One world title for a fourth straight year.
His victory was confirmed after finishing fifth at the Las Vegas Grand Prix. Mercedes’ George Russell won the race.
The 27-year-old Dutchman becomes just the sixth driver in Formula One history to win four titles or more, after outscoring Lando Norris who took the chequered flag in only sixth.
Verstappen is now guaranteed the world crown with two races still remaining, with his domination cementing his name among Formula One’s greats.
“Oh my God man,” said an emotional Verstappen after securing the world title. “What a season. Four times. It was a little bit more difficult than last year.”
Lewis Hamilton raced back from 10th to second place to complete an impressive one-two finish for Mercedes. Carlos Sainz finished third for Ferrari, one place ahead of his team-mate Charles Leclerc.
Russell’s third victory was the most dominant of his career so far, crossing the line 7.3 seconds clear of Hamilton.
More on Formula 1
Related Topics:
Michael Schumacher and Lewis Hamilton have each won a record seven, with 1950s Argentine legend Juan-Manuel Fangio on five ahead of Alain Prost, Sebastian Vettel and now Verstappen on four.
Having won every Drivers’ Championship since claiming his first in the controversial end to the 2021 season when he beat Hamilton in deeply contentious circumstances, Verstappen now joins Hamilton, Fangio and Vettel in winning four titles consecutively.
Advertisement
Only Schumacher has achieved a run of five.
The team were hit by controversy earlier this season, with Red Bull’s principal sponsor, Christian Horner, facing allegations of controlling behaviour by a female staff member. Horner, who denied the accusations, was cleared, and a subsequent appeal was thrown out.
Horner congratulated Verstappen on the radio, telling him: “Max Verstappen you are a four-time world champion. That is a phenomenal, phenomenal achievement. You can be incredibly proud of yourself.”
Red Bull is on course to finish third in the constructors’ championship this year. This century only Hamilton in 2008 with McLaren, and Verstappen in 2021, have won the drivers’ title when their team did not win the constructors’ championship.