Harry and Meghan’s controversial return to the UK became the target of a biting parody in a sketch on Saturday Night Live UK.
The Sussexes, portrayed by comedians Jack Shep and Ayoade Bamgboye, visit King Charles, played by Larry Dean, and Queen Camilla, portrayed by Emma Sidi, at their Balmoral estate.
“Harry, what are you doing here? This castle is for Royals only,” Charles tells his youngest son, before Camilla criticises him for being a “grump”.
“Sweet Harry,” she says to the Duke of Sussex, before addressing Meghan as “beautiful” and “as brown as ever” — a reference to claims discussed during the couple’s interview with Oprah.
The Suits star then presents her “step-Queen” with ice that she claims she “made myself”, while Harry praises his wife, calling her a “whizz in the kitchen” who has “hired the best cooks”.
Charles then demands to know: “What do you two want?”
“We’re moving back to the UK and we need your help,” Meghan replies. The King responds with a joke: “Don’t tell me you’ve spent all your Netflix money already.”
Harry complains: “Daddy, it was $60million. How long was it meant to last? I’m not asking for much, just a duchy or two.”
Harry and Meghan’s controversial return to the UK was ruthlessly mocked in a Saturday Night Live UK sketch, featuring comedians Ayoade Bamgboye and Jack Shep
During the skit, Meghan greets Camilla as her “step-Queen” and gives her ice she claims to have “made myself”
The Sussexes are shown greeting members of the public in Sydney. The couple returned to the UK from the US on August 26 amid an ongoing dispute over their personal security
Charles then tells the Prince what a “waste” he has become.
‘You’re lucky your father isn’t around to see this,’ the King sighs. The slip of the tongue prompts panic from Charles and Camilla and confusion from Harry.
‘Daddy, just because I don’t want to be a Royal, it doesn’t mean I want to be a regular guy,’ the Duke whinges.
The tense moment was interrupted by ‘regular guy’ Prime Minister Andy Burnham, played by comedian George Fouraces.
Fouraces, who played Keir Starmer in the last series, started his monologue by joking: ‘I’m the new PM and I’m nothing like the last one’.
He continued: ‘Harry, Meghan, I’m here to tell you just because you’re normal folk, doesn’t mean your life has to be c***. That is the Burnham promise.’
Burnham then shared his message with the group.
He said: ‘There is more to Britain than London. There is Manchester. There is Liverpool. There’s that town I’m MP of now. It’s all a bit of a rush, I didn’t catch the name.’
‘Regular guy’ Andy Burnham, played by comedian George Fouraces, also made a surprise appearance at the Balmoral estate
Sources close to the Sussexes have suggested the King’s assessment of them as ‘private citizens’ is unrealistic given their level of fame (the couple are pictured in 2017)
Harry tells him: ‘Makerfield?’, to which Burnham responds: ‘Make a field? Maybe I will.
‘I’m gonna make all sorts of things when I remember the name of that bloody place.’
Further gags poked fun at No10 North in Manchester, with Burnham joking he would build a No10 on ‘every street in this country’ and his eagerness to be liked.
‘Until then, I will buy everyone a pint,’ he proclaimed.
‘Because I want you to like me. I need you to like me.’
Viewers were quick to share their thoughts on the sketch online.
‘This is public execution in prime time,’ one person wrote on X.
‘If even the Brits are turning their return into a punchline, Harry and Meghan may want to brace themselves for the royal homecoming tour,’ a second said.
A third agreed: ‘They left the UK for privacy, but the jokes followed them anyway.
‘Even the UK TV shows are joining the joke party now.’
The sketch follows the couple’s criticism of being described as private citizens and an announcement of several pseudo-royal appearances in the UK and US.
The Duke’s plans have been interpreted as him making a return to public life in Britain and come amid rising tensions between the Sussexes and Buckingham Palace.
The couple remain unhappy with the King’s recent letter of ‘guidance’, which confirmed they would not be working royals and cannot use their HRH titles.
Sources close to the Sussexes have suggested the King’s assessment of them as ‘private citizens’ is unrealistic given their level of fame.
The sketch follows the couple’s criticism of being described as private citizens in the UK. They are pictured with their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet
An insider told People: ‘Members of the public know who they are. The idea that they can live a normal, “private” life is sadly not realistic.’
It comes amid an ongoing battle over taxpayer-funded security and claims that they are concerned about the safety of Archie and Lilibet on the school run.
The Sussexes appear unwilling to accept the King’s position, which stated that nothing had changed since ‘Megxit’.
The decision prompted a series of briefings from sources close to the couple, with one suggesting they be viewed as ‘public figures’ rather than private citizens.
Harry will attend the inaugural Invictus Spirit Awards on September 17 and the launch of the Invictus education programme INSPIRE.
The Duke is also taking part in one of his favourite annual occasions, the WellChild Awards, in London on September 21.
Harry has been patron of WellChild – the national charity for seriously ill children and their families – since 2007 and regularly attends the awards ceremony.
And he will also return to the US to support the Clintons’ Global Initiative on September 22 and 23 in New York.
Sources told People on Thursday that Harry and Meghan were ‘happy to be back’ in the UK despite a dispute with Buckingham Palace over Uganda’s withdrawal from the Invictus Games.
Insiders close to the couple have maintained that the East African nation’s decision to pull out of the 2027 Games was a ‘direct result’ of a letter written by the King which insisted they are ‘private citizens’.
The insiders told People: ‘They made it very clear that the reason they pulled out was a direct result of perceived guidance from the Lord Chamberlain.
‘This was an unintended or intended consequence of the letter – and that was always going to happen. Hence the wish not to rush it out.’
