Omid Scobie suggests Prince Harry shouldn’t fly on a private jet as he advocates eco-travel – after he and Meghan came under fire for going to Katy Perry’s gig on oil tycoon’s plane

Prince Harry has been criticized by the author of an explosive new book about the royal family for flying on a private jet while championing eco-travel.

Omid Scobie wonders whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should use luxury private planes to fly around the world.

It comes after the royal couple came under fire for flying from California to Las Vegas and back on an oil tycoon’s plane last month just to watch a Katy Perry performance.

Scobie’s comments to the Standard appear to refer to Harry’s links with the sustainable tourism project Travalyst, which the Prince helped launch in 2019.

Speaking to the Standard Ahead of the publication of his book Endgame, Scobie wondered whether the prince should “fly on private jets if he is in favor of a sustainable travel initiative.” “These are things that, if I were their publicist, I would tell them not to do,” he added.

According to research by the Transport & Environment campaign group, private jets are five to fourteen times more polluting per passenger than commercial aircraft, and fifty times more polluting than trains.

In 2019, Harry said he spent “99 percent of my life traveling the world on commercial” flights, but had to travel on a private jet “occasionally” to “make sure my family is safe.”

Showing his support for eco-friendly travel, Harry used a Maori TV channel in New Zealand last May to launch a campaign urging holidaymakers to prioritize sustainability when planning their getaways.

Scobie’s book, Endgame, will be published on Tuesday and is billed as a look ‘inside’ the royal family and the monarchy’s ‘struggle for survival’.

Among some of the striking claims in the 400-page book is the suggestion that there is a rift between the king and the Prince of Wales – who Scobie has described as ‘hot-headed’ and in ‘heir mode’.

Scobie says the monarch and his eldest son William are pursuing “selfish agendas and one-upmanship” that threaten their relationship, Elizabeth II’s legacy and the future of the Crown.

Scobie calls it a Shakespearean tragedy of “scheming and backstabbing” between “the favorite 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 were talking about her son Archie’s skin color.

And today the book was thrown into crisis after the two members of the royal family were inexplicably referred to as the “royal racists” in the Dutch translation of Scobie’s prose.

Dutch royal journalist Rick Evers revealed on ITV’s Good Morning Britain that the first name was ‘very specific’ while the second was ‘a bit vague’.

It comes after Mr Scobie’s book was withdrawn from sale in the Netherlands on Tuesday after apparently naming one of the ‘royal racists’. The author’s Dutch publishers said they had been instructed by American bosses to put sales ‘on hold’ at the eleventh hour.

Thousands of copies of Endgame, which was published worldwide yesterday and received scathing reviews for its revenge on the royal family, are in danger of being pulverized.

In the English-language edition, Scobie does not mention the royal family, which Meghan accuses of raising “concerns” about the skin color of her future son Archie.

But the book claims that in her letters to discuss the situation, the Duchess claims similar comments were made by a second person in the royal family.

In the English version, Mr Scobie says he knows the names of both people, but ‘the laws in the UK prevent me from reporting who they were’. The same sentence appears in the Italian edition.

However, a page from a review copy of the book sent to Dutch journalists this week clearly points the finger at a high-ranking royal family.

Referring to the letters discussing the matter, it states 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 a foreign language version of the book would mention a specific individual, while no other edition appears to do so. And it must be emphasized that there is no evidence that the statement itself is even true.

Mr Evers, who yesterday revealed for the first time that the book had identified one of the ‘royal racists’, told Good Morning Britain today: ‘The book names two leading members of the royal family.’

Host Richard Madeley then asked, “Can I be clear about this, there are two names in the book?”

And Mr Evers replied: ‘Yes, the first is very specific. The second is a 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 problem. There are some discussions about how these passages were reported in the book. I would say: how can you mistranslate a name?’

Mr. Madeley then said, “Well, I wanted to ask you how to mistranslate a name. You can mistranslate a word or a sentence, but a name? Do you buy the explanation from the publishers that it is a translation error?

Mr Evers answers: ‘I can’t believe it. I went through the book with a colleague of yours and we noticed that some passages were missing from the English version. As a sentence, five sentences between the first and third parts that were in the Dutch version.

“So something was erased in the work that was done on the book. So my suggestion is that… Omid’s official words were that it was “never in Omid’s production”.

‘That’s a way of saying: if it’s a production, then it’s produced – well, it’s my theory – but then a manuscript was never made, but of course it was used. So I think it was in the manuscript, but legal agents said it’s not a good idea to mention these names because that’s where we’re sitting.”

The Dutch version not only contains the specific name of the royal family, but contains no mention of Mr Scobie’s claim in the English version that he is prohibited by law from repeating it.

A spokesperson for the Dutch publisher, Xander, told the Mail: ‘You’re right, but I can’t talk about the details. However, we received a request to put the title on hold and we did so.’

When asked when that request was received, she explains: “Just now. We await further instructions. I don’t know how long this will be. You need to speak to the American agent.”

They later claimed it was an ‘error’ and ‘currently being fixed’.

Adding to the confusion, Mr Scobie told RTL Boulevard that he did not include a name in his manuscript.

He added: ‘The book is available in a number of languages ​​and unfortunately I don’t speak Dutch so I haven’t seen the copy myself, but if there have been translation errors I’m sure the publisher has it under control.

“For me, I edited and wrote the English version, there’s never been a version I’ve produced with names in it.”

HarperCollins in New York, Mr. Scobie’s publisher, did not respond to requests for comment.