On Tuesday evening, King Charles held a dinner for senior members of the Royal Family at the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh.The conclave gathered to discuss the impending visit (or not) of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their children.An event already threatening to turn into the usual peevish carousel of imagined slights and coddled grievance, courtesy of Harry and his misplaced belief that every time he doesn’t get his own way it is down to an ‘Establishment stitch-up’ or to beastly Press intrusion or to dark forces plotting against him – as if anyone could be bothered.Technically, Anne and Edward weren’t even there but, in my fevered brain, this is how it went.The evening began with the usual ceremonial toast to an absent Prince Harry from his kinfolk. All joined hands as King Charles began the traditional spiritual to his younger son. ‘How do you solve a problem like Prince Harry; how do you catch a cloud and pin it down? How do you find a word that means our Harry?’ he sang, in his tremulous baritone.‘A flibbertigibbet!’ shouted Princess Anne. ‘A will-o’-the wisp!’ ventured the Prince of Wales. Then all joined in, with perhaps more gusto than necessary: ‘A clown!’King Charles, Queen Camilla, Anne, William and Prince Edward were in the Scottish capital for the Order Of The Thistle service but this was far from the only prickly subject on the agenda. King Charles, Queen Camilla, Anne, William and Prince Edward were in the Scottish capital for the Order Of The Thistle service (L-R: Edward, Charles and Camilla) The conclave gathered to discuss the impending visit (or not) of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their childrenLess than five days before the Sussexes were due to arrive, no one knew if they were coming or not, if they had accepted an invitation to stay in a royal residence or not or why Harry had suddenly claimed that the entire trip was in jeopardy because he was not being given the round-the-clock security he demanded.Still wearing their lavish Garter robes, the royals bumbled about before dinner like velvet daleks, freaking out at the thought of what the huffy prince from across the water might do or say next. Not to mention his limpet-like wife, pressing jars of her grisly unsold jam onto palace footmen, selling her lightly perished, only-worn-once outfits on Vinted and issuing vague threats to her in-laws and others who had once dared to cross her path in Blighty.And now, like foxes in the henhouse, the toxic couple were to be back among the Windsors again. I imagine a stampede for the royal sherry, a titanic panic among the feathered plumes, collectively shaking like an ostrich in a high wind. Over assorted drinks and a ciggie washed down with a half pint of iced gin (Camilla, needs must) the Windsors discussed the fretful situation.Harry must have known – they must surely all have agreed – that he would not receive greater security provision than is normal or necessary for non-working royals on off-duty missions. ‘Just like me,’ said Edward. ‘And me,’ said Anne, who under her robes was wearing a trumpet-sleeved safari suit with box pleating around the knees that she first wore in 1973.I digress. It is no secret the Home Office decreed that the Sussexes no longer qualified for taxpayer-funded security because they had moved overseas.Last year Harry even lost his court appeal against this decision and nothing has changed since.Why was he suddenly pretending the security situation was such a shock that the entire trip might be called off? In 24 hours, he had gone from ‘highly anticipated family reunion’ involving a poignant visit to his mother’s grave, to a fevered state in which he was “close to tears” and “exploring every option”.Two explanations spring to mind. One, Harry never had any serious intention of bringing his wife and family to Britain. Two, he was trying to emotionally blackmail his dear old dad into intervening in the Government’s security decision-making process, something Charles has always refused to do and, to his credit here, stuck to his guns yet again.Look. The King is 77, living with cancer and hasn’t seen his Sussex grandchildren since the Platinum Jubilee in 2022. He deserves to be treated better than this by a demanding, petulant son who cannot bear it when he doesn’t get his own way. Particularly as Charles has shown remarkable benevolence towards Harry, despite challenging provocations.In his memoir Spare, for example, the Prince described Camilla as ‘the villain’ and ‘dangerous’; someone who trashed his reputation to save her own, a woman he begged his father not to marry, someone he now patronisingly claims to feel ‘compassion’ for. Awks. The Princess of Wales is another whose name was dragged through the mud by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, in ways both trivial – lip gloss sharing, bridesmaid dress traumas – and serious. ‘You don’t know me well enough to talk about my ovaries,’ Kate said to Meghan after the latter accused her of having preg-head brain fog and forgetting some important detail about tights. Oh, it is all so pathetic and childish, were it not yet more invasions of privacy, courtesy of Harry’s book.For a private family, this public exposure and these wounds are still raw. Yet here come Harry and Meghan, bouncing in like Ebola, caution to the wind, shame be damned, demanding to be treated like top tier royals. Or else.The King may want to see the Sussexes but it seems unlikely that any of the other senior Windsors will relish the chance to greet the couple who have done more to damage the British monarchy than Oliver Cromwell.I like to think that at the Palace of Holyroodhouse ‘dine and sleep’, someone – hopefully a thunderous William – might have pointed out that if Harry is so concerned about safety for himself and his family, he has made some odd choices along the way.First there was the freedom flight to settle in America, the only modern nation where civilian gun ownership is legally protected. Then in Spare he humblebragged about killing 25 members of the Taliban, hardly the claim of a cautious man.Yet it is on the streets of Britain where Harry demands that RAVEC (the Royal And VIP Executive Committee) overrides its process to supply him with a taxpayer-funded 24-hour blue lit police protection squad that he is no longer entitled to receive. It’s almost – almost! – as if he is looking for an excuse not to come.As pudding is served – Ginger Snaps and Hokey Cokey Ice Cream (You’re In Or You’re Out) – I like to imagine Charles and his exhausted family reaching a consensus. And by all accounts they did. Royal correspondents later reported on ‘a real sense of frustration from the Palace’.I took this to mean ‘we are all absolutely livid’. And no wonder.Jen's Block solid advice on loveIncoming relationship advice from Jennifer Lopez. The four times married pop star claims break-ups are ‘not a failure’ but a ‘launchpad into your next best self’. Has she got a point? Instead of moping around eating crisps and journalling, Jen argues that spurned lovers should celebrate the demise of relationships because heartbreak forces change and emotional growth. The four times married pop star claims break-ups are ‘not a failure’ but a ‘launchpad into your next best self’Jenny from the Block has certainly been around the block. But I like her positive message that endings can be beginnings, too.Cliff's still a Wimbledon smash at the age of 85Wimbledon is always a social snapshot of the world at large, a lawned microcosm of what’s really going on in Middle England.This year the tournament has launched new loos for single and gay fathers, banned a top female player’s Tesco logo and built a space age pod called the Ammortal Chamber where top seeds recover using light, sound and electromagnetic therapy.Yes, it is annoying that content creators – the modern scrouge of the earth – are jumping queues, making TikToks and ruining the respectful Wimbledon vibe for the real tennis fans.But how lovely – and oddly touching – to see Sir Cliff Richard still there after all these years and still looking as dapper as a tapdancer at the age of 85.Perhaps he’s had a go in the Ammortal Chamber, too? Sir Cliff Richard was in the Royal Box at Wimbledon on Thursday. He's still looking as dapper as a tapdancer at the age of 85Zoe was right to waltz awayZoe Ball was honest enough to admit she had been left dealing with ‘grief and rejection’ after missing out on the chance to host the BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing show, leaving her and her crumpled ego alone in the ballroom of broken dreams.Now she has left Broadcasting House entirely and signed to Greatest Hits Radio – joining fellow BBC refuseniks such as Ken Bruce and Simon Mayo. Is she – or anyone else – right to move on after being passed over for a big promotion?Yes. It is often valid and highly strategic to leave after rejection. If you don’t value your talents and take yourself seriously, why should your employer?Find an employer who will cherish you, not bury you. Now Zoe Ball has left Broadcasting House entirely and signed to Greatest Hits Radio – joining fellow BBC refuseniks such as Ken Bruce and Simon MayoWhy big fish Burnham is now out of his depthDear God, is Andy Burnham really happening? He comes across stolid yet naive, chippy yet fragile – and over-sensitive to criticism, a truly noxious combination.One sees already that he is a man who has grown used to not being scrutinised and who has enjoyed the big fish energy of small local power for far too long.His No 10 in the north? A performative gimmick that will never happen. Sixteen million people live in the north and 32 million in the south. He comes across stolid yet naive, chippy yet fragile – and over-sensitive to criticism, a truly noxious combination, writes Jan MoirBurnham will represent the majority of the country, not the favoured few in his chosen, cosy enclave. And I hate his twee vision of Britain where everyone stays in their little hometown, thriving in council houses, cushioned by benefits and buying a barm cake for tea from the corner shop. Get on your bike, leave home, follow opportunity, find an education, take a risk.Andy Burnham’s vision of small-town Britain points to decline and failure, not expansion and success.