THE Royal family continued to attract comment from newspaper columnists, with the ongoing debate over naming baby Sussex after the Queen, Meghan’s children’s book and the Queen’s portrait.

The Daily Express

Christopher Smithers said it was initially reported that the Queen was made aware of the new baby’s name ahead of the official announcement - however the BBC later said she had no idea.

“This led to a counter-counter claim from Harry and Meghan’s camp,” he said. “This one could run and run...The latest addition to the Sussex family will doubtless never materially want for anything. However, what of the potential emotional distress and trauma awaiting this little girl as she starts her life’s journey?”

He said many of us find the Sussex manner of doing things mostly undignified.

“After rubbishing his family Harry is facing - and will continue to face - the humiliating prospect of ridicule and derision for naming his daughter using a pet name that our Queen was called by only her father and husband. It all seems somehow so unsavoury and distasteful.”

The Daily Mail

Bel Mooney said most people believe they have a book in themselves and imagine a children’s book to be ‘easy-peasy.’

“Only those with zero knowledge of how increasingly hard it is nowadays for truly talented authors to get published will be able to read Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex’s contribution without weeping – either with mirth or despair,” she said. “The Bench is written in a sort of tum-ti-tum verse and comes in at only 37 lines long.”

She said the book was not for children at all, but for Harry.

“Throughout these pages the rather bossy narrator is telling Dad (aka My Love) what to do (You’ll tell him ‘I love you’) – and watches with ‘tears of joy’ from the window as he obeys her instructions. That is really the full extent of the story. But never mind, I expect the children of the world will be thrilled to see ‘Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’ on the title page. Better than an ordinary old writer, eh?”

The Independent

Rupert Hawksley agreed with Gavin Williamson that the decision by students at Magdalen college to remove a portrait of the Queen from the common room was ‘simply absurd.’

“This has less to do with initiating serious debate about our past – no-one, really, is offended by a photograph of the Queen,” he said. “It is all about stoking anger, sticking two fingers up at the mustard cords brigade.

“Fine – students have always done that. But let’s not dress it up as anything else. Because if we do – if we attempt to make a connection between the toppling of the statue of [slave trader] Edward Colston and this – we risk polluting what has been a largely constructive conversation with the childish pranks of a few postgrads.”