The 77-year-old Mastermind host is a renowned republican and has often argued against the existence of the Royal Family. Humphrys, the former host of BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, has had several clashes with the royals including the Queen, who rejected three of his interview requests. Recently, the TV star took aim at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and branded them “hypocrites”.
During a fiery debate on ITV’s Good Morning Britain today, Humphrys called out the couple for their remarks about bettering the world.
He argued they had acted in a “sanctimonious” way by telling the public to “be like us and the world will be a better place”.
Piers Morgan agreed with the star and argued that their comments about climate change were contradicted by their actions.
He moaned that the couple called on the public to reduce their carbon footprints while Harry was “using [Sir] Elton John’s private jet like a taxi service”.
Humphrys has taken aim at the Queen’s grandson and Meghan on multiple occasions and once suggested their actions could lead to a reduction in the Royal Family.
He argued that Megxit might encourage the public to think about “quality control” and how many royals were needed for “hand-shaking duties”.
In a YouGov article last year, Humphrys said: “How many royal hand-shakers there ought to be is really determined by the number who feel a desperate need to shake the hands of a royal.
JUST IN: John Humphrys on Meghan Markle and Megxit saga: ‘Maybe misinformed’
However, the TV star thought the question about how many royals were needed would most likely arise when “King William V” ascended to the throne.
Humphrys continued: “Prince William and his wife and children seem to be setting themselves up to keep the show on the road.”
But he believed the public might question whether there was a need to have “less of” the Royal Family “or none at all”.
In reference to the royals’ future under William, he added: “We simply don’t know what will happen.”
He argued that “the issue of the Royal Family” was more of a pressing concern than the “future of the monarchy as an institution”.
Humphrys questioned what was “the point of” them if there was “no hand-shaking” and how many royals “do we actually need” beyond the monarch.
He suggested that Harry’s decision to stop performing royal duties could lead others to question the need for the Royal Family.
Humphrys said: “There are some members who announce they don’t want to be bothered doing it any more and slope off to a life easier on the hands.”
The star felt that part of the Royal Family’s purpose was to serve as “purveyors of goods to tut-tutting voyeurs”.
Humphrys continued: “If William and Kate’s children, George, Charlotte and Louis, don’t make public exhibitions of themselves at trendy London clubs when they reach the age to do such things, whatever will be the point of them?”
He believed that the Royal Family and “monarchy itself” only “exists” because “enough of us want it to”.
The star argued that “quality control” was a necessity because the public wanted “to shake hands with an HRH, not a mere mister”.
He said: “Beyond mere genetics and heredity, we may feel the need for more HRHs simply to be sure we’re getting the genuine article.”
Humphrys suggested that the nation may question the need for the Royal Family’s services in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.
He felt that the nation had been “deprived” of their “services for a while” and had not suffered.
Humphrys added: “The question arises – do we actually need this service or can we do with less or even none at all?”
