To be surprised that I see Harry’s point about the security

Judging by the proliferation of these ridiculous threads that unerringly mimic Harry in getting the facts wrong, I think this self-destructive, whining, self-important and misleading interview must have really spooked what the Chair of Sentebale called the 'Sussex PR machine'.

The only royals who received full time security are the King and Queen and the Wales family. They are IPPs because of their political position as Head of State and Heir, not their royal one as a member of the King's family.

Oh come on, you know that in practice it's all muddled up anyway and basically the same. They only use whatever label suits them better at the time.

if newspaper and some racists commentators had made as many vile, insulting and aggressive comments against your wife, you wouldn't feel safe either.

The level of abuse this woman faced in the UK is unreal. You only one nutjob to push it too far.

You don't have to like Meghan, you can dislike her clothes style, but in a world of known and famous rapists, paeodophiles, child abusers.. it's beyond ridiculous that she's such a victim of haters.

I agree.

He has security when he visits, he just needs to give notice. His security needs are addressed each time he visits and are flexible depending on the assessment made by the security service at the time.

The only royals who received full time security are the King and Queen and the Wales family. They are IPPs because of their political position as Head of State and Heir, not their royal one as a member of the King's family. IPP status is governed by international agreements because it guarantees security in any country, by that country, for those who qualify.

Anne, Edward and Sophie as non IPPs receive security appropriate to their assessed needs when they are carrying out duties on behalf of the King. The same will be true for a Charlotte and Louis if they carry out duties as adults.

Harry isn't a working royal, he isn't politically important. He isn't a former Prime Minister, or anyone else whose security is threatened in a way that could affect those around them. This is why his security is described as bespoke, it is outside existing arrangements but they found a way to assess his security needs when he visits. All he needs to do is give notice so cover can be arranged as necessary.

He is conflating the very clear security position, as laid out in the judgement, with his feelings around his family and his mother's death, as laid out in Spare. That is sad to watch but as the judge said in his statement "his sense of grievance does not constitute a legal argument".

If he were to attend any event with working members of the Royal Family (eg William or Edward) he would be included at their level of security provision, funded by the tax payer.

Harry wanted more than this, though still funded by the tax payer.

He got himself into this situation, by his hasty, poorly thought out decision to opt out of The Firm, and I'm sure a lot of the knock on results of that decision have come as nasty shocks to him.

If I thought my family was at risk I would do whatever I could to ensure their safety. I wouldn't expect it to be paid for by anyone else and nor should he. He's not exactly short of a bob or two.

Again, whilst Prince Harry is getting mileage out of framing this as an emotive decision and one about him getting security, or not, that is actually not what his court cases are about.

Both the first decision in December 2023 and this appeal against that Decision sought judicial review of the decision RAVEC made, saying they did not apply their own policies when making it, and did not have good reasons to depart from those policies. If Prince Harry won the case, it would just send the matter back to RAVEC to make the decision again. The Court cases would not ‘give’ Harry security or force RAVEC to give it to him.

At all times RAVEC had access to the information and expertise needed to make this decision - more info than any posters have here - and made it. And now 2 Courts have said their decision making process when coming to that conclusion was appropriate.

I don’t think there is much more for anyone to say. However Prince Harry always seems to find something.

why should he have to DO anything?

He hasn't chosen to be in the royal family. He's the least hypocritical of all, better than the smug patronising others pretending to do "a job".

The point being that his family is as much a target than any of the others, his children as much as risk as Will and Kate's children, even more knowing that he doesn't live in a property secured by the police.

Remember when the police jumped on someone with a flat tyre because they stopped too near the Middleton's house (who were still not royals last time I checked).

What he says and the reality are not always the same thing. Every time he or his family visits, the level of security needed will be assessed and given free to him. The threat level facing him may be very different in 30 years time.

The issue with ex PMs ia partly protecting the secret info they know about the country.

Feels safe in the gun-toting capital of the world ..the USA … but doesn’t feel safe in the UK

Nob

He's got his nerve -wants everything for doing nothing.
IPP - the same applies. Why should other countries shoulder expenses for that pair of losers?

He comes across to me as doing everything to avoid admitting that his current situation is largely of his own doing. I can’t work out if he has the capacity to understand what he is responsible for or not at this point. Maybe being in permanent denial is easier for him given everything.

He quit being a working royal and left the safety of the UK, he can’t have expected nothing to change. I’m struggling to understand why he thinks he is safer in a country like the US than he is here. I do wonder if he’s knowingly trolling us all now.

He will still get security provided on an adhoc basis, in line with the need. That is appropriate.

I don’t disagree but I’m more talking about why he harps on about why it is so important. On a very deep level he found his family pulling security after the way he had been raised as how the rest of us might experience our parents shoving us out as soon as we turned 18 and being done with us. It spoke to him on a deeper level about his family not caring at all about his wellbeing.

AFAIK he isn't looking for the taxpayer to fund his security but for his private security to have access to the relevant intelligence

The case by case assessment that will happen for Harry has access to all that intelligence.

The fact he has been able to live in the states where there are more guns than people, for a number of years, without incident suggests the current process is working.

But I don't think he has been told he can't have Security
I believe that he has just been asked to provide a bit of notice rather than have Uk Police on 24 hour standby in case he arrives here

I thought it’s not about whether he pays for security but having access to the intelligence that the police / security have.

A lot of what he said should be taken with a grain of salt.

Whenever he wants to come to the UK he should give RAVEC notice, and they will assess the threat and what he is doing, and provide security as required. An example would be if he is going back for a Coronation/funeral/Trooping the Colour and staying in a Royal residence, he would be unlikely to get anything individual, as he would immediately be protected by the existing security at those locations and events. Alternatively, if he wanted to go back to go to Manchester to see friends, or attend one of his charity events or London for his recent court case the risks would be assessed and security provided as needed. Harry seemed to have plenty of security on his court appearance last month. It’s obviously not known if that was his private security or UK funded.

Harry is skirting or vague on the point that what he really wants is for RAVEC to determine that he is entitled to a high level of security at all times - in the UK, or not. Instead RAVEC have said they are only responsible for him on UK soil and subject to an assessment of the risk during his time there.

I think his position is very different to ex-Prime Ministers who still reside in Britain. Had Harry chosen to step back and still be in Britain, I think it likely he still would have security on his residence, and again, as needed for events.

He's asking for the same level of security as the King & Camilla, William & Catherine and their children. When right now he gets the same level as Anne, Edward, Sophie etc.

He chose to live in the USA but expects the UK to pay for his security there. Actually I think he's after Internationally Protected Persons status so that whatever country he's in will pay for 24/7 security.

So how on earth does them writing books and ensuring they stay in media's eye constantly help keep them secure?

They chose to move away from the other UK which is the other right so pay for their own security

he needs to pay for it himself

I’m not from the UK but I see his point too and it is worth remembering that the security he was led to believe his entire life was all that was keeping him alive and not kidnapped was pulled before Oprah gate and has always been his main issue. I think psychologically security has been completely ingrained in him as an absolute necessity in a way that very few of us could possibly relate to not coming from his background. This when it was pulled it did him serious psychological harm.

Why can't the royal family, one of the richest families in the world, pay for his security is beyond me. The simple fact that they all expect tax payers to fund every part of their lifestyle is telling.

I don't blame Harry for complaining - he's as much at risk as anyone else, his kids are as much a target as William's kids, but he's being ignored when convenient for the others.