Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

255 replies

Figmentofmyimagination · 03/05/2025 12:31

Not usually a royal watcher but I watched this as it was on the bbc and I was surprised to feel sympathetic towards his main argument. It’s somewhat crazy that even Liz Truss gets life long security at the expense of the taxpayer, and he was born into this position rather than choosing it, and private security is no substitute if they don’t have arms or access to intelligence. He’s also right that the wider fallout if eg one of his children were to be kidnapped would be something to be seen.

Surely there must be a deal to be struck where he gets high level security provided by the state but contributes to the cost through the tax system. I’m not surprised he’s upset about it and although he was never going to win his case because of the nature of the particular decision making regime, he has put the issue in the public eye in a more effective way than he usually achieves!

OP posts:
Smallmercies · 04/05/2025 09:15

YearlySubscriptionRenewal · 03/05/2025 12:40

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.

They can't fund armed security; it's against the law.

UndermyShoeJoe · 04/05/2025 09:18

Armed security police or whatever you want to call them are not for rent or hire in the UK.

Harry nor the king can pay for it. It’s provided for free IF and WHEN to WHOEVER is deemed at a high enough risk at any given time.

Some events for some people will require armed some won’t. Some will require 50 arms some 5. But no single individual can go I want it here’s 100k send them.

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:18

SallyWD · 03/05/2025 23:33

I feel sympathy for him and completely understand why he feels vulnerable. His mother was hounded to death by paparazzi. He and his wife have been on the receiving end of an insane level of hate. I would absolutely want security if I was him.
I do think he says too much though. He keeps claiming to want reconciliation with his family yet repeatedly reveals very private information about them. I think he does it from a place of deep hurt.

Oh please. They ha brought this entirely on themselves. Did anyone force him to write how many Taliban fight he killed?

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:19

CalypsoCuthbertson · 03/05/2025 14:07

But that was his point - he hasn’t had a proper risk assessment done in 5 years. He wants the security decision to be based on facts, not feelings. RAVEC have to decide to do a yearly or more frequent risk assessment, and members of the royal household (presumably the King) sit on RAVEC. So this is in the King’s power to influence.

The argument that protection paid for by Harry would open the flood gates to other rich people asking for protection is a lazy one. There’s no requirement to have a process that treats people equally. Lots of processes to do with risk and crime have stringent measures to decide things on a case by case risk assessment basis and this should be no different.

Yes this was a key point . Harry’s security hadn’t been reviewed in years.
Security is used by the Windsors as a form of control
RAVEC is not a legal body - it is king’s prerogative

UndermyShoeJoe · 04/05/2025 09:19

All he has to go is give notice and boom if he needs it he will have it.

His just crying about being more spare than ever. William gets more sausages. William gets more security. Well William is the heir.

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:21

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:03

Not true

When, as a result of public pressure , Andrew was stripped of his security Charles stepped in a paid millions year after year to protect Andrew
As soon as Harry said he and Meghan wanted to step away for a year Harry was threatened with having his security stripped away. Charles then did strip his security . He probably thought Harry would be forced back as a result
Harrys own father and head of the COE would rather protect Andrew than Harry

William and Charles have representatives on RAVEC ( the group who decide which royals get security and how much )

You have no idea if any of this is true.

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:24

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:09

Charles paid millions each year for Andrew
Andrew has tax payer funded armed security as he can’t leave royal grounds in case the FBI want a word

Thats the Windsors. How admirable . Bend your knee..

Edited

Andre ONLY has security because he lives on the Windsor estate which has security. If he moved out he wouldn’t have any security

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:25

It was published in the press that Charles had stepped in and was finding Andrew’s security ( and an allowance!)
Are you saying I’m making it up?

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:28

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:25

It was published in the press that Charles had stepped in and was finding Andrew’s security ( and an allowance!)
Are you saying I’m making it up?

Is that the British “gutter” press? 😹

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:33

Charles had also been financing Andrew’s living expenses of a million a year

When under more public pressure Charles cut Andrew’s funding Andrew somehow gained a business deal somewhere in the Middle East.

UndermyShoeJoe · 04/05/2025 09:34

That Would have still be unarmed security which isn’t want Harry wants.

Good for the king for cutting off two grifters. Should have happened way sooner. The queen should have cut off Andrew a long time before she died.

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:35

Andrew has armed security provided by the Windsors as they harbour him and each time they parade with him in public

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:40

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:33

Charles had also been financing Andrew’s living expenses of a million a year

When under more public pressure Charles cut Andrew’s funding Andrew somehow gained a business deal somewhere in the Middle East.

The point being is that Charles has cut it off

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 09:41

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:35

Andrew has armed security provided by the Windsors as they harbour him and each time they parade with him in public

Edited

And Harry would have the same protection if he attended royal events or stayed in one of the royal palaces. What is your issue with that?

flapjackfairy · 04/05/2025 09:42

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:35

Andrew has armed security provided by the Windsors as they harbour him and each time they parade with him in public

Edited

he does not. You are talkng nonsense.
As has been repeatedly stated armed security cannot be bought.
Andrew gets protection on Royal estates because the estate is protected.
Otherwise he has the same rules as Harry.
And let's not forget Chatles was funding H and M in the early days. But they wanted to go.it alone and chuck the royal family under the bus for cold hard cash.
It backfired on them badly. Who would've known ?They basically killed the golden goose. They have made a monumental mess of their lives and can blame no one but themselves.
And say what you like about Andrew( and there is plenty to say ) but he hasn't sold his family for 40 pieces of silver . He has the sense to know which side his bread is buttered.

Noshowlomo · 04/05/2025 09:46

Sorry to sound like a thicko, but I’ve read so much of “he wants this, no he wants that”. Can someone who fully understands this please tell me what exactly he wants, what he is actually getting and why he can’t get what he wants. Thank you 🙏🏼

Mirabella7 · 04/05/2025 09:55

It’s not so much about who pays for security as Harry not being safe with unarmed security and without the intelligence that only the police have access to. Harry also has to be formally invited to visit the UK, he can’t just give notice of it. With the state of his relationship with The King that’s not likely to happen.
Harry needs to build bridges with his father long distance first and The King understandably won’t communicate.
Such a mess and every time he speaks he seems to make it worse.

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 10:02

@Munnygirl
My issue is that Andrew was protected by Charles and the queen . The vast majority of the uk population have an issue with that . If you don’t I have nothing to add .

The attempt to draw parallels with Harry and Andrew are desperate .

myrtleWilson · 04/05/2025 10:04

@Mirabella7 where did you see that Harry has to be formally invited to the UK? He is a UK citizen still so can travel at his whim (he needs to comply with RAVEC security processes but that doesn't extend to only visiting when invited...)

flapjackfairy · 04/05/2025 10:05

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 09:03

Not true

When, as a result of public pressure , Andrew was stripped of his security Charles stepped in a paid millions year after year to protect Andrew
As soon as Harry said he and Meghan wanted to step away for a year Harry was threatened with having his security stripped away. Charles then did strip his security . He probably thought Harry would be forced back as a result
Harrys own father and head of the COE would rather protect Andrew than Harry

William and Charles have representatives on RAVEC ( the group who decide which royals get security and how much )

Charles didn't strip his security. RAVEC make decisions on security. .And did Andrew leave the country ? No .
If he had chosen to live abroad he would've been in the same boat.
Harry spat the dummy and then realised he wouldn't get state funded security in America. Why should he ? He wants to live a non royal life so he has to accept he doesn't get the royal privileges either.

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 10:05

@flapjackfairy
Unbelievable ! I said on another thread that when royalists comment one will say ‘ at least Andrew keeps his mouth shut !’

Do you ever pause to wonder why keeping your mouth shut is so crucial for the Windsors ? WTH are they hiding ?

Anyway thanks for proving my point

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 10:08

Ukisgaslit · 04/05/2025 10:02

@Munnygirl
My issue is that Andrew was protected by Charles and the queen . The vast majority of the uk population have an issue with that . If you don’t I have nothing to add .

The attempt to draw parallels with Harry and Andrew are desperate .

Not at all. Two members of the RF who are no longer serving getting exactly the same security.

Munnygirl · 04/05/2025 10:10

flapjackfairy · 04/05/2025 10:05

Charles didn't strip his security. RAVEC make decisions on security. .And did Andrew leave the country ? No .
If he had chosen to live abroad he would've been in the same boat.
Harry spat the dummy and then realised he wouldn't get state funded security in America. Why should he ? He wants to live a non royal life so he has to accept he doesn't get the royal privileges either.

This 💯