To think Meghan Markle has every right to worry about her security?

[Hardware252525252525]

I’m not a monarchist and haven’t really taken much notice of the whole saga, but obviously do know the main points.

However, the comments across Mumsnet and multiple newspapers and websites are absolutely insane and unhinged. People who don’t know them insisting she’s leaving Harry and the kids, is controlling him, that they’re skint and tge
kids will have to go to state school if Charles doesn’t pay, people saying they hope a random stranger sees her and gives her ‘some home truths’.

It is absolutely crackers and I worry about the sanity of the people who seem to really believe they know them.

I assume someone has to provide details of the King’s diary and working knowledge of the various engagements etc. to help inform security decisions. And he is one person on a committee of several. You and other posters seem determined to find a conspiracy where there is none. The process has been scrutinised via judicial review and found to be reasonable and appropriate.

Exactly, doesn't sound very independent to me. At work we would probably call this "marking your own homework" ie making sure you can get what want but make it look like you have gone through the right channels.

If they want to live a quite life then carry on. But the interviews, the books, the hate from H and MM are not helping them live this life. They seem in a bubble where they can do whatever they like and if someone queries what they are saying - well they are racists.

Quite honestly its the lies, the victim mentality and the endless grifiting that is causing many people to call them out on this. Add in the green agenda and then using private jets, briefing out things in advance and then blaming others is unforgivable.

RAVEC has a pretty good track record of keeping people safe so far…

They should have security even as non working members of royal family.

No, it is independent, no matter what Harry thinks.
The UK Government would not want harm to come to anyone, and that includes Harry, no matter what he may have claimed.

When there is a sub committee and NO VOTE what does it matter how many reps are in the subcommittee ( which acts outside of parliament btw) ?
One is all it would take to pass on the ‘wish’

The comments are bonkers. There are a frightening amount of people with nothing better to do then spew hate about someone they do not know

Stop being hysterical about it you sound like her she managed to get in and out of the country unnoticed and unharmed despite the constant leaks to the press and hysteria they tried to whip up about it all

She isn't diana

So you think MI5, MI6, counter terror intelligence experts and the Met would just go along with someone who is there to inform on diary matters?

Especially if they felt that doing so would result in the King’s son not having sufficient protection and (God forbid) something bad happening to him on their watch? It makes no sense.

I think ridiculous. You cannot tell me that every time a member of the RF is protected, there has always been 4 weeks notice given. There will be impromptu visits no doubt.

And I agree with a PP, if it's totally independent why so many Palace courtiers on the committee.

@OrangeAxolotyl

Its not complicated . I’m saying that why have reps there at all ? They could give the diary info and leave . They don’t . They are known to be representing William and Charles .
A word in an ear

If they want security they are welcome to pay for it, like other celebrities.

They could also stop teasing the faceless pics of their kids on various holiday locations, if they really wanted to keep their childhood private.

I agree with you, OP.

Some weirdly, worryingly obsessed folk hating on M&H. There was one poster who was logging onto 'As Ever' every day, multiple times, to check and report back on the stock levels; 'well, she's only sold 1 candle today.'

I have always taken a big interest in the RF, I love listening to the gossip podcast etc. but cannot understand or abide the hatred.

Trolls and bots.

If they permanently lived outside the uk then yes they would have to give notice.

Do you know... it is only on MN that they are criticised for keeping their childrens faces out the media. Only here.
Elsewhere they are praised for that decision.

I presume you think the same for , for instance, Eugenie... loads of pics of backs of heads of their children.

This is up to them too, they can have more of a private life without selling content. Plus covering their own security.

There was someone who bought a pot of her jam to count the strawberries!

I don’t want to see the kids faces. I don’t want to see the kids at all.

No one I know in real life has any strong feelings about MM - the unhinged stuff you see online doesn't reflect reality thank goodness. Agree it is disturbing behaviour and reflects all kinds of social pathologies involving race, gender, class etc.

I've always been more of a republican than a monarchist, but in more recent years I've started to feel it's quite cruel on royal kids as much as it's undemocratic. Yes, the kids get a very affluent lifestyle, but they don't get a choice as to whether they want to be in the public eye. If a film star forced their kids to be film stars as they grew up and became adults, we wouldn't think it was right, any more than a child of a miner being forced down the mines. Most young people have career choices and can avoid the limelight. Why shouldn't the eldest child of a Windsor?

But in that light, I think we taxpayers owe Harry and his family some security. He didn't choose to be a child or adult in the public eye (well, he does now, but it was too late to really opt out by the time Meghan came along). It shouldn't be about whether he's a working royal or not. It was his birth that forced attention and accompanying dangers onto him and his family, not the type of work he does.

'The kids' covers who????

Well I don't want to see pics of any of the Royal children, so there we go.

The latest front page of Hello was beyond awful... Huge pic of George and headed Teen Prince George or something equally dreadful.
Those poor kids.

Ive always thought charles should pay from his vast wealth since they left the uk. In reality the MET protction officers arnt discharging fire arms regularily.

No, because it’s not necessary in the case of the other royals who receive protection. The King, Queen, William, Catherine and their children receive round the clock protection, so shifts can be arranged on that basis. The other working royals (Anne and co) only receive protection when on official duties. Those engagements are predictable and planned in advance, so again appropriate and employment-law compliant arrangements can be made to ensure there is enough cover.

Harry is in a different position - hence his bespoke arrangement - as he lives outside the UK and no-one knows if or when he is going to visit. Therefore, to ensure the appropriate level of security can be provided for each visit, he is asked to give notice. The alternative would be to have multiple highly trained, taxpayer funded security personnel on standby 24/7 just in case Harry decides to turn up. That would not be a good use of taxpayer funds.