If you were as fearful for your family's safety as Harry is....

[PostingForTheFirstTime]

...why would you want to have them participate in a really high-profile public bash?

Particularly one to celebrate an institution you have walked away from.

Genuinely puzzled.

I suppose it’s a bit different to a celebrity who chose to be in the spotlight he was born into this position. I don’t know their financial situation if they have the money it’s a bit cheeky to ask. The Uk to foot the security bill but it is one of those he kinda has a point but also kind of doesn’t.

@Roussette

Why would he keep his taxpayer provided security when he was leaving official duties and the U.K. ?

Andrew's not left the UK (probably not allowed to!). No royal duties. He has it.

It's an uncomfortable truth for some that it's different rules for different members of the RF.

PA should have his security taken away too then now he has been stripped on his title. Maybe he will in the future but I expect at the moment an assessment has been made that for his safety he still needs it.

The comparison doesn't matter anyway. Just because one royal gets it they all should? No- one goes not automatically equate to the other.

H has been told he will be assessed for security on a case by case basis depending on the level of threat. It has been assessed that it is not needed at this time. I guess with PA it has been assessed as being needed at the moment- we all know why!

@notanotheroneagain

As has been stated on here. Harry never at any point specified what or who the threat was. The media are the ones who have been going on about paparazzi chasing and claiming that was the actual threat.

You are the one rewriting history here.

Did he file a police report about this 'incident'?

London is awash with CCTV cameras. Was this 'incident' caught on camera?

And again, do you honestly believe that the police and Home Office would be indifferent to a genuine danger to the queen's grandson? And if so, why would he want to return to a country where the authorities are apparently so hostile to him?

The comparison doesn't matter anyway

The comparison is very valid indeed. Two members of the RF who are not doing royal duties. One gets 24hr personal armed protection wherever he goes. One doesn't.
And is asking to pay for his should he ever need it, which will be extremely infrequent, unlike the other one.

@Smallkeys

I suppose it’s a bit different to a celebrity who chose to be in the spotlight he was born into this position. I don’t know their financial situation if they have the money it’s a bit cheeky to ask. The Uk to foot the security bill but it is one of those he kinda has a point but also kind of doesn’t.

He was when he was a member of the RF but he has now chosen this celebrity status since moving to the US. He's made himself a target by doing so. Just the same as a celebrity does. He could have disappeared and kept a low profile. He has chosen another route.

Yes that’s a fair point he hasn’t exactly stayed out the limelight :-)

He can't just not be a member of the Royal Family whatever you like to think.

@Roussette

The comparison doesn't matter anyway

The comparison is very valid indeed. Two members of the RF who are not doing royal duties. One gets 24hr personal armed protection wherever he goes. One doesn't.
And is asking to pay for his should he ever need it, which will be extremely infrequent, unlike the other one.

Did you not read my post? I said one has probably been assessed as needing it, the other has not. One still lives in the UK as a Uk citizen, the other does not. It's been stated it is done on a case by case basis. Perhaps at future visits H will get what he wants if the risk is deemed to be there.

I would definitely like PA to have it taken away too though.

I said one has probably been assessed as needing it

You know that for a fact do you?

He was when he was a member of the RF but he has now chosen this celebrity status since moving to the US. He's made himself a target by doing so. Just the same as a celebrity does. He could have disappeared and kept a low profile. He has chosen another route.

What on earth are you talking about, he was royals when those Neo nazis got arrested.

If anything, the problem seems to originate in the UK, not the US.

@Roussette

He can't just not be a member of the Royal Family whatever you like to think.

There is a difference between The Royal Family and the royal family though.
PH is no longer a member of one of those groups - the Queen has made that perfectly clear.
Most members of the royal family carry out their lives without protection.

@Roussette

And Andrew?

It's OK for him to have 24 hour security? If he were to go and play a game of golf, he'd have PPOs.

It was reported last month that RAVEC will be reviewing Andrew's security arrangements in the coming months. Plenty of links including the Mail but here's a different one

www.marieclaire.co.uk/royal-news/prince-andrew-security-sex-abuse-claims-762772

Given the direction that recent decisions about Andrew have gone in, it seems very likely to me the round the clock protection will be removed. Then the 'what about Andrew?' argument won't apply, and neither he nor Harry will have this level of security, which in my view would be the right thing.

There is a difference between The Royal Family and the royal family though

Skip

Let's see shall we? He's fought tooth and nail to keep it in the past.

The former Home Office minister and royal author Norman Baker said: “[Andrew] has, like Harry, kept his HRH even if he is not using it. But that means he still qualifies to spend public money and qualifies for security. He is no longer carrying out royal duties, so should have the HRH taken away along with his security.”

I know the comparisons to Andrew make some uncomfortable on here

@Smallkeys
Harry wants to pay for his security, not the taxpayer.

@IcedPurple
Harry knows better about his own security.
Who can blame him for not trusting a committee made up of palace grey suits also known as 'palace sources', together with Priti Patel representatives, together with Cressida Dick's representatives. I don't blame him for asking for the court's opinion on this.

He wants to be a private member of society (cough, celebrity) so he pays for his own security, whether it’s US, U.K. soil or elsewhere. Simple.

That RAVEC, together with HMQ have known about Andrew for about 7yrs now. But they are still going to review.

Yeah... they're always reviewing Andrew lol

Roussette

Not sure I agree with you . Most people I know are no longer interested in H and M and their shenanigans

Yet here you are posting on a thread about them grin

Yes and I will continue to post on this and any other thread I choose 😀

99.9% of the population agree that Andrew is a disgrace so no argument about that so no idea why he keeps being dragged into threads about H and M

He did use his own security at Diana unveiling

Are you sure? Because I'm not clear on why he'd need to do that considering he was with William who's obviously heavily protected

As for the PP's comment on whether these decisions should be made by RAVEC or "some other person", I guess that depends on who it is. Some other professionals, yes maybe, but someone who just wants to personally dictate what's done definitely not, whether that's Harry or anyone else

He was not attached to the hip to William. He went to one of his charities alone.

Yes and I will continue to post on this and any other thread I choose

Of course!

Ditto!

Never said otherwise

99.9% of the population agree that Andrew is a disgrace so no argument about that so no idea why he keeps being dragged into threads about H and M

Because he is also a member of the RF who does not undertake royal duties. That's why. It's pretty obvious.

It's like not being able to mention Charles in the context of K&W or vice versa.
On other royal threads, other members of the RF get talked about. Does that mean we can't mention H's father Charles, or his GM, the Queen?
They are all part of it. And when there is a direct comparison on security, of course it will be brought up. It would be odd otherwise.

But of course, as I said above, comparing the treatment of PA to H would make uncomfortable reading maybe....

I assume that given PA’s behaviour there may be credible threats against him? On a case by case basis he must be the most hated member of the RF and he’s resident here. If Anne, Edward and Sophie don’t get PPOs except on royal duties, and they’re all the monarch’s children (or in law in Sophie’s case) too, it seems like the police may know something we don’t.

I disagree that they are a direct comparison. For the reasons given below. IMO they are not.

It's a very weak argument at best as in any argument you could say but what about ......? Just because one has it- for whatever reason , it does automatically mean the other should. We are discussing H and if that's the only defence you can come up with it says it all really. I have read your comments on numerous threads and it really is the only defence you can come up with too. It's very repetitive.

If PA is stripped of his security at the next review will you then change your mind about H or just switch to another royal?

Totally agree with the comment, there are different levels of royals too.