Security for Harry and Meghan not a priority

[Viviennemary]

Article in the DM reporting that Rishi Sunak has apparently said Harry and Meghan's security issues in New York are not a priority for him when he was asked about the car chase. He is concentrating on policing and safety of people in this country.

If they hadn’t been “Ta-da! It’s us!!” at a NY awards do then this wouldn’t have occurred. Has anyone photographed Harry at BetterUp? Or Meghan at the Archewell HQ? Nah, didn’t think so.

Of course Charles paid for Camilla's security before they were married. Why not?
He's not paying personally for anyone else. Andrew's now comes out of his own money, he also pays for Beatrice and Eugenie, much to his chagrin.
Personal decisions by family members are just that. Otherwise it's a branch of the police.

The Royals have security either because of their position in the line of succession (Willliam and his family) or because they are carrying out engagements on behalf of the King. So, as I understand it, Edward and Sophie have police when they are “on duty” but not as a matter of course. Harry is neither - he is now 5th in line and he isn’t a working royal. Plus - he left the country and his “job” as a working Royal in order to have a more private life. He could do that. If you go flouncing round New York having your picture taken at awards ceremonies, then you can’t really object to press interest. But that’s up to him. Why on earth should someone else foot the bill for it?

@notanotheroneagain The security wasn't armed like the security she had as the Duchess of Cornwall.

Security has also not been removed from Harry exactly: just the guarantee of round the clock, armed personal protection no matter what he’s doing. It’s now judged on a case by case basis, but he’d still get royal protection in a situation he needed it.

Exactly, and nothing was removed to punish them or at the whim of Charles. That's not how security is decided.

Like when they quickly showed up in this recent situation?

What recent situation?

The security was under St James palace. So quite up there in security. But whatever you say.

Also Kate was protected even as a girlfriend.

Yet, Charles finds it hard to protect his son who has had viable threats with people going to jail, and him being born into risk due to his heritage.

Takes away funds from him, when he had been busy funding Camilla's children before marriage and even arrested peados were getting funding from Charles.

All this was before interviews and book, before you harp on.

Oh my goodness! Thank heavens they are ok. Very brave and courageous of these two. Their achievements inspire us all.

As Liz might say: 'recollections may vary'

Charles' involvement with paedophiles is obviously unacceptable and dodgy as hell. Nobody is going to dispute that.

Camilla had 2 full time retired protection officers protecting her before marriage. Harry wants armed protection officers which isn't the same thing.

The current system of assessing each visit to the UK is reasonable and he's received it when he had official business like the Coronation which is fair.

Adult Harry is as important as Edward or Anne. If he was still a working royal in the UK then he'd have security for engagements and his home would be protected because the whole compound where it is would be protected.

He clearly wants IPP status so that American taxpayers pay for his security which will save him millions.

Also Kate was protected even as a girlfriend.

She wasn’t actually - certainly not by the Met Royal Protection Squad. Although Meghan was, as Harry’s Private Secretary went all out to make it happen after Harry insisted.

Those are good points, @WheelsUp . The met aren't going to leave security decisions to Charles! It's up to the professionals. Hence why Harry needs to take it to court, rather than take it to Charles.

Harry & Meghan didn’t have their security removed.

They removed themselves from the security that was made available to them.

Lots of people have security which they pay for themselves. Harry & Meghan can do the same. Nobody is stopping them.

Back around 2004 -2008 Kate was a girlfriend who was reported as having royal security.
What? Now the story has changed?

MM was had Suits organising her security not the palace.

@notanotheroneagain The 2007 article said she left with William so maybe they were protecting him? It also says policemen not royal bodyguards. As she was constantly harassed by photographers maybe they thought there was a risk, but royal security is 24/7 not just an odd evening. As for a police radio it's hardly protection unless she whacks a pap round the head. 2008 was only 2 years before they got engaged and had been together 6ish years already.

So for most of the time she had nothing as so many pictured would testify. Same as Diana.

The fact that police officers had to be called in to help Kate Middleton as she was then when she got into a near-catastrophic situation with the paparazzi (as I think we call them these days…) demonstrates that she didn’t have her own protection, actually. As does the fact that she had a radio to call for help, rather than a protection team with her 24/7.

And that picture of Kate on a ski field - she was with William on the trip, and so of course the couple were both protected when they were together.

Meghan had protection from very early on.

The 2007 article said she left with William so maybe they were protecting him? It also says policemen not royal bodyguards.

Oh yes, polkadotdalmatian, I missed the point that in the nightclub article that said that Kate left with William - as I pointed out, obviously she had protection when the couple was together. But not Kate on her own.

Of course Charles paid for Camilla. She was his partner.

Harry has security. He's paid for it as he should. Who should pay it? Not me, or the American taxpayers. As for Charles 1-2 million a year isn't peanuts to anybody. Why would you find someone who has done nothing but slag you off for 2 years? 🤷🏻‍♀️

Which makes sense. And as you pointed out, Her having a radio for security isn't the same as the security she has now.

Exactly. They chose to give up their official role and move to another country where they have no special status. Choices have consequences in the real world.

If they can afford a luxury home in one of the most exclusive parts of California surely they can afford to pay for their own security? If not, then they're living beyond their means. That's on them. Like I say, choices have consequences.

There is footage of Kate in the early days getting the full pap treatment- followed down the street, getting so close to her, cameras in her face, luckily doesn’t happen anymore

Is that the video when she's trying to get into her car and drive off? That was intense and unacceptable.