Andrew, his £3M per year Security and Priti Patel

[Roussette]

Well I never.

Andrew is at it again.

He lost his security last year. He enlisted the help of Priti Patel to have it reinstated. She lobbied Charles's Private Security to this purpose, and someone has leaked that.

He never gives up does he....

Wow. I thought those non-working were supposed to be stripped of security? I thought Britain was supposed to be super safe, why does he need 3 MIL in security?

I wonder how much this review will cost taxpayers and if people will care?

I thought Charles was supposed to be happily paying for it?

This thread should be interesting, regardless.

Here's a column from the Guardian
Patel email for non-working royal receiving taxpayer funded security

I think he's trying to worm his way back in every which way he can...

I also thought the royal family had ZERO SAY in who received security: so why exactly would Patel be emailing Buckingham?

Shouldn't she know this??

Also, why mention Harry's security issues? I thought it was moot and he didn't have security issues in Britain? So what are they?

"She emailed Charles's private secretary Sir Clive Alderton and asked him to consider a review of Andrew's security and referenced Prince Harry's security issues."

Prince Andrew tries to win back £3m-a-year taxpayer funded protection after winning Priti Patel's support

@Roussette Yup! It's a disgrace.

I'm interested to hear what the response to this will be.

From what I gather Dame Patel (yes, that woman is a Dame now 🙄) personally knows Andrew's PR friend or something similar.

I thought the RF were meant to be apolitical.. silly me...

I thought it was RAVEC who decided on security matters ?

It is so clear now just how political the so called royals are .
I thank the guardian for their sterling work on what goes on behind the scenes- I’m thinking of their reports on how the queen chose to exclude her family from hundreds of laws etc They are really the only paper doing proper journalism on this .

Im not in the least surprised that Andrew and the ‘royals ‘ are expecting more money paid - regardless of whether they ‘ work ‘ or not . Andrew’s right in that sense. None of them ‘work’ . A bit of performative grinning and jazz hands isn’t work. It’s this generation of Windsors scam to keep the cash rolling in .

I don’t believe for a second that Andrew is being is in any way shunned by the rest of the family . The queen made that very clear . Not that she cared one iota .
She revealed who she really was on those occasions when she showed Andrew off like a show pony . Completely unnecessary- she chose to do it.
And some indiots tried to call her the ‘nations granny’
Words fail me .

How can people still cling to this feudal remnant ?
I have seen some deluded souls even defend Andrew over Harry - claiming Andrew keeps his mouth shut …
Where to start with that level of disordered thinking?

Well.... exactly.. so why Patel is sticking her beak in, I don't know.

I'm sure the Guardian will be grateful for your thanks Nov but I don't think this is their story - they like all the others are reporting on the Sun's story.

I presume given her previous role that Priti Patel knew who was previously on RAVEC and either knows or assumes that Sir Clive has replaced one of the previous members - Sir Edward Young

Presumably there are official channels for making requests to RAVEC to reconsider security status and this looks like Priti has tried to circumvent this by approaching a (possible) member directly. Neither she nor Andrew have come out of this looking particularly good do they?

Andrew really is the poster child for entitlement isn't he? I keep thinking that eventually the penny will drop and he will realise that there is really no way back for him, and then a story like this drops showing the depths of his delusion.

I don't think that Charles or William will support him in this, only some like Dame Priti would disregard public opinion.

But Patel isn't even Home Sec anymore so no idea why she got involved. She's a backbencher.

Urgh he makes me sick. There's no end to his sense of entitlement. And why is Pritti involved? How embarrassing for her.

To be honest @Roussette trying to understand the reasoning of many MP's is a fools game and will normally results - for me - in a banging headache! Maybe she was trying to impress someone - the PR person you mentioned??

A lot of MPs seem to get involved in matters that they really shouldn't. I can think of several times they've lobbied on behalf of people they really should have done more due diligence on (an MP lobbying for someone closely implicated in the Hampstead Satanic child abuse hoax immediately springs to my mind).

From reading The Guardian it looks like Andrew lobbied Patel who emailed Alderton who isn't involved in RAVEC or security and soon after the email "leaked".

Andrew still doesn't have tax payer funded security (and by the inference in the article, isn't likely to get it) and him and Patel have been shown up publicly.

Good. They're both tw@ts.

Even the Guardian states that while Priti Patel emailed the king’s principal private secretary, Sir Clive Alderton, because she backs Andrew’s efforts to get his security back, Alderton is actually powerless to make any changes to royal protection.

What on earth was she thinking? Why expend your political capital (or what remains of it…) trying to curry favour with Prince Andrew? Not that I ever thought she was particularly sharp, but this seems moronic…

Anyway, it sounds from this that, contrary to various reports, Andrew currently doesn’t have protection?

It's a grey area... we don't really know. At the end of last year, Charles was paying for it out of his own pocket. Or something like that.....

Telegraph article on it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/08/24/priti-patel-letter-prince-andrew-security-leaked/

I could only read it once so now can;t quote it if anyone else can. Did she send this recently? Or when she was Home Secretary? I guess I never paid attention but 3 members of Ravec are staff of the royal household. Not sure thats really appropriate, surely it should be completely independent and based on security risk determined by suitable security experts? Although I do not like her, is anyone else a little concerned this appears to be leaked by the royal household?

Wow. I had no idea about this. Thanks for starting this thread.

Thanks @Iwantcakeeveryday

Here is the article C&P'd.

Priti Patel ‘thrown under the bus’ for daring to question Prince Andrew security decision
Former home secretary’s letter on Duke of York’s police protection ‘leaked as a warning not to challenge the process
Dame Priti Patel was “thrown under the bus” for suggesting that decisions about the Royal family’s security should receive proper scrutiny, it has been claimed.
A letter sent by Dame Priti to Sir Clive Alderton, the King’s private secretary, in which she mooted a potential review of the decision to strip the Duke of York of his taxpayer funded police protection was leaked to a tabloid newspaper.
The leak forced the former home secretary to apologise to the King for the “embarrassment and difficulties” it had caused.
But a source familiar with the situation said she had done nothing but point out the “blindingly obvious” when it came to the activities of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures – known as Ravec – which is responsible for such decisions.
‘Outrageous’The source said: “It is outrageous that an email sent in confidence about sensitive security matters should be leaked less than a week after it was written.
“All she did was suggest that decisions made by Ravec about the security arrangements for high profile individuals should have proper political accountability and be kept under review.

“Dame Priti has been thrown under a bus for simply raising a matter of process. Is she not entitled to express her view?”
The source suggested that the email was leaked as a warning to anyone who dared try to question the decision-making process.
The source added: “This leak could only have come from an official inside the palace, the Home Office or Ravec to warn off anyone – including the former home secretary – from asking serious questions about security policy.
“And this from the people employed to keep us and the Royal family safe? They should be ashamed.”
The Duke lost his Metropolitan Police protection when he was forced to step back from official royal duties in the wake of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
It is thought likely that he is keen to have his bodyguards – said to cost up to £3 million a year – reinstated.
The concerns raised by Dame Priti echo those outlined by the Duke of Sussex in his legal challenge of the decision to deny him and his family automatic police protection when in the UK.

The Duke won the right to a judicial review based on an alleged lack of transparency about Ravec’s composition and processes.
He said he had been denied a “clear and full explanation” of the composition of the Home Office committee and how it operates.
The Duke was denied the right to bring a second challenge based on his offer to pay for his own protection, which he argued should have prompted the Home Office to “quash and retake” its decision.
Ravec shrouded in secrecyThe membership of Ravec has traditionally been shrouded in secrecy.
But The Telegraph revealed last year that Sir Clive was among the 10 people tasked with making decisions on the level of protective security afforded to members of the Royal family and public figures at particular risk.
Chris Fitzgerald, the King’s deputy private secretary, also sits on the committee, as does a senior aide to the Prince of Wales.
Alongside the three senior members of the Royal household sit the chairman of the National Police Chiefs Council counterterrorism coordination committee, the deputy assistant commissioner of specialist operations at the Metropolitan Police, the director-general of the Homeland Security Group at the Home Office, and the deputy director of the National Security Secretariat at the Cabinet Office.
The director of protocol at the Foreign Office and the head of royalty VIP and MP security unit at the Homeland Security Group are also on the committee.

I agree, this article puts a completely different light on matters. I dislike Patel but I am still not sure why she is involved in this.

But, to me, it highlights yet again the opacity of the RF, the fact that security costs will never be revealed, supposedly for security reasons!
No. It is because the public would be appalled at how much the taxpayer is actually paying for security for members of the RF. A hugely stretched police force, struggling local councils... they all have to shell out to pay to protect this family every time they go anywhere.

Why would Andrew's protection cost £3million anyway? Supposedly he isnt going anywhere, he isn't performing royal duties, he is hiding away, what on earth is he doing to warrant this?

Why are members of the Royal Household sitting on Ravec? I agree @Iwantcakeeveryday This is very dubious. Shouldn't they be independent.

This I agree with from Republic...

This massive bill for the taxpayer is supporting privileged lifestyles: helicopter flights around the country, palatial homes, round-the-clock security for minor royals who should pay their own way, and millions of pounds in cash handed to the family by the two Duchies.

So many unanswered questions. Nothing to see here folks

He could take the home office to court like Harry has done/ is doing.

Oh thanks @Roussette I like to try and read a few diff sources to see who is reporting what about it!

So, Sir Clive does sit on Ravec, just as an FYI

The source suggested that the email was leaked as a warning to anyone who dared try to question the decision-making process.

This is the bit that concerns me. Whether we like Andrew or not, if there is an issue with the process the appropriate people should be able to question without this being leaked. However I am not sure how she is the appropriate person. It is an issue that a letter like this is leaked though.

Whether we like Andrew or not, his security should be about need. I do not treat security separately to my belief that we shoudl be a republic, so obviously I do not agree with paying any aspect of their life. However, we do have a royal family and because we do, the public present a risk to them. They are in this position by birth not choice. So if they are at risk, we should have to pay for it, like we still pay for Tony Blairs security etc

I would support him paying for his own, or his brother covering it, but like Harry's security, they can't carry guns. Therefore they are not protected really. I believe Andrew rarely leaves home, as he is protected on the Windsor estate. This is not a fair situation. Although then you could argue he brought it on himself.

However you look at it, I am uncomfortable with security being decided based on who we like or do not like, or who Charles and William think should get it- 3 members are their key trusted staff. That is not a good look for me.

@Roussette he isn;t going anywhere because he has no protection. Look I know we all hate him, but I just do not feel comfortable with this. He hasn't;t been charged or convicted but is sitting as a prisoner in a huge mansion. Nothing about this has been handled well, from the former Queen to the current King, they have fucked up.

We can only imagine what the King wants for Andrew. Is he happy for him to be able to move freely... a private life, playing golf, spending time with family, holidaying with them perhaps...
Or does he want him hidden away.
Of course the media would just love pictures of him, it would be as clickbaity as any pic of H&M out and about!
Isn't he not going anywhere because he is so unpopular and not carrying out duties of any sort.

I just wonder if he isn't going anywhere because of no protection, not sure about that, because last year Charles was paying for it out of his own pocket I thought?
Maybe this has all come about because Charles is saying Andrew should now pay it, hence getting Patel onside to have it restored and paid for by us.
I agree... it's a fuck up.