RAVEC - Prince Harry

[pilates]

Can someone explain to me the procedure and how this works?

I think what Harry wants is armed security whenever he is in U.K. and whatever the reason. At the moment he has it when on official visits or I think royal visits but that’s it. So if he wants to come and bring kids just to hang out with friends etc he is not entitled to it and that must feel very very restrictive when he was used to doing what he wants, when he wants.
so he can come to U.K., stay in Frogmore or similar and attend a royal event with security but that’s it so they can’t go out anywhere else.

i also think it’s not in the royal family’s interest not to lobby on his behalf for security as this will the same situation for Charlotte and Louis in due course. Harry’s security arrangements will set a bit of a precedent going forward for others and so William in particular probably has a vested interest in Harry getting reasonable security ( albeit not in his gift)

These things are decided on the basis of sophisticated risk assessments by highly trained professionals. Harry's 'fears', genuine or not, simply don't enter into it

Precisely - and TBF they make a damned good job of it considering we've never lost a visiting VIP in Britain

Unfortunately it appears that even this isn't good enough for Harry; he wants what he wants and clearly expects to get it, though whether that'll happen remains to be seen

Sorry @WelshFionaThePlasticSurgeryGorgon
I don't understand your post to me. I think you are trying to make a point. I just don't understand what that point is!

i also think it’s not in the royal family’s interest not to lobby on his behalf for security as this will the same situation for Charlotte and Louis in due course. Harry’s security arrangements will set a bit of a precedent going forward for others and so William in particular probably has a vested interest in Harry getting reasonable security ( albeit not in his gift)

Not really. Harry's security arrangements were always likely to change. Only the most senior royals are guaranteed unconditional security. Edward and Anne only get security when on official engagements, and they were also the children of the sovereign. Beatrice and Eugenie also had theirs cut off. So Harry's situation is not precedent setting.

Beatrice and Eugenie had theirs cut off because of travelling world wide on jollies accompanied by police bodyguards paid for by us.

Hardly surprising.

I think when Harry said he had to flee that was from Canada , and that’s when he became unsafe.

But that’s exactly what Harry wanted to do.

Absolutely @AliceOlive - even the Canadians didn't want to fork out for his security, instead those poor British police were sent out in shifts, away from their families, to babysit them ... seem to recall they sent them out to buy coffees for H&M sat in their self built ivory palace

He is not asking for armed security when travelling all over the world. It is about UK security. Every article says that. Unless you know different.

When he is in Britain

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/prince-harry-challenges-unfair-treatment-over-uk-security-london-court-2023-12-05/

Just read the Queens letter, basically the Queen lobbied the government to continue to provide Harry with tax payer funded security, talk about the ultimate 'putting in a good word'.

RAVEC did not succumb to the pressure being put on them by the Palace and independently assessed his risk or lack of, I guess a good thing to know they cannot be influenced, even by the Queen..

Maybe it's because they don't want Harry here constantly stirring up trouble. Can't say I blame them.

You can now understand why Harry reassured Meghan they wouldn't lose their security. 'It's okay, no worries, Granny is on it, we are fine'.

The original expectations were made clear on the Sussex Royal website.

He is not asking for armed security when travelling all over the world. It is about UK security. Every article says that. Unless you know different.

All the experts are saying he will get it if he needs it in the UK, I don't see how that is unfair or unjust. To most people that sounds very sensible.

Different now, non?
As per his court case and articles.

I think it’s pretty clear Harry thought they had IPP status at time of deciding to leave. They literally wrote it on their website. So they thought they were entitled to world wide 24 hour security. Harry had always had this up till this point and he said in his Netflix doc that they would not take it away. And then they did.
I don’t see the Queen lobbying on Harry’s behalf to RAVEC a bad thing. I would expect her too and actually ravec should consider her opinion but she shouldn’t ( and wasn’t) allowed to sway the decision making process which is also right. I think Harry wanted to make his own representations to ravec but wasn’t allowed.

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1077904018/funny-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle?gpla=1&gao=1&&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=GDN_UK_DSK_PROS_InMarket_Dynamic&utm_ag=In-Market&utm_custom1=k_EAIaIQobChMItrSiv_GCgwMV34NQBh0GnwRUEAEYASABEgIfFPD_BwE_k&utm_content=go_12802783397_120935098013_516501077745__c_&utm_custom2=12802783397&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItrSiv_GCgwMV34NQBh0GnwRUEAEYASABEgIfFPD_BwE

I'm seeing a Google Ad for this at the top of the page

Again - why use masses and masses of the same old words to repeat the same old arguments when a few suffice.

All the experts are saying he will get it if he needs it in the UK, I don't see how that is unfair or unjust. To most people that sounds very sensible

Indeed, and this is the bit I don't understand
Unless he really thinks they'd hang him out to dry and refuse security when it really was needed, in which case why not say so?

Harry is a lose cannon. He's moved abroad, not only cutting familial ties but grossly attacking the crown and his nearest family.

It would be ludicrous to provide on tap armed security for harry paid for by us, the tax payers. He has an excellent deal now, where his security is reviewed by the government, as and when he visits the UK. He is no longer a working royal. King Charles' siblings only get security when on official duty, they don't have on tap security and neither will Charlotte or Louis, once George has produced his heir and C&L are not in the direct line of successions any longer. These guys are not celebrities, they are royalty with allocated status respectively. Lower status, less privileges. I mean, wouldn't we all like to to be able to get security, drivers etc when we feel we need it? Harry is a normal citizen but he is still privileged as the government provides security if needed.
Shame he's so full of himself.

I think, @Puzzledandpissedoff reading more about this, and reading the updates that it's more about his status than his risk.

Are you saying you are a moderator as well?

I think it’s pretty clear Harry thought they had IPP status at time of deciding to leave. They literally wrote it on their website

I think it's said they've removed that bit now (?) but the IPP thing is another I don't understand

Some have said that if one country confers IPP status on him then everywhere else has to provide security, but is this really so? I can't quite see how one nation could bind others like this, but it would be really useful to hear from anyone who actually knows

I'm ok for my taxes to pay for security for those in the direct line of succession, as the monarch represents our country but NOT happy for my hard earned salary to be allocated to random, distant rellies and hanger ons.