RAVEC - Prince Harry

[pilates]

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

I don't believe this. There must be at least 20 posts explaining that the type of security Harry wants, is not for sale. At least another 20 posts explaining that KC is not above the law, and quite rightly, can't overrule RAVEC.

Yet the republican on the thread is simply not having it. Sheepskinthrow, why don't you start a petition to give the royal family more power? Then KC would be able to help his son, using the taxpayers money, regardless of what the plebs think about it.

I for one, do not want my taxes being used to prop up that pair of spoilt, petulant narcissists. They don’t even live here.

Well in that case how about we settle on a couple of handy ex gamekeepers carrying cudgels?

Please tell me you've not got Lady Chatterley's Lover on your bedside table.....

I don't think there needs to be any more piling on about the Gurkhas. @Sheepskinthrow is making some interesting points very politely, (even if I disagree with most of them 😅) so let's not hassle them off the thread. Otherwise it feels a bit like when H+M supporters accuse their critics of racism to deflect from the argument, as has happened to me in the past.

Fwiw I bet Harry would love a cp team of Gurkhas - not the most effective but who cares, they have cool swords and knives.

(My dad also ex forces and his most treasured possession is a kukri given to him by a Gurkha colleague)

Same. It just seems really odd to me that someone who calls themselves a republican, would be happy to.

My last thoughts about the Brigade of Gurkhas for this thread, is to remind that there is a complicated, shameful, history of how they were treated in retirement.

There are also (partly as a legacy of that, but also through personal choice) comparatively few who settle in this country after leaving the Army.

There could hardly have been a less appropriate formation to choose as an example of an available pool of people (no that's not a challenge!)

(I've noted Hughs suggestion and so will also leave it at that)

SidekickSylvia I’ve suggested that KC can use his own private funds to do this.

Thank you Hughs . Appreciated.

😃😂

I think the logic for republicans in insisting KC can (and should) over rule Ravec or pay for Harry’s security himself is simply that it is an opportunity to kick the royal family and monarchy more generally.

that’s why Harry has become the unlikely poster boy for the Republican cause despite he himself being in support of the principle of monarchy and refusing to give up his titles and desperately trying to hang on to his privileges and even giving his children titles.

it’s a strange position to be arguing from but I think that’s the motivation.

'The type of security Harry wants, is not for sale'

It's the 2nd sentence of the post you quoted.

SidekickSylvia I’ve suggested that KC can use his own private funds to do this*

For the last time ! Harry doesn't want this , he can get this himself, he WANTS met security that isn't for sale !

If it was for sale he could pay for it himself and has offered to do so, it's not the money that's the problem. He doesn't want his level of security to reflect the level of threat, he wants it to reflect who he is. (Even though who he is would not warrant what he's asking for.)

If he wants Charles to show that Harry is as important to him as William, he should choose a mechanism which makes it possible for Charles to actually do that. William's security arrangements do not stem from being Charles's favourite, they stem from his being heir to the throne.

Well, also for the last time, because I have work to get to, my interpretation is that in addition to wanting his wife and children to
be safe, and not let them suffer the same fate as his mother, Harry also wants recognition that he is of “value” to his father, and I think he could be reassured about that in various ways if KC was so inclined.

The protection demand is almost tantamount to Harry saying to his father,

”Am I as valuable to you as William?”

Back when HM died I was on a thread and asked one of the self-proclaimed republicans how they squared that with their support for PH. It was a genuine question because I was interested in the thinking process and how they got to their stance. I never got a reply and I think your saying that it's a chance to kick an institution they don't like and don't approve of is bang on the money. And it's ironic that at least one republican is arguing for the king to have untrammelled power to interfere in institutions to benefit a member of his family - so my question from over a year ago still feels relevant.

Yes I supported Joanna Lumley’s excellent original campaign when this issue first became public.

X post Hughs

I agree with a lot of this. Maybe Charles could choose the mechanism?

For Harry it is more about emotional validation I think.

I don’t think that Charles providing Harry with security would give him any more emotional validation. Harry wants met security to prove he is as important as William in the family generally (ie as in the line of succession). Nothing to do with his father per se. Harry’s problem is that he believes that RAVEC have some sort of conspiracy against him because of who sits in the committee, even though the letter from the late Queen would suggest otherwise

You could give Harry all the 'emotional validation' possible. It still wouldn't be enough.

For Harry it is more about emotional validation I think.

I think it's pretty arrogant of him to think that taxpayers should fork out for security beyond what is judged necessary, for the sake of his emotional validation. These are very expensive, finite resources that are supposed to be for the benefit of the nation.

I agree that if Harry wants Charles to show he is just as important to his dad as his brother, there are ways of doing that. Slagging them both off in public is probably not the best way of achieving it tho 😂

The protection demand is almost tantamount to Harry saying to his father,

”Am I as valuable to you as William?”

I agree with this. Unfortunately for Harry the security he wants isn't in his father's gift. It is clear that the late Queen tried to influence ravec as far as the monarch can and Harry still wasn't given the security he wanted. He was, however, given more than his role demands so it is possible the letter did have an effect (which is morally wrong). Though I'd bet good money that the higher security is due to his being more vulnerable that comparable family members.

The wider problem, of course, is that Harry simply isn't as important to the monarchy or to the country as his brother. It seems he has never really come to terms with this. And I think W&K have made the right decision in having 3 children - being the only "spare" must make the difference in treatment feel very personal indeed.

The wider problem, of course, is that Harry simply isn't as important to the monarchy or to the country as his brother. It seems he has never really come to terms with this.

I agree this is very problematic, because it's never going to go away and will only get worse as William becomes more important to the country and Harry less. He needs to come to terms with this or be a festering ball of resentment for the rest of his life.

And he would naturally want to show her that he was a valued part of both. This did not happen and his pride was hurt.

I'm quite sure this was true.
Not that it didn't happen, but that his pride was hurt.
They had enormous privilege and respect just not as much as William and (more importantly, imo) Kate.
Harry seemed so amazed and enchanted that such a wonderful woman, who also happened to be very easy on the eye, had fallen for "ginger" him and actually stuck around for marriage (unlike some girlfriends) that he would have hated anything that lessened him in her eyes:

"Why do we always have to walk behind William and Kate? Why doesn't Kate immediately want to become an intimate friend of mine, share lip gloss and take me shopping? Does she think she's better than me? You said 'Whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets' but I'm not getting everything I want! Are you not important enough to arrange that?"

I'm sure Harry's pride was hurt. Maybe, subconsciously, he felt it was his status, as well as the man he is, that had attracted Meghan.
But it's the hurt pride that needs changing, not the law.

Yes, this is all supposition on my part.
No, I do not have links.
Please don't ask as a refusal often offends.

Edited for style: "amazed" and "amazing" close together.
Tsk!

@MrsDanversGlidesAgain Yes, it simply doesn't make sense. Massive support for Harry and Meghan from republicans, yet H&M are hanging on like grim death to their titles and giving them to their children. Make it make sense.

High level security for Harry is simply a vanity project.

Harry's problem is that he is and always has been a festering ball of resentment.