Duke of Sussex security to be reviewed

[bluegreygreen]

The Duke of Sussex lost his argument in the Court of Appeal in May for automatic taxpayer security: the current arrangement is that his security needs are assessed on a case-by-case basis provided he gives notice.

He has recently been in touch with the new Home Secretary, and the latest update is that RAVEC has asked its Risk Management Board (RMB) to reassess his threat level.

Telegraph archive link

Even if they had the entire SAS on 24hr guard duty, I don't see Meghan darkening these shores any time soon or indeed ever.

Whatever the outcome, in H's account it will not be fair.

Sadly, he's the proverbial boy who cried "wolf!" isn't he?

I wonder how he could ever get 'automatic' security.

In one of the court documents for his failed Judicial Review, it was pointed out that even as a working royal, Harry belonged to RAVEC's 'Tier Two', denoting those individuals who may receive full time security for a certain period, but are not automatically entitled to security because of their status. Since he 'stepped down', he demoted himself to Tier Three, meaning his security needs are reviewed on a 'case by case' basis.

It's hard to see how he could be 'upgraded' to Tier Two again, as he lives abroad and has no official role. But even if he were, he still would not be automatically entitled to security just because of who he is. So I expect this will be yet another expensive farce leaving Harry right back where he started.

I am hoping for poetic justice: the threat has diminished, current security arrangements are adequate. Shabana Mahmood is sharp, and well able to see that she can close this down by agreeing another RAVEC review.

Many dangerous incidents? Name one.

There was an abduction plan thwarted by the police aimed at Archie when they lived in Windsor

Come again @Ihavelostthegame?

I'd have expected someone to be charged over that if it happened but haven't heard anything about it ...

Do we know that this review was not already scheduled? 5 years seems like a good time to do a review, especially as Harry is now son as opposed to grandson of the monarch.

That's a good point @IcedPurple. I have seen a suggestion on a different forum that there is usually a review at 5 years that is more detailed than the annual one (I have no way of verifying this).

A review does make sense, apart from the inevitable spin as a 'win' for Harry, in contrast to the comprehensive loss in court. I wonder if he has paid the taxpayers' costs yet?

Presumably the RMB takes into account all aspects of person/status/threat when assessing the risk. The status had significantly reduced, hence the 'case by case' assessment of need and provision of security. That suggests that the corresponding threat would need to have increased significantly for any change (increase) in provision.

Harry offering to pay for his security solves nothing. It would set a precedent for the wealthy to buy public services. Only a few steps then to Banana Republic Britain.

Risks that he himself could have mitigated by not writing about how many people he killed during his time in the army and by not courting publicity wherever he goes.

Also, members of the RF have credible threats against them all the time. For example: there was a person with a crossbow who intended to harm the Wales family. He got into the grounds at Windsor. The Sussexes are not exceptional or unique, however much they claim to the contrary.

Quite a few posters have said they think it’s perfectly fair for a review to be carried out, even if they don’t believe Harry should ultimately receive publicly funded protection.

Terms like “frothing” and “hate” are likely to elicit a response. I’m assuming you realised that when you used them!

Exactly. Thank you.

I'd say 60% of people on here wouldn't mind if anything bad happened to him. As for her, it would be the 95%. You only have to read the comments

Yes that was my understanding too - I thought the case was that he wished to supplement the security arrangements at his own cost. But the Home Office argument was this would set a precedent.

And perfectly reasonable to redo the risk assessment regularly - would expect the risks to be dynamic.

Sorry but I don’t believe any of this and neither do most people

Windsor is probably one of the most protected royal residences so the assumption made by that poster along with the claim of journalist chasing them is simply laughable.

It does make sense that it's reviewed periodically.

I have to say upon reading headline I was hoping they'll come back with best way to make him safer is to remove all his titles and make it clear to everyone -including Harry- he's a private citizen nothing to do with RF, not needed for succession and nothing to do with UK government but they obviously won't.

I expect in reality little will change.

Considering he’s doing interviews in America slinging bricks at trump ans there are so many fanatics, I’d suspect it’s a good idea.

wish the pair of them would just bugger off.

They have never been chased by any journalists.
The footage on their Netflix series was fake.

There’s a difference in actively wanting something bad to happen and being indifferent if it did. I think your figures aren’t far wrong, based on the popularity polls. I wouldn’t care if any harm came to the Sussexes, or at least any more than any other person I don’t know. I would very much not wish any harm upon them.

And it’s beyond ridiculous that the notion they are being chased by journalists especially after they were caught out over the whole “Catastrophic New York Car chase” which never happened.

What would the harm be if they were swarmed or chased by journalists? Surely they could just wave and smile for photos or say no comment? Journalists don't tend to carry weapons or seek to harm the people they are interested in.

I believe it was specifically said in one of the many court proceedings that protecting an individual from photographers was not within RAVEC's remit. Any competent private security guard can manage that.

I'm more interested in whether or not he paid back the Home Office, ie the taxpayer, for the hundreds of thousands of quid they were forced to pay to fight his stupid Judicial Review.

Has he?