Should Prince Harry get state funded security ?

[CaraVirra]

Okay, why does he want State funded security. Let’s speaks with cited facts only… and not emotion.

Prince Harry has stated clearly and in writing that he will pay for the security out of pocket.

Sources:

-Reuters-

Reuters confirmed Harry’s offer and the government’s refusal:

“Prince Harry said he had offered to personally pay for police protection for himself and his family during visits to Britain, but the UK government rejected the offer.”

-BBC-

The BBC reported that Harry’s legal team argued the refusal was procedural, not security-based:

“The Duke of Sussex offered to fund the security himself, but this was rejected because police protection cannot be paid for privately.”

-The Guardian-

The Guardian adds context that this was raised during court proceedings, not after the fact:

“Prince Harry’s lawyers said he was willing to pay for protection but was blocked by policy, not assessed threat.”

Okay so if he’s willing to pay out of pocket why won’t his own security work?

Heres why:

When Prince Harry stepped back from royal duties, the UK government… via the Home Office… removed his automatic, state-funded police protection.

That decision was made by a committee called RAVEC (Royal and VIP Executive Committee), which assesses security risk.

Harry’s argument is:

“My role changed, but my threat level didn’t.”

And on that point, he’s not wrong.

Okay, so where’s what he’s actually asking for:

He has been very explicit that he is willing to pay for security.

What the UK government refuses to allow is:

Access to armed, intelligence-briefed Metropolitan Police protection
Even on a paid basis

So why does this matter?

Private security cannot legally carry firearms in the UK
Private guards do not receive intelligence briefings
They cannot coordinate with UK counterterror or local police in real time

So this is not about luxury, it’s about safety.

Okay now. Why does harry believe there’s still a risk?:

There are several concrete factors:

He is still one of the most globally recognized people alive
His mother, Princess Diana, was killed following paparazzi pursuit
He and Meghan have received documented threats, including extremist rhetoric
His military service (Afghanistan) placed him on known threat lists
His children are high-value symbolic targets, regardless of titles

None of this evaporated because he moved to California.

Okay now because you can’t have a argument without both sides of the story lets talk about why the UK government has refused:

The official stance is:

Police protection is tied to official royal duties
Allowing people to “buy” police services could set a precedent
Security decisions must remain under state control, not personal request

This is a policy argument… not a safety argument.

So why is Harry fighting this so publically?:

Harry believes removing protection discourages others from leaving. That signals “Step outside the institution, and you’re on your own.” And it indirectly pressures him to return or stay silent.

so those are the facts. How do you feel about it?

also, if there a fact I’ve stated that you wanted cited, politely asking will do just fine.

I work in a job that is involved in major incidents.

Everyone knows that they happen, and that if they happen leave is cancelled and people have to work hours over their regular duties.

That doesn't mean that people should have their leave cancelled on a whim, just because someone decides they want to fly to the UK the following day, for example.

The current scenario (where Harry has security, assessed according to the current threat, as long as he gives 28/30 days notice) allows both for proper planning and the required notice for cancelling leave in employment law.

There is flexibility for emergencies (he got security when he flew over urgently to see his father after Charles' cancer diagnosis).

I strongly suspect the latter.

Let's say the notice period were reduced or even waived. Harry would still find something to complain about. We know this isn't really about security, but about envy and spite.

Of course, if something unexpected happens then the 28 day notice should be waived.

But that is very different to responding to Harry's random whims.

Which is why the risk is assessed and an appropriate level of security provided, as long as Harry gives sufficient notice (28 days).

He can also provide himself with as many private security personnel as he wants. As other high profile people do without any drama.

Sibling rivalry is never simple, @Mylovelygreendress especially when you have an ambitious wife goading you. It’s practically Shakespearean.

So fucking what? If he was at risk, regardless of being a twat prince, the Met would protect him.
He isn't deemed to be at risk.
So no need to be so generous with your tax money.

I agree but that’s what he and some others think !

Exactly. Salman Rushdie had a high level of protection for years, because there was a genuine threat.

I would far rather my tax money was spent on protection for people genuinely threatened - such as those trying to escape domestic violence - than a paranoid multi-millionaire who wants more protection than the risk assessment suggests is needed.

From The Telegraph, is this Harry leaking the 28 day advance requirement is no longer required

With the specific trial timetable still unconfirmed, the Duke is unable to commit to any specific dates or times. He has still not been able to book his flights.

Except that he knows when it starts, and is the first witness, so could book the incoming flight easily. I'm sure he could also manage to cope with any fees for changes of return flights.

It doesn't make any sense.

Haven't seen the whole article but don't think so.

I think it's more likely a whinge that he'll have to book late (and given dynamic pricing that'll cost).

More likely he’s trying to press the point that he’s unable to give a firm commitment until
he gets court dates confirmed. Which is rubbish of course. He could block out a window to be available and give that to RAVEC.

Yes but a particular problem for Harry is that because there are always stories about him in the papers, once he gives 28 days notice in advance and makes all the usual arrangements such as aeroplane tickets, accommodation, onward travel, security, even if it’s done under a pseudonym, the information is leaked to all and sundry. So many tabloids are willing to pay good money for tip offs like this. And that in itself makes him and his family an easier target.

VIPs who need to protect their safety often do so by making arrangements at the very last minute and they constantly chop and change travel plans too. I therefore think H should be allowed to come and go spontaneously which would allow him to evade both the press and any potential fruit loops.

Because he leaks it to the media 😂

He doesn’t need to give 28 days notice to the public or the media, just the security services. And they don’t leak. If word gets out that H is on the move, it’s coming from him.

crossposted with Baital

As far as airports, and as far as the reputable airlines the Royals/some VIPs book ahead but can stay under the radar quite well using pseudonyms...and pseudonym or not at places like Heathrow there's a whole system and infrastructure in place to allow pap avoidance.

Certainly from what I saw over the years many celebs supposedly papped walking through airport terminals appear to have set the whole darn thing up....

Dont get me wrong I would prefer that we didn’t have to pay for any of them! I would far rather my taxes were spent on an elected president whose finances were accountable and transparent.

But if people insist on having a RF then you need to protect them well because of their symbolic value to the UK. And I think the protection should still cover Harry, even if he is no longer working for the RF, because a fruit loop or a more organised terrorist gang can still make a point, draw attention towards a political cause, or potentially become infamous, through kidnapping the son or brother of the monarch.

But even if you are right, he can still make changes up to the last minute if he can rub his brain cells together enough to think about it.

Get a slightly later flight. Give 28 days notice of arriving e.g. the afternoon of such and such date. Confirm the exact time and flight at the last minute.

Arrange to stay in Buck Palace or somewhere else that has 24 hour protection so you don't have to specify a hotel etc also means the exact dates don't matter because security will be scheduled as usual 24/7 that you will benefit from.

If there's a public event - e.g. the court case, enter a couple of hours early through the back door.

Of course that means you won't get opportunity of appearing in the media, in front of all those 'triggering' flashlights, to tell the world 'your truth'.

There are so many things he could do differently if security were actually the issue, @Baital

After all, in their NF series they struggled to provide footage of a relentless pap pursuit. There was the random 'man on a scooter' who didn't appear on film (from what I remember?) and there was no evidence that he was paparazzi or deliberately following them.

Not to mention the footage of overwhelming photographers turned out not to be anything to do with them (were targeting Katie Price I think?), just as the racist headlines shown weren't from the UK media.

Very true...!

Exactly this

It's not about feelz.

It's about evidence. Facts, assessed by experts.

You'd think he would be glad if his risk goes down. Instead he seems to resent it.

Not to mention YET AGAIN!!! sorry for shouting...

He can have as much private security as he wants to pay for. Many of them are ex-police/army. They have had the same training. The only things they can't do are carry guns and see source intelligence. They can liaise with the current security services to discuss potential risks, based on those sources...

Just pay your way Harry. If you need additional security it will be provided. If you don't need it be happy that you and your family aren't at such high risk.

Are you being serious?

Harry and his wife regularly divulge their plans in advance, even when there is zero reason to do so. At Invictus last year, Meghan even told the world that their children were at home in another country, without them. Nobody who is paranoid about their security would dream of doing that!

Can you give a recent example of Harry's British travel plans being 'leaked' by anyone other than himself? That would help your argument.