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.

Most stalker fans are brought to court, given restraining orders or prison time. all a lot worse than what Harry has dealt with clearly, see short list below of british celebrities who have had stalkers. The list of US celebrity stalking is just as awful.

There has been no action taken against Harry’s superfan, either by Harry privately or by the police. So if he is getting police protection again, it’s weird one if it’s due to the attention of this fan.

• David Beckham A stalker who sent "threatening" letters and turned up at his daughter's school was charged with stalking and detained under the Mental Health Act.
• Fern Britton A stalker who harassed the TV presenter was given a 10-year restraining order in 2024.
• Sophie Ellis-Bextor A former tax consultant was given a stalking protection order in 2021 after sending hundreds of "upsetting" messages and unwanted gifts to her home and contacting her family.
• Claire Foy The actress described her stalker's actions as "deeply frightening" after he sent over 1,000 emails and visited her home; he was later sentenced.
• Anna Friel A man who sent the actress numerous messages, expressed his love, and repeatedly visited her home was given a 15-year restraining order and a community order in late 2025.
• Myleene Klass The presenter and classical musician's alleged stalker has faced trial for causing serious alarm or distress.
• Emma Raducanu The tennis star's stalker, who walked 23 miles to her home and stole her father's shoe, was given a five-year restraining order in 2022.
• Beth Rylance The comedy actress was stalked by an obsessive fan who tweeted about her continually and then turned up on her doorstep. He received a two-year restraining order.
• Harry Styles A woman was sentenced to 14 weeks in prison and given a 10-year restraining order in 2024 after sending the singer 8,000 cards in less than a month, some of which were wedding cards.
• Cheryl Tweedy A persistent stalker has shown up at the singer and TV personality's rural home multiple times, breaching previous restraining orders, leaving her feeling unsafe.
• Robbie Williams The pop star won an injunction in a German court against a woman who believed he was in danger of being abducted by aliens.
• Holly Willoughby A dangerous sexual predator, who plotted to kidnap, rape and murder her, was handed a life-sentence and ordered to serve a minimum of 16 years in prison.

The fact that this woman was prepared to follow H&M in Nigeria and UK would suggest this isn’t an ordinary fan, that this isn’t a question of just getting carried away in the moment as obviously more planning was involved, and there is likely to be on-line evidence too that won’t be in the public domain. Added to that is her known mh issues which, not always by any means, but potentially could add to the risk factor.

Why has there been no action against her, by Harry and his legal team? why is she allowed to roam the streets, hop on flights and turn up in a court house.

Your theory doesn’t make sense.

I don’t care whether he’s a working royal or not. He should get security.

Probably because h and m paid for her to go to Nigeria and are happily pictured with her a lot.

He has security ……. his own private security and on the occasions when he does travel to the UK he gets tax payer security, his fans don’t seem to be able to grasp that.

But there is often a very long period of time, often far too long, before these people are charged and the full extent of their obsession becomes apparent.

One of the well known problems with stalking cases has been that they have to cross quite a high threshold before they can be charged with anything. I think the legislation on this has only improved quite recently.

We only know about the long list of people above in retrospect because they have been charged and in some case, some of their harassment has gone on for years.

I would have thought that the fact that you can draw up such a long list so quickly indicates that H&M need more security, not less!

But why state funded armed security in the UK we don’t shoot people because they have MH issues.

Exactly

Of course it makes sense if you have read anything about any stalking cases.

All stalkers have to start somewhere!

Some can just follow a person obsessively, for a long time and not do anything more than that. And British police have to follow the law and wait to collect evidence before charging them.

But it is still disconcerting to have someone repeatedly appear on the pavement outside your house, or your work, or outside your children’s school and to be sent hundreds of emails or letters, and then have them appear when you go to your favourite restaurant and not know when their behaviour may escalate?

Why ?

We only know about the long list of people above in retrospect because they have been charged and in some case, some of their harassment has gone on for years.

EXACTLY - we know about it because they were charged for doing something illegal, taken to court and the courts dealt with it. in Harry’s case, no one has been arrested, charged or brought to court. So in all likelihood the Harry fan is not threat at all🤷‍♀️

I would have thought that the fact that you can draw up such a long list so quickly indicates that H&M need more security, not less!

Do they have tax paid armed security despite having proven mentally deranged stalkers? Are Holly Willoughby’s husband and kids given tax payer funded 24 hour security, I mean her case has to be one of the worst and most dangerous ! What about the Clooney’s and their kids? Amal has some serious threats against her, should they have armed security waiting on hand in the UK when they decide to visit? Tony Blair’s’ kids and grandkids.

On what basis? Not just, he’s the son of a monarch, as Anne, Edward and Andrew had their security withdrawn and they were DCs of the monarch at the time.

Genuine question.

If Harry or any British citizen needs security because of a serious threat, then they should get it. But his fans using the Sussex fan ‘stalker’ or being a member of the extended RF as the reasons he should get it are wrong. He should be afforded the same as any non working Royal and any other person whose life might be in mortal danger when they land in the UK. (That line I wrote actually makes me laugh in hindsight)

According to the Telegraph newspaper, the woman was known to Harry's staff as she was on a list of fixated individuals drawn up by a private intelligence company for his personal protection team. She has previously followed him to Nigeria, the paper said.

So a 'private' intelligence company drew up a list of 'fixated' individuals for PH's private security team. Obviously, acting in the best interests and security of their client they then shared this list with RAVEC/MET? Has anyone heard whether this happened or not?

He does get security.

What is wrong with his current arrangements?

It's really handy then that Harry can afford his ex Secret Service full time bodyguards, that are with him 24/7, and who from all published press and court account dealt with the stalker swiftly and without much obvious fuss at the time.

Exactly.

And it appears that the intelligence services have found evidence of an increased threat, hence the new level of security when he comes. Harry might be claiming victory but the facts are that his bespoke arrangement is working exactly as it should.

And it appears that the intelligence services have found evidence of an increased threat, hence the new level of security when he comes.

Has it been announces that there's a new level of security (separate to the 'sources close to the Sussexes' comments)?

No, but I doubt there would be an official announcement. It would defeat the purpose of RAVEC and the security assessment in the 1st place. It just draws more attention towards the individual - which then increases security needs.

It's a short term gain anyway. It will get reassessed again - probably sooner rather than later - and as with his uncle's, aunt and cousin's - Harry's security will not be permanent and will likely be downgraded again as he becomes less relevant to the State than he is now.

Edit to add - I really hope we don't have to go through this whole fecking palaver again.

Oh, @Thedom , I fear you are in pigeon chess territory.

I'm not sure it 'appears' that way at all.

All we have is vague 'leaks' from 'sources', almost certainly the Dook and Dookess themselves. There has been, and will be, no comment from official sources.

Not to mention that even if there is indeed 'an increased threat' today, that does not mean there will be three weeks or four months from now. Harry it not important enough to be guaranteed security, so nothing has really changed, which I think is the point you were making.

Of course he should. He is at risk from being the son of the king. He did not ask to be that.

Yes. My point was that nothing has changed, including Harry's need to feel he has won.

There is a government procedure to determine if he needs it and investigate thoroughly the reasons why. They shoulda be left to make the decision. As posters have said, this should be on the basis of need not because of Harry’s feelings, need to be as important as his brother or desire to save on costs.

Plenty of other royals, people like the Kennedys manage to exist quite happily without the security Harry feels is necessary.

I doubt Ravec are reading on here so the pile on about his security needs seems a little OTT 😀

This is another example of harry twisting the truth and his supporters not actually knowing the facts!
the question “ should Harry have security “ is defunct because he already does! But it doesn’t seem to matter just how many times it’s pointed out , people still believe Harry’s narrative! 🤷‍♀️