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.

No actually. It was widely reported that Diana was very careful about alcohol and its consumption owing to her family history.

And Bashir’s fraud fuelled Diana’s suspicion and distrust of the RF and staff, leading her to believe her official security was part of the surveillance against her.

Bashir used forged bank statements that suggested people close to the princess, including her private secretary and an ex-security member, were being paid by intelligence services to spy on her. This manipulation convinced Diana that she was surrounded by people who could not be trusted, including her royal protection officers.

This information emerged during the court case between Patrick Jephson (Diana’s equerry and private secretary for eight years) and Martin Bashir (it was actually legal action against the BBC which employed Bashir) which was settled out of court, with the BBC paying Jephson a substantial sum in damages and issuing an unreserved apology.

The same information emerged from the preceding independent investigation aka the the Dyson Inquiry too.

I despair, I really do, you could put a banner saying this on a back of a plane with Keir Starmer’s signature in blood on it, fly it above posters houses and they still wouldn’t get it.

If he needs the security based on demonstrated credible threat level and he cannot obtain it privately, then it should be provided for him. He's not responsible for having been born a prince or a grandson of the then-Queen and son of the then-future King. There's no action he can take to change that and no way he can even remove himself from the line of succession. It might be argued and even demonstrated that the security threat changes based on his own actions, but I think that's a secondary consideration; we didn't alter security coverage for say Prince Philip or Boris Johnson because they were prone to making inflammatory remarks. If there's a base level of threat JUST because of who he is by birth; that is the UK's responsibility for having a monarchy. There's no perfectly ethical answer.

He can have the protection that is assessed as needed at the time. For free. If he gives 28 days notice.

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/prince-harry-loses-legal-fight-with-uk-government-over-police-protection-2025-05-02/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Harry%2C_Duke_of_Sussex?

You could say that about any celebrity, shall we fund Holly Willoughby for the rest of her life? Colin Salmon? Just two celebrities off the top of my head with stalkers and actual credible death threats?

I disagree. While what you have said is true, I still think she would have seen RF security etc as monitoring and controlling, and would have rejected it anyway having 'broken out' of the system. So even if that hadn't happened, she wanted to plough her own furrow. And let's face it, her decision making wasn't the best. She was impulsive and rash on occasions.

He's very much her son.

You should be happy to have Andrew’s round the clock tax payer funded protection reinstated then going by your reasoning.

@Theunamedcat Yes, I’m not sure why this is still an issue tbh.

@CaraVirra I honestly don’t think that Harry is one of the most global recognized men. I live in the US and loads of people here wouldn’t recognize him. If he’s not a major figure in the country he lives in, I really doubt that he’s instantly recognized in other countries.

I do agree that he needs security in the UK as he’s definitely recognized there. But giving 28 days notice of a visit seems entirely reasonable.

No. I don't think most people realise the level of security he currently gets, which is pretty high and paid for by British tax payers. There are very few people that get what he wants.
Whilst complaining how dangerous it is for him here, last year he was filmed wandering the streets of London in the middle of the night (without any security), knocking on stranger's doors. Google it, it's astounding for someone claiming to be in fear.

You’ve said a few interesting things here. But first I’d like to say Harry has said what he is after is the intel on threats and the armed response is what he is after and that he is willing to pay for it.

Also what you’ve said about Diana is interesting as well. Are you blaming her for death? Is it because you feel like it was preventable?

And finally you seem to have an intense animosity for Prince Harry. I’m curious what specific actions of his led you to feel this strongly. I’ve been researching and I haven’t been able to find any data on Harry actually harming the public in any way.

Okay, may I have a cited website? I’ll research and respond. Thanks for the correction.

Just ask ChatGPT you are clearly using it.

I’m bored and invested. Plus googling isn’t hard. Anything I don’t know (which is a lot) when it comes to the UK I just use Copliot. It’s not hard, but I understand what you’re getting at. At no point would a dare pretend I have all this information just hanging around in my head.

Totally. If the OP is Harry trying to put together a case for his next lot of expensive security, he's even dimmer than I'd thought.

In 1970

As has been said multiple times by other posters, the current status is that Harry has a bespoke arrangement (bespoke because there has never been a member of the royal family living abroad who needed such an arrangement before).

This arrangement means that he has security provided on the basis of an up-to-date assessment any time he wants to visit the UK. He just needs to give 28/30 days notice. This will be on the basis of (a) ensuring appropriate security planning (risk assessments, routes etc) can be done and (b) ensuring staff are available (there aren't multiple highly trained personnel sitting about not working - rotas would have to be adjusted, etc.)

There is flexibility in the system - he was able to come urgently to see his father when he was diagnosed with cancer. Emergencies can be allowed for, but you can't cancel people's leave on the basis of someone simply deciding to fly across the next day.

Sorry nope, but I’ll take that as a compliment lol.

Yes, quite.
He will have a stronger case now I would have thought.

Just copy and pasting from AI then, not much different.

Well if we are going to get in to a broader discussion about British tax payers and the Royal family; and the relative costs of security, how about the monarchy contribute to the public purse a bit more than they do currently? They can start by paying corporation tax on the Duchies? Then there might be a bit more money in the public purse for security?

After some quick fact checking you are mostly correct.

he does automatic security, the 28 days notice is correct. Prince Harry is arguing that the lack of access to real time intelligence is what makes them not enough. He wants the intel. And is willing to come out of pocket for it.

I couldn’t find any documentation have some quick research that proves He requested IPP, can you cite that please?

And are you suggesting that because he spoke out about it kill count if it gets him killed it justified?

It’s understood. Harry is arguing that he wants his security time to have real time treatment intelligence. Currently they don’t get that.

You could start a thread doing exactly that.

If he does get this extra level granted, what is Meghan’s new excuse for not wanting to visit the UK going to be?