The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #521  
Old 10-18-2018, 11:05 PM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 618
It just occurred to me—by living (part of the time, when she’s in Britain, anyway) with Andrew still, Sarah does benefit from his protection detail and only needs paid security when out and about. I wonder if that is part of why they’ve chosen their unconventional living situation. I also wonder if the security already in place at Kensington and St. James are a reason why the Queen chose to allot Beatrice and Eugenie living quarters in those palace complexes, to simplify what they (or, rather, Andrew) need to arrange for in terms of private security.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #522  
Old 10-19-2018, 02:52 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 100
Why wasn’t Sarah offered protection if Diana was offered it after the divorce?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #523  
Old 10-19-2018, 02:55 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,093
Diana was the mother of the future King, Sarah wasn't.

That was why Diana was offered accommodation at KP and Sarah wasn't offered any for of accommodation and Diana received a 17 million pound settlement to Sarah's 3 million of which 2 was to go into trust funds for the girls effectively meaning Sarah was given a 1 million pound settlement.
Reply With Quote
  #524  
Old 12-05-2018, 01:31 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 100
I know this isn’t the case now but I was wondering why it used to be that the children of a son of a monarch used to receive 24/7 police protection but they never offered this to children of a daughter of a monarch?
Reply With Quote
  #525  
Old 12-05-2018, 01:33 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Norfolk, United States
Posts: 5,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
I know this isn’t the case now but I was wondering why it used to be that the children of a son of a monarch used to receive 24/7 police protection but they never offered this to children of a daughter of a monarch?
I'm assuming it has the same to do with why children of a son of monarch has HRH, but children of a daughter of monarch do not. They were seen as of the paternal family.
Reply With Quote
  #526  
Old 12-12-2018, 06:48 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 100
If in the hypothetical scenario Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother had re-married would she have lost her police protection?
Reply With Quote
  #527  
Old 12-12-2018, 07:00 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
If in the hypothetical scenario Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother had re-married would she have lost her police protection?
Highly doubtful-she would still have been the mother of the Queen.
Reply With Quote
  #528  
Old 12-12-2018, 07:36 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 100
Do you think her new Husband would have received police protection as well as he would be the stepfather of the Queen?
Reply With Quote
  #529  
Old 12-12-2018, 07:55 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Do you think her new Husband would have received police protection as well as he would be the stepfather of the Queen?
I don't think so, unless the threat assessment showed it was necessary. I doubt it would be ongoing.
Reply With Quote
  #530  
Old 01-18-2019, 09:43 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 100
Hi, I know that after her divorce Diana was offered but refused RPO’s. If she had accepted them would they have continued even if she re-married and let’s say moved abroad?
Reply With Quote
  #531  
Old 01-18-2019, 10:02 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Hi, I know that after her divorce Diana was offered but refused RPO’s. If she had accepted them would they have continued even if she re-married and let’s say moved abroad?
I think if she still had RPOs in the UK, but she then had moved abroad she would have been on her own to provide security-RPOs would not have moved with her.
Reply With Quote
  #532  
Old 01-18-2019, 07:31 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,104
I think you're right. I don't see the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard assigning any of their protection officers on a permanent foreign detail.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #533  
Old 01-18-2019, 07:49 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,093
Absolutely not. The British taxpayers wouldn't have stood for that either and rightly so. They pay to protect the BRITISH royal family and so should expect them to live in Britain.

I actually believe that if a member of the BRF chooses to go outside the UK for a holiday then they should pay for the security and not expect the British taxpayers to pick up the costs at all but that is just me.
Reply With Quote
  #534  
Old 01-29-2019, 11:03 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,127
Catherine has had the same PPO for the last 8 years. Emma Probert was with her on her wedding day and was with her today in Scotland.
Reply With Quote
  #535  
Old 02-03-2019, 04:43 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,221
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-London.html

The Queen has been dragged into an extraordinary ‘Project Fear’ row after it emerged that civil servants have drawn up plans to evacuate the Royal Family if a No Deal Brexit causes riots on the streets of London.

The Mail on Sunday has learned that Whitehall contingency planners have included among their ‘worst case’ scenarios the need to move the Royals to safe locations away from the capital.

Officials in the Civil Contingencies Secretariat, the Government department responsible for emergency planning, have ‘repurposed’ a secret operation under which the Royals could have been accommodated in various country houses to protect them from enemy forces during the Cold War.


Oh what madness
Reply With Quote
  #536  
Old 02-03-2019, 05:24 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 293
"Plans to evacuate" ? How dramatic. Presumably they'd just hop in a helicopter & go to their country retreats like they do most weekends.
Reply With Quote
  #537  
Old 02-03-2019, 05:42 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,221
I thought the same...houses in the country? The implication is to some sort of secretive country house like the plans was in WW2 in there was an invasion. Much more likely the Royals would simply stay in their own houses outside of London. There have been marches and protests outside BP before so it would take a lot IMO to cause an evacuation.
Reply With Quote
  #538  
Old 02-03-2019, 05:52 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,533
In the news today: the British government is reported to have reactivated old Cold War-era plans to evacuate the Queen and other members of the RF from London to a "secure location" in the event of riots in the capital following a no-deal Brexit.
Reply With Quote
  #539  
Old 02-03-2019, 05:57 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I thought the same...houses in the country? The implication is to some sort of secretive country house like the plans was in WW2 in there was an invasion. Much more likely the Royals would simply stay in their own houses outside of London. There have been marches and protests outside BP before so it would take a lot IMO to cause an evacuation.



Since they are using Cold War plans, I assume there must be undisclosed safe houses, maybe even bunkers that would be used in the event of a nuclear war as there are in the US. I don't think they are talking about Sandringham or Balmoral here.
Reply With Quote
  #540  
Old 02-03-2019, 06:07 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,526
What a crock! In WW2 the Queen and Margaret were stowed away in Windsor Castle with Crawfie. This time I'm sure they can all have a cosy time at Sandringham for a couple of days. Norfolk is the last place that would have riots!
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, gloucester, kent, kidnapping, minor hrh, royal security, security, terrorism


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Royal Family's Security Helen88 Royal House of Sweden 5 02-11-2005 06:59 PM




Popular Tags
"chinese gordon" bavaria;house;chef;luitpold;ludwig belgian bonaparte british royal family britishroyals camilla ceremony clothes corruption countess of wessex current events daughter daughters duchessofcambridge duchess of cornwall duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex duke of york england extramarital affairs fashion french royalty friendly city greece harry hohenzollern infanta cristina juan carlos kate middleton kiko king ladies-in-waiting meghan markle monogram northampton osborn patronages prince harry prince harry of wales prince laurent prince of belgium princess anne princess claire public opinion queen elizabeth quizz rania of jordan royal royal geneology royal ladies royal wedding sarah duchess of york savoy saxony siblings soldier south africa state visit the crown tiara titles uk styles valois van belgië viscount severn wedding windsor windsor castle windsor wedding



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:21 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises