Royal Security


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I don't think we can underestimate the threat level for Harry and Meghan. One thing really struck me was when Harry drove Meghan to church last Sunday there was a very large man leaning forward between the two front seats. I am guessing he was security and I have never seen security that obvious.
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...allowed-300-000-year-bodyguards.html#comments

IF this is true. PATHETIC!pathetic! [...] I'm so sick of these entitled spares in this family. One was made to step down the other chose to step down. But both feel they are still entitled to the same privileges as if nothing has happened nothing has changed everything is fine and dandy and their parents are too weak to crack the whip and say no.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering the dubious source, I'm not really buying into this story. While it may be true that the Queen could have petitioned for Andrew's security to continue, it is never up to the Queen or any of the BRF to have any kind of say in their security detail. In fact, the BRF are not the "bosses" of their security detail. Its the other way around. The BRF listen to and follow what their detail tells them to do or not do.

All security is decided on, provided and paid for by the Specialist Operations directorate of London's Metropolitan Police Service which is funded by the government (aka taxpayers). A RPO doesn't answer to the royal he's protecting but his supervisors at the Met Police.

Can't blame this on the Queen or any member of the royal family. ?
 
It says later on that there were "proposed cuts to the security of Andrew, Edward Sophie and Anne" so really if there is any truth in it, the Queen has stepped in for 3/4 of her children and her daughter in law.

I don't like Andrew but security has always been handled rather "clinically" based on threat assessment. If the Police believe there is no threat no amount of protest from the Queen will see it continue, more likely (again if any truth whatsoever) concerns were raised that the cuts were too deep and they were asked to take another look. If the police have agreed to another review then I would imagine there is some merit to the needs for a review.

It may well be that there are concerns now Ed Sophie & Anne are doing more, with the Sussex's overseas and Andrew out of action, that they shouldn't lose some of their protection. It may not even be about Andrew at all.
 
Just clicking the link is enough to make me feel like I've just made an unforgivable sin, so I only read the first few sentences. It stated that 3 security personnel are supposed to be axed but the Queen intervened.

If I'm not mistaken, royal tax-paid security team are Metro personnel, right? I don't think they'll be axed just because they no longer needed to protect a royal, re-assigned yes but not axed. So just like the Sussexes, he may still have those some-thousand-pounds-worth bodyguards, but paid by her mother (hence her intervention). It's their money.
 
Just clicking the link is enough to make me feel like I've just made an unforgivable sin, so I only read the first few sentences. It stated that 3 security personnel are supposed to be axed but the Queen intervened.

If I'm not mistaken, royal tax-paid security team are Metro personnel, right? I don't think they'll be axed just because they no longer needed to protect a royal, re-assigned yes but not axed. So just like the Sussexes, he may still have those some-thousand-pounds-worth bodyguards, but paid by her mother (hence her intervention). It's their money.

You just expressed eloquently how I "check" Daily Mail links for information. I rarely read the whole article as the ads and videos are enough to irritate me to death.

If a protection officer is taken off royal detail, he is reassigned elsewhere and not "axed". I'm sure that any protection officer that were on the Sussex detail are assigned to new duties rather than out of work. When the Met Police deemed that Beatrice and Eugenie no longer needed royal protection, Andrew decided to pay for it out of his own pocket. I don't believe those protection officers that Andrew paid for were employed by the Met Police but independent bodyguards for hire.
 
You just expressed eloquently how I "check" Daily Mail links for information. I rarely read the whole article as the ads and videos are enough to irritate me to death.

If a protection officer is taken off royal detail, he is reassigned elsewhere and not "axed". I'm sure that any protection officer that were on the Sussex detail are assigned to new duties rather than out of work. When the Met Police deemed that Beatrice and Eugenie no longer needed royal protection, Andrew decided to pay for it out of his own pocket. I don't believe those protection officers that Andrew paid for were employed by the Met Police but independent bodyguards for hire.

of course they wotn be "axed" and if Andrew needs security, and the queen pays for it, they'll probably hire Ex Met officers who are trained in this sort of work, but are now independently working for private individuals.
 
You just expressed eloquently how I "check" Daily Mail links for information. I rarely read the whole article as the ads and videos are enough to irritate me to death.

If a protection officer is taken off royal detail, he is reassigned elsewhere and not "axed". I'm sure that any protection officer that were on the Sussex detail are assigned to new duties rather than out of work. When the Met Police deemed that Beatrice and Eugenie no longer needed royal protection, Andrew decided to pay for it out of his own pocket. I don't believe those protection officers that Andrew paid for were employed by the Met Police but independent bodyguards for hire.

My understanding is that Andrew offered the job to the same Met officers who had been protecting the girls before they lost their protection and some, if not all of them, accepted the offer for more money and better conditions and so they left the Met. Many Met officers leave to go into private security and earn a lot more money.
 
Okay, I hope this is the right thread:
According to the article nearly 60k was spend just between November 18 until Jan 19th, and does not include the Mounties salaries Nor the costs until March 14, which according to the article is when Canadian tax funded security ended, which mean that bill must be at least double that!
Add in the amount of British rpo’s pribably costing just as much if not more.

https://www.taxpayer.com/newsroom/rcmp-bill-for-meghan-and-harry-topped-50,000?id=18453#gsc.tab=0

RCMP bill for Meghan and Harry topped $50,000
Author: James Wood 15/06/2020
Federal Blog

(Bolded done by me)

Security costs for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hit more than $50,000 in the few months the couple lived in Canada as they stepped back from their royal duties, according to documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation through access to information requests.

The costs were piling up even as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau refused to say whether or not Canadians were paying to protect the royal couple.

The documents show the RCMP spent at least $56,384 from Nov. 18, 2019, to Jan. 19, 2020. The email records also show the RCMP was worried about the issue “costing us huge” while attracting a lot of media attention.

“More than $50,000 is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you consider the fact that this is taxpayers’ money covering bills for one of the most famous and wealthy couples in the world,” said Aaron Wudrick, Federal Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “Had the government not cut them off and had Meghan and Harry stayed in Canada, the bill could have easily turned into millions.”

The current bill does not include the salaries paid to the Mounties on duty and only shows the pay costs such as overtime, travel, meals, incidentals and accommodations.

More than 80,000 Canadians signed the Canadian Taxpayers Federation petition telling Trudeau to welcome the royal couple, but to not pay for their costs with taxpayers’ money.

During the couple’s brief time in Canada, there was much debate over who was to pay for their protection. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation advocated against spending any taxpayers’ money on the couples expenses. The petition drive generated media interest from London to Washington.

“We’re proud to have given voice to the vast majority of Canadians who felt subsidizing the Sussexes’ lifestyle choices was an outrageous use of tax dollars,” said Wudrick.

The RCMP unit in charge of protection recognized the debate at the time, with National Division commanding officer Bernadine Chapman touching on the furor in an email to two colleagues on Jan. 10, 2020.

“Media is on this like a hot potato ... so lots of coverage of the potential of the royals to spend half their time in Canada now, as an independent couple. Media spin is about the cost to Canadians,” wrote Chapman. “We are having a greater conversation next week on the go forward on this. This has a potential to cost us huge!”

The email exchange happened on Jan. 10, 2020, and concerned a briefing note meant for Public Safety Minister Bill Blair. The briefing appears to have been presented to Blair in early February, after multiple public dodges on the issue of paying for the royal couple’s needs by both Blair and Trudeau.

Blair first touched on the issue on Jan. 21 in Winnipeg, telling reporters at the time: “I can tell you now we are not engaged in providing those security services.”

When that turned out to not be the case, Blair later told the CBC in February the contradiction was due to a “misunderstanding,” and taxpayer-funded protection would cease “in the coming weeks.”

According to People Magazine, Meghan and Harry relocated to Los Angeles in March. United States President Donald Trump welcomed the couple on Twitter, but said they’d have to pay their own way.

Asked for comment, the RCMP said their protection of the couple ended on March 14. They refused to provide a total summary of costs for the whole visit.

“For security reasons and to protect our operations, we are not releasing salary costs,” read a statement from the RCMP. “Security costs for protection are covered through the existing operational budget.”

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has filed access to information requests to obtain the total of all public spending on the couple throughout their stay in Canada, including RCMP salary costs.



This is the request for information file mentioned in the article:
https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1vUVIayQ7rEbPvRquBJ7EDFYleP8gGHfd928QVKBZZRQ/mobilebasic
 
Last edited:
An interesting read. Thank you.
 
Okay, I hope this is the right thread:
According to the article nearly 60k was spend just between November 18 until Jan 19th, and does not include the Mounties salaries Nor the costs until March 14, which according to the article is when Canadian tax funded security ended, which mean that bill must be at least double that!
Add in the amount of British rpo’s pribably costing just as much if not more.

https://www.taxpayer.com/newsroom/rcmp-bill-for-meghan-and-harry-topped-50,000?id=18453#gsc.tab=0

RCMP bill for Meghan and Harry topped $50,000
Author: James Wood 15/06/2020
Federal Blog

(Bolded done by me)





This is the request for information file mentioned in the article:
https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1vUVIayQ7rEbPvRquBJ7EDFYleP8gGHfd928QVKBZZRQ/mobilebasic

Security costs for members of the royal family can sometimes be a contentious topic. When those family members cease to be working royals, there is clearly no debate in the minds of most members of the public.
 
Harry and Meghan did not cease to be senior working royals until after March 30th 2020. The period from Jan to March mentioned in the account above is therefore before that date.
 
Harry and Meghan did not cease to be senior working royals until after March 30th 2020. The period from Jan to March mentioned in the account above is therefore before that date.

Whilst technically that may indeed be correct, I can see why the good people of Canada may resent having to fund security for a couple who, barring a few engagements in March in London, had for all intents ceased to be working royals.
 
Whilst technically that may indeed be correct, I can see why the good people of Canada may resent having to fund security for a couple who, barring a few engagements in March in London, had for all intents ceased to be working royals.

More to the point it was known from January that they wernet going to be working royals any more.. after March.
I think that the Canadian people probably weren't too pleased when Justin T was very welcoming and it seemed like there was a commitment to provide them with free security indefinitely.
I think that's the reason for the sudden departure to LA at the end of March.. that they had thought they could settle in Can for as long as they liked and they'd have the free house, and free security and no problems about staying.. but reality began to bite as neither of them are Canadian, borders were closing, and the free security was about to stop...
 
...
I think that's the reason for the sudden departure to LA at the end of March.. that they had thought they could settle in Can for as long as they liked and they'd have the free house, and free security and no problems about staying.. but reality began to bite as neither of them are Canadian, borders were closing, and the free security was about to stop...


.. which confirms the observertion, that their move out of the Firm wasn't thought throu properly on their part, and they rushed in - not heeding the advice of their family and the palace consultant.


A very sad story. They are not rich enough to pay for their security and the way of life they like to live - and surely not in LA or any other hotspot of the world. That is why so many of the 'minor' royals are living at St Jameses, Kensington or Windsor etc. because there is allready security in place and no extra security for the home is needed - only when they go out.
 
More to the point it was known from January that they wernet going to be working royals any more.. after March.
I think that the Canadian people probably weren't too pleased when Justin T was very welcoming and it seemed like there was a commitment to provide them with free security indefinitely.
I think that's the reason for the sudden departure to LA at the end of March.. that they had thought they could settle in Can for as long as they liked and they'd have the free house, and free security and no problems about staying.. but reality began to bite as neither of them are Canadian, borders were closing, and the free security was about to stop...

This was a big part of it. Justin Trudeau tried to fanboy by trying to get the Canadian Taxpayers to foot the bill for security for the long term, but backed down when his position proved extremely unpopular (and damaging to him and his party).

As a Canadian, I want, no I demand, that Canada be reimbursed for security costs for their time in Canada. They were on a private "vacation" from late last year and were in no way invited by the Canadian Govt or people to stay in Canada. They did not perform any significant representative functions while there and there is/was no need for the Canadian taxpayer to foot the bill for their whims and follies.
 
As a Canadian, I want, no I demand, that Canada be reimbursed for security costs for their time in Canada. They were on a private "vacation" from late last year and were in no way invited by the Canadian Govt or people to stay in Canada. They did not perform any significant representative functions while there and there is/was no need for the Canadian taxpayer to foot the bill for their whims and follies.


This won’t ever happen, but I’m intrigued if you’d have the same mindset were any other royal had done the same?
 
This won’t ever happen, but I’m intrigued if you’d have the same mindset were any other royal had done the same?

Yes. Why not? The BRF are rich enough to afford to pay for their own security when they are travelling for extended private vacations. With everything going on that is a drain on public finances, there is no need for the taxpayers to pay for extremely wealthy people to have a vacation
 
Yes. Why not? The BRF are rich enough to afford to pay for their own security when they are travelling for extended private vacations.


Are they indeed? I’d like to see some sources of this information as it’s well the royal family aren’t truthfully “cash rich”.
 
Are they indeed? I’d like to see some sources of this information as it’s well the royal family aren’t truthfully “cash rich”.

Well they better learn to live within their means then- like the rest of the world. We don’t want to pay for their extended vacations.
 
Who is supplying the sussex's security now that they are in the US? Trump said the government wouldn't pay for it so are the British taxpayers?
 
My understanding is since mid March they've had private security.


LaRae
 
That's my understanding too. There is no way that the Sussexes, as private citizens, can dump security costs on anyone else besides themselves. I would have thought that they'd realize this as part and parcel of being "private citizens" and that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I don't believe though that we know who is providing security or the costs as that isn't something that should be in the public domain. In fact, discussing their security actually isn't on topic for this thread as its not "Royal Security" anymore. :D
 
I don't believe though that we know who is providing security or the costs as that isn't something that should be in the public domain. In fact, discussing their security actually isn't on topic for this thread as its not "Royal Security" anymore. :D




The security company is Gavin de Becker and Associates.
 
That's my understanding too. There is no way that the Sussexes, as private citizens, can dump security costs on anyone else besides themselves. I would have thought that they'd realize this as part and parcel of being "private citizens" and that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I don't believe though that we know who is providing security or the costs as that isn't something that should be in the public domain. In fact, discussing their security actually isn't on topic for this thread as its not "Royal Security" anymore. :D

I think it’s fairly easy to guess who is paying for the security cost (Prince Charles- question is of course from which account - duchy or other), since neither Harry and especially not Meghan, with her meager million or two, can afford private security- which can cost a cool million a year, at least!
 
This was a big part of it. Justin Trudeau tried to fanboy by trying to get the Canadian Taxpayers to foot the bill for security for the long term, but backed down when his position proved extremely unpopular (and damaging to him and his party).

As a Canadian, I want, no I demand, that Canada be reimbursed for security costs for their time in Canada. They were on a private "vacation" from late last year and were in no way invited by the Canadian Govt or people to stay in Canada. They did not perform any significant representative functions while there and there is/was no need for the Canadian taxpayer to foot the bill for their whims and follies.

But @Eskimo, you did get H&M visit Canada House in London on 8 January to thank the people of Canada for making them feel so welcome! :flowers:

That's my understanding too. There is no way that the Sussexes, as private citizens, can dump security costs on anyone else besides themselves. I would have thought that they'd realize this as part and parcel of being "private citizens" and that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I could not agree more with you. However, I do not think it was their expectation that their security would need to be privately financed. It was very much part of their "wish list", as published on their website in January this year.


I don't believe though that we know who is providing security or the costs as that isn't something that should be in the public domain.

I think it’s fairly easy to guess who is paying for the security cost (Prince Charles- question is of course from which account - duchy or other), since neither Harry and especially not Meghan, with her meager million or two, can afford private security- which can cost a cool million a year, at least!

I have no doubt that it is Prince Charles who is funding their security.

As to which account, Duchy or otherwise, to me it does not matter. The purpose of the Duchy is to provide an independent and private income for the Prince of Wales, it is not only for official duties.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well they better learn to live within their means then- like the rest of the world. We don’t want to pay for their extended vacations.


Who’s we exactly? I don’t understand what you want?

Henry and Meghan have private security with them in the US, paid for presumably by The Prince of Wales from the Duchy of Cornwall income which belongs to the person within that role.

As to the security situation when they were in Canada, at the time they were there they were still working royals, regardless of their announcement in January. The whole period, pre and post “break up” I imagine was covered, discussed and agreed between the Prime Minister of Canada and HM The Queen.

What’s happened, happened. What’s happening now in terms of security is an agreement between the Sussexes and The Prince of Wales.
 
Last edited:
Same circular conversation, who knows for sure.
 
Does anyone know if Anne and Edward's security are paid for by the government due to the location of their homes? If so, does Zara and Mike and children also have the same security since they also live on the property? Does Peter and family also become covered by this blanket type security due to the location of their home? Just curious. If so, that is one darn huge expense and I can actually see why maybe they will want all the royals to be close instead of all over and having to supply separate security groups many miles apart.
 
Back
Top Bottom