The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #661  
Old 02-28-2020, 08:58 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
The whole issue of policing and security is a muddle. What annoys a lot of people is that taxpayers' money is used to fund policing for political protests, even when these are by extremist groups to whom most people are vehemently opposed. Policing outside sports grounds etc is also state-funded, which is questionable when big clubs are spending tens of millions of pounds on buying one player.

However, as far as security for individuals goes, AFAIK it's only senior royals, government officials and diplomats.

I don't know what would happen if someone - say a high profile businessperson or celebrity - received a specific threat, though. But that would be in response to a specific incident, not ongoing, anyway. You certainly do not get police protection because of harassment or intrusion: you just get a restraining order telling whoever's making the threats to stay away from you. It's a shame you don't, because there've been so many cases of people being attacked by violent exes whom they'd reported to the police, but there just aren't the resources.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #662  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:29 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,177
What has happened to Scotland Yard, to MI5, to MI6 and the legendaric James Bond with his "Licence to kill"? The United Kingdom has such an unbelievable machinery of security. They should not even have 0,001 second of thought to protect citizens which score within the parameters of risk assessment. I also think the amount named here and there is sucked out of a big fat thumb. Exactly because it is a secretive policy, the security services will not reveal precize amounts distributed to individual royals.

The armoured Audi which shadows the Earl of Wessex today, probably shadows the Duke of Sussex tomorrow and the Prince of Wales coming week. Maybe the armoured Audi came with a staggering price label but it is in use for three or four years. What I have seen is allocating security, cars, helicopters whatever to individual royals. But they also protect foreign guests, they also protect the Prime Minister, they also protect Mme Brigitte Macron doing some shopping in London. With or without a royal family, any developed country has such a security force.

In the Netherlands the Prime Minister always refuses to say what the security costs are for the royals because the Corps Royal- and Diplomatic Protection Service would have been there anyway, with or without a monarchy. They protect Justices of the International Tribunal, they protect foreign ambassadors, they protect politicians, mayors, prosecutors, citizens under threat.

I think that reply is pure. I see millions swarming over the net about the costs but the central comnand, the fleet of armoured vehicles, the shadowing by personal guards, the helicopter above, it would have been there anyway, with or without a Harry.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #663  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:42 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
You raise an interesting question. Does British government policy provide for the police force to fund bodyguard protection (beyond regular police services) to any person who is subject to threats, or is the personal protection service only available for members of the Royal Family, officials in government, visiting dignitaries, and so on? Is there a policy statement which clarifies this?
I doubt very much if Joe Bloggs calls the police and says that he is in danger or subject to threats, is going to get ful time police protection.. much less special officers.
Reply With Quote
  #664  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:56 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
The whole issue of policing and security is a muddle. What annoys a lot of people is that taxpayers' money is used to fund policing for political protests, even when these are by extremist groups to whom most people are vehemently opposed. Policing outside sports grounds etc is also state-funded, which is questionable when big clubs are spending tens of millions of pounds on buying one player.

However, as far as security for individuals goes, AFAIK it's only senior royals, government officials and diplomats.

I.
Of course ordinary people as opposed to the RF, senior politicans etc don't get regular security. If soemone is in danger and is a wealthy person they may get some help during a specific incident like a kidnapping but the police wont be there permanently..> They wll be expected to pay their own security.
Reply With Quote
  #665  
Old 02-28-2020, 10:25 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
Yes - so it's hard to argue that there should be an exception for Harry and Meghan, when there isn't for Beatrice and Eugenie, and police resources are stretched as it is. It'll probably end up being like the "Who pays for the repairs to Windsor Castle after the fire?" saga - if there's a public outcry, public funding will be withdrawn. If there isn't, who knows?
Reply With Quote
  #666  
Old 02-28-2020, 10:44 AM
LadyGlendower's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: City of Light, France
Posts: 268
Dear Meghan and Harry:

Life as globe-trotting philanthropic celebrities often does require a security presence. Get some referrals from George and Amal, or Oprah.

Do not in any event expect the hardworking taxpayers of any country in the world to support your lifestyle. (BRF protection of course being an exception for which you no longer qualify.)

Sincerely,

The World
Reply With Quote
  #667  
Old 02-28-2020, 10:52 AM
Avicenna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North of Lake Constance, Germany
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Yes - so it's hard to argue that there should be an exception for Harry and Meghan, when there isn't for Beatrice and Eugenie, and police resources are stretched as it is. It'll probably end up being like the "Who pays for the repairs to Windsor Castle after the fire?" saga - if there's a public outcry, public funding will be withdrawn. If there isn't, who knows?
There's a difference though between Harry and Beatrice/Eugenie: His service in Afghanistan. Does this make him a target? Something that should be considered IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #668  
Old 02-28-2020, 11:21 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,758
I think the Beatrice/Eugenie & Sussexes comparisons are a little flawed mostly due to profile at the moment. I don't disagree they shouldn't have their security costs questioned but the fact is that the York sisters don't bring the attention and likely threats the Sussexes have at the current moment. And I am sure that is likely the biggest issue right now. Will that change in the comings months? We shall see.
Reply With Quote
  #669  
Old 02-28-2020, 11:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Quote:
Does this make him a target? Something that should be considered IMHO.
His military service ended 5 years ago.. and Terrorism has 'moved on'. If the Security people consider it a continued risk, it will [of course], be 'factored in' to the decision.

Most people in the UK seem to think think Sussex has put HIMSELF outside his previously safeguarded position, and so have little sympathy, and even less 'appetite' for continuing to pay for the security of what will be [after 31st March], essentially 'private individuals', who undertake no duties on our behalf, or that of the Crown..

If and when they do, of course they should have security provided by the Met, otherwise no..they are 'on their own', as they chose to be.
Reply With Quote
  #670  
Old 02-28-2020, 11:43 AM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 372
Royal Security

British soccer football clubs contribute costs significantly for policing inside and outside football grounds during matches! It’s not all up to taxpayers thankfully.
Reply With Quote
  #671  
Old 02-28-2020, 11:59 AM
crm2317's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,589
If wealthy people such as the Beckhams, Ecclestones and Dyson families need to pay for private security then why shouldn’t the Sussexes? They are wanting to make an independent income and that it their right but they should use this income to fund their security.
__________________
God Save the House of Windsor
Reply With Quote
  #672  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:16 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 635
In my humble opinion there should be a period for a year or something, in which the security costs are paid by the state. There are a lot of crazies out there and the Sussexes continue to have a very public profile.


And after this: Since the Sussexes seek the public and it looks like they want to become international A-listers, they should pay for themselves. I mean Oprah or Brad Pitt or any other in this league has to pay for the security too.
Reply With Quote
  #673  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:23 PM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 372
Should the British taxpayer continue to foot the security bill going forward for these two private individuals then there is a danger that a gravy train of costs could spiral without end! I am reminded of the Dutch sovereign’s private holiday villa in Greece (different status) where Dutch taxpayers have paid for various safety measures including the lease of land for a wall, the construction of a small harbour and the lease of a plot of land to extend security as well as the construction of a building for the security personel! I could well envisage this sort of extravagance on Vancouver Island or the Californian coast if there isn’t a stop to it. Thankfully the Canadian Government have listened to taxpayers’ concerns.
Reply With Quote
  #674  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:43 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,624
The author Salman Rushdie was a non vip who had round the clock state protection for years. Very different circumstances of course. There was a very clear public threat to his life.
Reply With Quote
  #675  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:39 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I also think the amount named here and there is sucked out of a big fat thumb. Exactly because it is a secretive policy, the security services will not reveal precize amounts distributed to individual royals.
Let's see, at least three teams of RPOS for three people, that have to rotate off every two weeks since they are living overseas. And because they are overseas, the RPOs probably get some sort of bonus. 5 star hotel rooms while the RPOs are off duty, a generous meal allowance, plus the back and forth trips from London to Vancouver in first class. I'm sure there are other additional expenses as well. That all adds up fast.

Only the RPOs salaries, and maybe a meal allowance, would be normal costs if the Sussexes had stayed put at Windsor.

This is not sustainable.
Reply With Quote
  #676  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:49 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
But that is not the point. When you or your loved ones are subject to threats, harassment, intrusion then the police will provide protection. No matter you are no royal. I fail to see why Prince Harry should foot the bill. He did not ask idiots to threat him, his wife or his son. .
The police won't provide protection indefinitely.
They would probably advise installing security cameras, or something of that nature.

Even celebrities who get stalked by disturbed people generally must get their own security. The police simply don't have the resources to offer protection 24/7.
Reply With Quote
  #677  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:51 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
But that is not the point. When you or your loved ones are subject to threats, harassment, intrusion then the police will provide protection. No matter you are no royal. I fail to see why Prince Harry should foot the bill. He did not ask idiots to threat him, his wife or his son. .

I am not sure the British public really minds paying for Harry's security. There are other things that are much more important now and the prize of security for them is just a topic to get readers away from thinking about all the other things wrong with the distribution of taxes. And as Harry is exposed to threats due to his station as a son of the PoW, then the Met Police should ask for further money from the Crown estate, because paying for guards and security was one of most important things that were payed by this estate before George III. turned it over to the government in exchange for eg. security. I understand that a lot of you think that Harry could not have his cake and eat it, but it is the same with the government/taxpayer. The government took the Crown estate for the taxpayers in exchange for security and other privileges for the Royals. They cannot now tell the Royals they won't get it anymor when they get the extra money to distribute among the citizens of the UK.
Reply With Quote
  #678  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:59 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalriada View Post
Should the British taxpayer continue to foot the security bill going forward for these two private individuals then there is a danger that a gravy train of costs could spiral without end! I am reminded of the Dutch sovereign’s private holiday villa in Greece (different status) where Dutch taxpayers have paid for various safety measures including the lease of land for a wall, the construction of a small harbour and the lease of a plot of land to extend security as well as the construction of a building for the security personel! I could well envisage this sort of extravagance on Vancouver Island or the Californian coast if there isn’t a stop to it. Thankfully the Canadian Government have listened to taxpayers’ concerns.

I can only remind all members her to check out the Crown Estate, what it used to be, what it was exchanged for and how much money it brings in - for the queen and her family as the souverain grant and for the use of the government. Harry does nothing to be threatend but be born a prince! You cannot leave him unprotected when th experts think he should have protection. And there is enough money out of the Royal hand to pay for that, just like the Britons pay for their embassies and ambassadours worldwide to be protected.
As Nr. 6 in the succession list, Harry is the 7th most important person in the Uk when it comes to official precedence - he is far higher in official rank than any ambassadour or even the Prime Minister ever can be. That's how it is in the Uk and nothing is going to change that apart from a public vote for the end of the monarchy.
Reply With Quote
  #679  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:07 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Quote:
I am not sure the British public really minds paying for Harry's security.
Perhaps you underestimate the resentment his actions have prompted amongst a Public that [once] adored him ?
lt seems to me that much of that same public now seeks to punish this couple for their [perceived] 'betrayal', and attempting to deny them security, paid for 'from the Public purse', is one of their sole remaining weapons in the quest for revenge ?

The Press [naturally] are 'stoking this fire'.
Reply With Quote
  #680  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:21 PM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 372
Royal Security

“ ....As Nr. 6 in the succession list, Harry is the 7th most important person in the Uk when it comes to official precedence - he is far higher in official rank than any ambassadour or even the Prime Minister ever can be. That's how it is in the Uk and nothing is going to change that apart from a public vote for the end of the monarchy.[/QUOTE]


Looking ahead Harry is still the grandson of the Head of State of the realm of Canada but he is still deemed a private individual by the Canadian government who sees him not worthy of this realm’s special security.
__________________

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 10 07-27-2021 12:02 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia biography birth britain britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex elizabeth ii family life gemstones george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hello! henry viii history hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee politics portugal prince harry princess eugenie queen consort queen louise solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech st edward sussex taiwan thai royal family tradition united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×