The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   British Royals (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/)
-   -   Royal Security (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/royal-security-21145.html)

Lumutqueen 05-11-2011 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FanofMonaco (Post 1251234)
The Queen is supposedly worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Is she too cheap to provide security for her own grandchildren? That's sad.

What you're saying is sad IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redbicycle (Post 1251384)
But where does it end? Apparently the royal wedding cost 20-30m in security and policing costs, and Her Majesty has 6 other grandchildren yet to get married....

It made the country over 1 Billion pounds, I think that's well worth it. Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Harry, Louise and James deserve security during their wedding as they are public figures who will serve our country. Just like our PM and other high profiled politicians. I see no problem with spending 20 million on such a wonderful occasion, especially if it makes the country 5 times as much is spent.

muriel 05-11-2011 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redbicycle (Post 1251384)
But where does it end? Apparently the royal wedding cost 20-30m in security and policing costs, and Her Majesty has 6 other grandchildren yet to get married....

This was probably the most high profile of the weddings of HMs grand children. The others are likely to be relatively small weddings and are unlikley to require much security, other than is usual when a member of the royal family is present.

muriel 05-11-2011 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1251446)

Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Harry, Louise and James deserve security during their wedding as they are public figures who serve our country. Just like our PM and other high profiled politicians.

You have an excellent sense of humour. The only one who should not be your grouping above is Harry as he is actually serving his country!

Lumutqueen 05-11-2011 11:12 AM

That wasn't humour, that was missing a word.

muriel 05-11-2011 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1251463)
That wasn't humour, that was missing a word.

It certainly made me smile!

Lumutqueen 05-11-2011 11:20 AM

Mistake on my part then.

KittyAtlanta 05-11-2011 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vasillisos Markos (Post 1251198)
....On a lighter note, perhaps their penchant for ludicrous head gear will afford the York princesses some sort of protection, like an amulet. :-) They certainly don't wear them because they are fashionable or attractive. Just my opinion

Vasillisos, can you see my grin???

Further to Zonk's earlier post:

After the 1901 assassination of William McKinley, the U.S. Congress directed the Secret Service to protect the President. Today, the Secret Service is authorized by law to protect:

President
Vice President
President-elect
Vice President-elect



plus
  • The immediate families of the above individuals, with the exception of spousal protection, which shall terminate in the event of remarriage, the divorce from, or death of a former president.The widow or widower of a former President who dies in office or dies within a year of leaving office for a period of 1 year after the President's death (the Secretary of Homeland Security can extend the protection time)
  • Children of former Presidents until age 16 or until 10 years after the presidency, whichever comes first
  • Former Vice Presidents, their spouses, and their children under age 16 for a period of not more than 6 months from the date the former Vice President leaves office (the Secretary of Homeland Security can extend the protection time)
  • Visiting heads of states or governments and their spouses traveling with them, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States, and official representatives of the United States performing special missions abroad whom the president deems important enough for protection outside the Diplomatic Security Service
  • Major presidential and vice presidential candidates
  • The spouses of major presidential and vice presidential candidates (no more than 120 days before a general presidential election)
Any of the above can decline Secret Service protection, with the exception of the President, the Vice President, the President-elect, and the Vice President-elect.

Congressional Research Service.
U.S. Department of State https://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/109502.pdf.

During the current presidential cycle, Congress has been called upon to reconsider, as the world has become more dangerous for former office holders. Members of Congress have discussed restoring lifetime protection in view of increases in terrorism and other threats.

No decision on any change has been reached to date.

Vasillisos Markos 05-11-2011 02:49 PM

[QUOTE=KittyAtlanta;1251511]Vasillisos, can you see my grin???

KittyAtlanta my dear,

Your grin is illuminating my day up here near Chicago. thank you:flowers:

dilsnub 05-11-2011 07:19 PM

Any figures on how much anually is spent on secret service?

Vasillisos Markos 05-11-2011 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dilsnub (Post 1251755)
Any figures on how much anually is spent on secret service?

The agency is reluctant to disclose actual figures because it believes that showing the amount may reveal how much actual protection is out there. When I googled your question, I found a link where the Washington Post estimated the amount at $140 million but that was only for protecting the President, Vice-President and their immediate families. But that was back in 1992 and one must remember that the Secret Service also protects others such as foreign dignitaries and past presidents and assists the Treasury with investigating crimes such as counterfeiting. I imagine the actual budget is enormous.

dilsnub 05-11-2011 10:42 PM

It must be... I know the secret service in the states is very expansive also... I had to get a top secret clerance once and the ss went to my home town and knocked around for months

tommy1716 05-28-2011 07:02 PM

Going too far in my opinion:

THE Princess Royal, Duke of York and Earl of Wessex face losing their 24-hour police protection as part of desperate cost-cutting measures.
Prince Andrew’s daughters Beatrice and Eugenie are already expected to lose their protection, said to cost 500,000 a year.
The latest move comes as the cash-strapped Metropolitan Police Service tries to recoup some of its 8million Royal Wedding costs.
Royals would continue to receive protection for official duties but it would be taken away at other times.


Read more: Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Princess Anne's fury overplans to cut Royal protection police

kathl29 05-29-2011 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy1716 (Post 1259282)
Going too far in my opinion:

THE Princess Royal, Duke of York and Earl of Wessex face losing their 24-hour police protection as part of desperate cost-cutting measures.

I agree.

It is fair enough the grandchildren of the monarch lose police protection as they will move further and further away from the centre of the royal family and won't do as many royal duties but I think it is dangerous in these times to remove it from actively hardworking members of the royal family.

I think that Princess Anne in particular is right to be concerned as I am sure she can still remember being at the centre of a kidnap attempt which must have been very frightening at the time.

Iluvbertie 05-29-2011 01:30 AM

Edward and Sophie lose 1m police protection as Royal security costs are cut | Mail Online

This article says that Edward and Sophie, along with Beatrice and Eugenie are to lose security.


I would then assume that Andrew and Anne might also be about to lose it as well.

I do hope that the people making these decisions know what they are doing and that it doesn't come back to bite them.

Zonk 05-29-2011 07:14 AM

I can't believe that this issue is discussed to publicly.

I watched an old 90's movie last night, with Shirley MacLaine and Nicolas Cage called Guarding Tess about the Secret Service guarding a Former First Lady. She had 24 hour protection of 6 to 8 officers who rotated their hours watching. She was a bit of a pain in the butt, and complained about their presence and the cost associated with guarding an old lady (her words not mine) ...until she was kidnapped of course.

My point (and yes I do have one)....in the US....the Secret Service is a part of the Department of Treasury (never made sense to me why that particular department). Anyway, the Secret Service guards the President, Vice Presidents, First and Second Ladies, Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader, Supreme Court Justices, past living Presidents (see above posts) and we hardly NEVER hear how it costs per year. There was some discussion about escalating costs as we were guarding so many former presidents at one time and presidents post Bush only get it for 10 years after leaving office and not lifetime service they had in the past.

But again, we never hear that the US taxpayers pay XXXX million a year to guard all these people.

How come this is being discussed so freely? And does Scotland Yard protect the royals or regular police? Why isn't this included in the regular royal budget?

Again, I hope this doesn't end up being a bad decision with someone being harmed or killed.

AnaC 05-29-2011 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie (Post 1259358)
Edward and Sophie lose 1m police protection as Royal security costs are cut | Mail Online

This article says that Edward and Sophie, along with Beatrice and Eugenie are to lose security.


I would then assume that Andrew and Anne might also be about to lose it as well.

I do hope that the people making these decisions know what they are doing and that it doesn't come back to bite them.


I agree :ermm:
I don't think this should be part of a public debate.

Harold 05-29-2011 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk (Post 1259460)
....the Secret Service is a part of the Department of Treasury (never made sense to me why that particular department).

My understanding is that it was the only federal law enforcement agency in existence when it was thought that the president needed security.

Quote:

Anyway, the Secret Service guards the President, Vice Presidents, First and Second Ladies, Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader, Supreme Court Justices, past living Presidents (see above posts) and we hardly NEVER hear how it costs per year. There was some discussion about escalating costs as we were guarding so many former presidents at one time and presidents post Bush only get it for 10 years after leaving office and not lifetime service they had in the past.
My understanding is that the Congressional leadership is guarded, to the extent that it is, by the Capitol Police not the Secret Service. I am not aware that the Supreme Court Justices receive protection. I believe this because Justice Ginsburg (or O"Connor?) was mugged one night in DC some months ago.

It is also my understanding that W is the first president to receive protection for only 10 years. I believe the law permits the then current president to extend this and I feel certain that it will be routinely extended for all ex-presidents.

If I am incorrect in any of this, please let me know.

Duke of Marmalade 05-29-2011 09:19 AM

I think its only consistent. Nobody apart from the core BRF (Queen & Duke, Charles & Camilla as heirs, William & Kate as future heirs & Harry as spare) needs 24 hour protection. They do have protection when on duty and that should be sufficient.

Feel not sure? Well, go and pay for your own bodyguard. The Queens children should be rich enough to pay for their own security. Its not for the taxpayer to pay for the extended Royal Family.

I agree this shouldnt become part of a huge public debate.

Lumutqueen 05-29-2011 09:33 AM

That's a question - are the Edward, Sophie, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Anne, Timothy rich?

Duke of Marmalade 05-29-2011 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1259517)
That's a question - are the Edward, Sophie, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Anne, Timothy rich?

For a start, Andrew received GBP 15 Mio for Sunninghill Part, that should fund some bodyguards for a while :biggrin:

I am sure the others arent poor either, Z-List celebrities pay for bodyguards, Edward or Anne can do as well. As with regard to Timothy - the average Brit has no idea what he looks like or that he even exists, why would he need protection?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises