A dispute over taxpayer-funded security for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex persists, even as reports suggest a Home Office review has been finalized. The situation has drawn varied responses from politicians regarding the protection of Prince Harry, Meghan, and their children.
Dame Emily Thornberry, chairwoman of the foreign affairs select committee, stated that Harry, Meghan, and their children "deserve to be safe." She argued that Prince Harry's past public service and his position as the son of the King place him and his family at risk. Fellow Labour MP Mike Tapp, a former Home Office minister, emphasized the need for an "objective assessment of threat" to guide security decisions, asserting that police protection should be based on evidence, intelligence, and risk, rather than public opinion or headlines.
Dawn Butler, a former minister, added that any security system should be independent and grounded in an objective risk assessment, particularly considering threats such as sustained racial abuse directed at the family. However, Labour peer Lord Foulkes argued that the Sussexes' security is a "private matter" and should be personally funded, citing their wealth and questioning where such provisions would end if extended beyond the immediate family.
In contrast, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch called for "common sense" to prevail. She acknowledged Prince Harry's high public profile due to his birthright but suggested that security assessments should be a collaborative effort between the palace and security experts. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has previously described the couple's security as a "private matter."
The ongoing debate coincides with claims that a review by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee's (Ravec) risk management board has already concluded. Prince Harry has reportedly personally appealed to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood for the results of this review ahead of their potential return to the UK.
Reports indicate the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, along with their children Archie and Lilibet, may be returning to the UK for a period of around six months. This potential return follows their move to Montecito, California, six years ago. Prince Harry had previously expressed doubts about bringing his family back to the UK, citing security concerns.
The Home Office maintains a policy of not disclosing details about security arrangements, stating that doing so could compromise their effectiveness and individual safety. Meanwhile, non-working royals such as Zara Tindall and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie do not receive publicly funded police protection.