Prince Harry’s security woes spark ‘civil’ war

Prince Harry is merely a few steps away from his taxpayer-funded security and the news comes via one well placed author who has a penchant for laying it how it is.

This time around he turned to his Substack with a candid flair. The person in question is none other than European Editor-at-Large, Tom Sykes.

He explained that while the campaign to secure Prince Harry state-funded security is “well underway”, even “backed up by senior government figures,” the issue is that barely 2% of British taxpayers actually think they should be footing his security bill.

What’s something worse, that many other experts, commentators and even critics have pointed out is the actual decision to return to the other side of the pond, after spending many years talking out against his homeland because it did not treat his wife right allegedly.

Some are even speaking about his decision not to lead with an apology to his elder brother and sister-in-law, who on many occasions has face accusations.

However, what Mr Sykes focused on was the King’s apparent softness towards the wayward Duke. In his piece he defended the idea that “any idea that the King is not nodding this through is, frankly, absurd.”

In his point of view, “it’s going to go down incredibly badly,” as he put it plainly. Because what the future promises is the notion that “these two people who think the monarchy is terrible, cruel, duplicitous, deceptive, uncaring (pick your own pejorative adjective) are now back in a better position than any non-working members of the family have ever been in”.

He explained the repercussions of offering round-the-clock security to a Duke who isn’t even a working member of the Firm and described it as being, ‘serious money’.

Reportedly, the calculations would go down as follows. Because “even the most basic level of protection is going to cost serious money. Round-the-clock cover with one officer on duty at all times requires a team of at least five officers—once you allow for weekends, leave, and sickness. At £80,000 ($109,000) per year, that’s £400,000 ($545,000) in salaries alone. Once you add employer costs, vehicles, and overtime, you’re looking at something closer to £700,000 ($950,000) a year.

For those unversed, there is another body in charge of providing security for members of the British family, their descendants, or other dignitaries. They are called RAVEC (the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, the body responsible for determining security protection in the U.K.)

In his view even the softening of people like former British Home Secretary, David Blunkett spells doom for the British coffers because they’ve become vocal in their claims that, it was “hard to imagine how he and his family would not receive some protection.”

Near the end is where he got stricter though and said, “there needs to be crystal clear, on-the-record communication from the King’s office.” If done wrong, or not done at all he says, the King “looks weak—and the British public will not tolerate it.”

What’s more is that “the final straw for many would surely come when the Sussexes arrive at Heathrow and are met by a police escort.”