The discourse around whether Prince Harry and his family should receive the British taxpayer-funded police protection has taken a major turn ever since the Sussexes were “confirmed” to move back to the UK.
Previously, Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) had been reviewing the circumstances for the occasional visits but the decision to move back had thrown a curveball at the Home Office.
Report had also claimed that King Charles’s son had been “privately pleading” with Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood for the result.
Now, a former home secretary David Blunkett has suggested a middle ground for the issue, which appears to be plausible.
“There are three areas of security… the fully blown, blacked-out back-up car with two or three close protection – one in the passenger car and the others in the back-up – on a 24-hour basis,” Blunkett told The Times.
“There’s then the middle ground… where you have one or two officers who travel with the principal, as they call it. The third is they get a driver with security training,” he continued. “The middle of that is a perfectly reasonable thing to offer for the time being, and then it could be reassessed in a couple of years.”
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said the Sussexes’ security was a “private matter”. Moreover, a Home Office spokesman said on Sunday that it did not discuss private security arrangements.
The security arrangements for the family of four will reportedly cost the taxpayer up to £5 million per year.
Dame Emily, chairman of the Commons foreign affairs committee, added that Harry is the “son of the King” and “has made a big contribution to our country through public service – that puts him and his family at risk”.
She added hat she would want to be “reassured” that Harry and his family are going to safe as they “deserve to be secure”.
2026-08-24 10:49:00
