Leaving already? Harry and Meghan’s reported risk to stop Britain if they’re refused taxpayer funded safety is ‘akin to blackmail’, declares RICHARD EDEN on this week’s Palace Confidential
On the latest Palace Confidential, Diary Editor Richard Eden and a panel of royal experts discuss reports Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are already considering a move back to California if they are denied taxpayer funded security.
At the weekend, the Mail’s Editor at Large Alison Boshoff reported that friends say the Sussexes could leave the UK if a Home Office review refuses them automatic police protection.
Speaking to columnist Sarah Vine and royal biographer Robert Hardman, Eden said he views the couple’s reported ultimatum, so soon after their arrival, as ‘akin to blackmail’, an attempt to pile pressure on the review.
He added it would be ‘outrageous’ to give the couple, who the King recently restated are effectively private citizens, the same protection as working royals.
Harry lost automatic taxpayer funded security in 2020 after the couple stepped back from official duties and moved overseas, and failed to overturn the decision in the courts. Their return has now triggered a fresh review.
‘My goodness, that makes the whole thing seem like… some sort of blackmail,’ Eden argued, as though the couple were saying: ‘We’ll move to Britain in an attempt to get the taxpayers to pay for security.’
On the latest Palace Confidential, Richard Eden and a panel of royal experts discuss reports Harry and Meghan are already considering a move back to California if they are denied taxpayer funded security
At the weekend, the Mail’s Editor at Large Alison Boshoff reported that friends say the Sussexes could leave the UK if a Home Office review refuses them automatic police protection
He continued: ‘The implications of this are massive because if they get it, what that then means is Harry and Meghan can come and go, and they’ll still be getting police protection, and also they can say that they want it in America.
‘So those hard pressed taxpayers in the US might find that they’re having to pay for security too. So it could ease any money worries that they have.
‘Harry and Meghan would be absolutely thrilled. They’d have these huge costs paid for by someone else.’
If the review were to go the Sussexes’ way, the panel questioned whether they could be regarded as internationally protected persons.
This status, the same as that given to diplomats, would mean other countries would also have to protect them when they travel overseas.
The couple argue that as the King’s son, who also served his country in Afghanistan, Harry is as much a target and as deserving of protection as any other senior royal.
However, Eden pointed out that the King’s own siblings do not get such protection, only receiving it while carrying out official royal duties.
Vine predicted it was an ‘inevitability’ that Harry will return to official duties in some way, as the price of being awarded security.
‘They will say you can have the protection, but you need to start doing some royal duties,’ she said.
‘Maybe not Meghan, just Harry. He’s good at that stuff and if he does it on his own, then she doesn’t need to be involved. She can’t get upset about it. It sort of makes sense.’
The couple argue that as the King’s son, who also served his country in Afghanistan, Harry is as much a target and as deserving of protection as any other senior royal
Hardman, however, argued that security decisions are made on the threat alone, not on a transactional basis.
He said: ‘I don’t think it can be on the basis of, you get an extra copper with an earpiece if you cut a few ribbons. It doesn’t really work like that.
‘The people judging security are not interested in plaque unveilings, ribbon cuttings and hospital openings. They’re just interested in the threat, and I think that’s how it’ll be decided.’
Watch the full episode, including more analysis of the fallout from Earl Spencer’s explosive memoir, on Palace Confidential’s YouTube channel and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
