Prince Harry’s entitlement to security during his UK visits is being reassessed, amid accusations from Royal experts that he is using it to “revive his brand”. The Duke of Sussex lost his bid to restore his police protection in May, but a fresh Home Office review will consider whether he should automatically be granted it when visiting his homeland.
The process to re-evaluate the duke’s threat level is reportedly under way, with a decision anticipated next month. He had previously stated that he did not feel secure bringing his family back to the UK due to concerns over their safety.
Consequently, King Charles has only met his grandchildren once. He last saw Archie, six, and Lilibet, four, during the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in 2022.
Kinsey Schofield, presenter of To Di for Daily, suggests the request was made to help him “resuscitate that royal image.”
She said: “His goal is to project that brand and monetise it through books, television, or paid appearances. For years, he has leaned heavily into a victimhood narrative that audiences have largely rejected, and he seems eager to turn that around.”
“He is desperate to be seen as the happy go lucky prince people once adored, but I think too much damage has been done for that image to fully return. With the Sussexes, actions speak louder than words, and Harry’s recent behaviour does not support the idea that he genuinely wants to return to the fold.
“His appearance on Colbert was a misjudged attempt at a viral moment that risked complicating the Royal Family’s relationship with President Trump. Don’t forget, Colbert previously perpetuated Wales cheating conspiracies at a time when Catherine was quietly facing her cancer diagnosis.”
Harry made an unexpected appearance on Stephen Colbert’s Late Show last Thursday where he ridiculed Donald Trump by asserting America had “elected a king”. The remark referenced the “No Kings” left-wing demonstrations, which witnessed millions taking to the streets in New York, Washington DC, Chicago, Miami and Los Angeles in October to oppose Trump and his administration.
He also lambasted CBS for settling a “baseless” lawsuit with the President and declared the US were “obsessed with royalty”. The chat show host has been a vocal detractor of Harry’s family previously.
Kinsey adds: “None of this sounds like a man who is eager to reconcile or work collaboratively with his family. It feels irresponsible.
“Ultimately, I think Harry wants more visibility in the UK because it allows him to look like a royal on the global stage. I also think there is real resentment over not being treated the same as his brother. But Prince William has devoted his life to the crown. Harry walked away from that responsibility.
“And the late Queen made it clear there is no half in half out. If the King wants to protect his own standing, he will honour her wishes.”
Prince Harry‘s protection arrangements were scaled back following his decision to step away from senior Royal responsibilities in 2020 and relocate to America with Meghan.
During his court battle this year, the Duke challenged how decisions were made by the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures committee (Ravec), which oversees security provision for senior royals on the Home Office’s behalf.
Ravec had determined that given Prince Harry’s status as an occasional UK visitor, his protection requirements would be evaluated individually for each visit.
However, the Duke’s legal representatives maintained that Ravec failed to conduct a thorough reassessment of the dangers he encountered when reviewing his circumstances in 2020. His barristers claimed he had been “singled out” for “inferior treatment”, yet the judicial decision confirmed there was nothing improper about the decision-making process.
A senior judge determined that Prince Harry’s “sense of grievance” regarding how his security arrangements were modified did not constitute grounds for a viable appeal.
Buckingham Palace responded at the time: “All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.”
A government representative stated: “The UK Government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate.
“It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.express.co.uk ’
