'If You Don't Feel Safe, Don't Come Here': Brits Slam Prince Harry Over His Push for Taxpayer-Funded Security

Public opposition in Britain has intensified over reports that the Home Office is considering reinstating taxpayer-funded security for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, with many expressing the view that the protection was forfeited when the couple stepped back from royal duties in 2020. 'If you don't feel safe, don't come here,' wrote one commenter in response to reports of the review. Another said: 'When he left the UK, his duty, his position — he gave up all the perks that went with the job.'

The backlash comes as senior civil servants from the Home Office, the Cabinet Office, and the Foreign Office — all members of the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) — are understood to be opposed to reinstating protection for the Sussexes. A source told a national newspaper there is 'nervousness among certain members of the committee who fear a public backlash,' adding that 'the political side believe there is too much political risk while the police and security chiefs believe that he absolutely must have it due to the extant threat.'

A Committee Divided

Ravec, which authorises protection for senior royals and public figures, is currently conducting a full security review — the first comprehensive threat assessment of the Duke of Sussex since 2019. That assessment placed Harry in the highest risk category, citing his royal status and military background. No updated review was carried out when his protection was downgraded in 2020, a procedural gap that later became central to his legal challenges.

Harry lost a Court of Appeal ruling in May 2025, with judges concluding that his 'sense of grievance' did not amount to a viable legal argument. He subsequently wrote to the then-Home Secretary and later Shabana Mahmood to request a fresh risk assessment, which Ravec's Risk Management Board agreed to undertake. As recently as last month, reinstatement of his protection was reported to be likely, with one source describing it as 'nailed on.' The Home Office's political wing is now understood to be resisting the move, despite pressure from police and security chiefs.

The Stalker Incidents and the Invictus Visit

Harry's legal team has cited specific recent incidents as evidence that the threat against him remains active. During a visit to London last September, a woman reportedly entered a secure area at a children's charity event at the Royal Lancaster Hotel, where Harry had been granted one day of police protection. Days later, without protection at Imperial College London, the same individual reportedly got within close range of him and was stopped only by a member of his private security team.

Harry is expected to travel to the UK in July for an event marking the one-year countdown to the 2026 Invictus Games in Birmingham. Three individuals previously jailed for plotting to harm him are understood to have since been released. His children, Archie, 6, and Lilibet, 4, have not been seen publicly with King Charles since the late Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022.

The Cost Factor

The financial dimension has sharpened public opposition. The Sussexes' private annual security costs in California are estimated to run into the millions, with figures cited as high as $10 million (approximately £7.9 million) per year. During their 2024 visit to Colombia, local authorities reportedly spent around $2 million (approximately £1.6 million) on their security, a decision that drew criticism given the country's economic conditions. Any reinstated UK protection would represent an additional cost to British taxpayers and would apply on visits rather than as a permanent arrangement.

The Ravec decision carries implications beyond the Sussexes. It sets a precedent for how security is allocated to members of the royal family who have stepped back from public duties, and it tests the boundary between intelligence-led risk assessments and political calculation.