The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s claims that their son Archie was denied security protection because he was not a prince are “utter nonsense”, police and Home Office sources said yesterday.
The Metropolitan Police, which protects the royal family around the globe, stopped providing security when the couple stepped down as working members while in Canada last spring.
Round-the-clock protection during their time in Canada was estimated to be costing taxpayers
more than £1 million a year. Between four and six officers on salaries of about £60,000 were stationed with them and there was the cost of an armoured vehicle and other items. They also had to cover the cost of help from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Protection of members of the royal family is based on a threat assessment conducted by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC). It gauges the risk individuals face using intelligence from across British security and intelligence services and others, including through the Five Eyes partnership with US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It makes its recommendations to the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, chaired by Sir Richard Mottram, a former civil servant.
A Home Office source separately said there had been “concerted efforts” to cut the huge taxpayer-funded cost of protecting the royals in the past five years. Only the most senior members of the royal family and government receive automatic protection from Scotland Yard but it will authorise protection for all individuals who face a large enough risk.
However, the duchess
claimed in the interview that she was told her son would not receive security because he would not be a prince. Later the duke told Oprah Winfrey: “I never thought that I would have my security removed, because I was born into this position. I inherited the risk. So that was a shock to me. That was what completely changed the whole plan.”
Sources familiar with decisions over royal protection have debunked both claims and said it was “ridiculous” of them to expect continued protection. A police source said: “JTAC do threat assessments for anyone of any note and they obviously know who has targeted who in the past so certain individuals have been targeted by certain terror groups and their threat level is moderate high or very high. The leading royals all get protection but again done on a threat assessment basis.
“If you cease to be a royal, you lose your HRH and you go to another country like America, your threat level is going to reduce quite considerably because basically, who wants to kill you? You’re not a royal. It still will exist — there still will be a threat against Meghan and Harry but it won’t be high. And the threat against their children is non-existent so the notion that her son should get protection just because they were born to Meghan and Harry is nonsense, really.”
Another source familiar with the process mocked Meghan for expecting that Archie would receive his own protection, saying: “The point they were making was stupid.
A baby that can’t crawl wouldn’t get protection in its own right. It doesn’t need it. The baby doesn’t go anywhere independently, it’s with Harry and Meghan all the time.”
A Home Office source said: “When they stepped away from royal duties, if they then aren’t going to have any contact with the public — they’re going to be living in a private home — the risk assessment is automatically reduced. So even without any change in status, just not doing those day-to-day things will reduce your risk assessment.”
Dai Davies, a former chief superintendent who ran the Met’s royal protection unit, said
there was no automatic right to security because Harry was born a royal. He said: “The duty on the officers is to protect the Queen and the line of succession. If there were any concerns about their safety, then they are now US residents, and she’s a citizen — the FBI would also take appropriate action. If there was any known risk or perceived threat then action could be taken by the police there.
Clutching at my pearls 
