A Kent MP who previously worked in counter-terrorism has weighed into the row over whether Prince Harry and his family should receive police protection when they return to Britain.
Dover and Deal MP Mike Tapp says the decision must be based solely on the threat facing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, rather than “headlines, politics or public opinion”.
The Labour politician, who served in the Intelligence Corps before going on to work for the National Crime Agency and Ministry of Defence, spoke out as debate over the Sussexes’ security arrangements intensified ahead of their return to the UK.
Prince Harry and Meghan are expected to relocate from California to a private residence in Britain with their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, who are due to start school in the UK.
But questions remain over what taxpayer-funded protection the family will receive.
Harry lost his automatic entitlement to the level of police protection afforded to senior working royals after he and Meghan stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
Their circumstances are now being reconsidered by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) - the body responsible for decisions over protective security for royals and other public figures.
Mr Tapp, whose Dover and Deal constituency includes one of the country's busiest borders, says politicians should not attempt to dictate the outcome.
“Decisions about protective security should be based on a clear-eyed assessment of the threat and impact they face,” he said.
“I don’t presume to know what the outcome should be for Prince Harry, that is not for politicians.
“But with my security hat on, having worked in national security, I strongly believe the only relevant consideration should be the assessed level of threat, and the professionals should be allowed to reach that decision independently.
“Police protection is not a reward for public service.
“It exists to prevent attacks, deter those who would do harm and manage known risks before lives are lost.
“Those responsible should of course make their assessment based on evidence, intelligence and risk – not headlines, politics or public opinion.
“The central question is simple: what is the genuine level of threat faced by Prince Harry and his family when they are in Britain?
“The decision should be made independently on that basis alone. Nothing more, and nothing less.”
Mr Tapp is a former soldier who served with the Intelligence Corps, including tours of Iraq and Afghanistan, and later worked for the National Crime Agency and Ministry of Defence.
He has previously told Parliament he worked in a counter-terrorism role and has spoken of his experience of intelligence gathering and national security investigations.
The Sussexes have paid for private protection since moving to the United States.
Harry has fought a long-running battle over his security arrangements in Britain and previously challenged the decision to remove the automatic police protection he received while he was a working royal.
The issue has taken on renewed significance following the family's decision to return to Britain.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham said last week that their security arrangements were a “private matter”.
Decisions are not made by the Prime Minister, but by Ravec, which is overseen by the Home Office.
The Home Office has said the UK's protective security system is “rigorous and proportionate” and that it does not provide detailed information about individual arrangements because doing so could compromise security.
A private security report commissioned on behalf of Prince Harry and reported by ITV News last month claimed the duke was the focus of six terrorist plots, five originating in the UK.
The report was said to have concluded that the threat facing him was significantly higher in Britain than in the United States.
Harry has previously said concerns about security were a major factor in his reluctance to bring Meghan and their children to the UK.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.