Kellydofc
Nobility
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 472
- City
- Out in the country
- Country
- United States
I do somewhat understand Harry's argument. However, I am quite sure that he could have continued to benefit from the basic level of protection offered by living at Frogmore Cottage. So, it is primarily his decisions that lead to much more expensive bills.
However, if Harry sh/would be entitled to at least a minimum level of security because part of his need for security is at least at first still based on him being born in the BRF (based on what he might need if he had chosen to live a mostly anonymous life from now on), the question is who should pay for that type of security? Would that be the British tax-payer as they keep his family in office; his father because he at least earns an income from being a member of the royal family; the queen as head of the family; someone else? It seems the other royals do indeed fund it themselves (including Andrew who was also born in the family and due to his own decision is now 'outside').
If you go on the born into the Royal Family argument for security then ALL the royals deserve it. Clearly they don't go by that rule. Princess Anne works more than most royals and she doesn't have her own security. This is a HUGE reason why the "I was born royal" holds no weight with me.
So were loads of other royals. Royals who are still working royals. Royals who only get security when they are at events. Yet none of them have complained except Andrew and Harry.