Major shakeup of royal protection

Started by PrincessOfPeace, August 02, 2014, 01:36:50 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

PrincessOfPeace

August 02, 2014, 01:36:50 PM
QuoteThe protection of the royal family will have a major shake-up Scotland Yard has confirmed.

According to the London Evening Standard, the shake-up of royal protection is a controversial decision. The Royal and Diplomatic Protection Department officers who protect senior members of the royal family are reportedly in uproar over the planned changes.

Some of the changes that will happen include the SO14 department being stripped of back-up officer support. There has been concern within the royal family that this could cause potential security threats.
More: Major shakeup of royal protection

Limabeany

#1
August 02, 2014, 02:15:14 PM Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 02:18:08 PM by Limabeany
Prince Charles 'intervenes in changes' to elite Scotland Yard protection detail for the Royal Family - Mirror Online

Quote
Prince Charles has reportedly intervened in changes to the elite protection detail for the Royal Family.

But the Scotland Yard shake-up which removes back-up officer support for the Royal and Diplomatic Protection Group went ahead as planned.

A source said: "The personal protection officers have been told effectively it is over to them to sort it out.

"Obviously it raises serious concern about the effectiveness of the department and will have an impact on the safety of the royal family.

"For the first time it seems Scotland Yard is putting a price on protecting the royal family. In the past this was not even a consideration — security came first."
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

Limabeany

#2
August 02, 2014, 02:30:05 PM
Royal security shake-up plan sparks fears among team charged with keeping Queen and her family safe - UK - News - London Evening Standard

Quote
Scotland Yard has launched a major shake-up of protection for the Royal Family, the Evening Standard can reveal.

The decision has caused uproar among Royal and Diplomatic Protection Department officers charged with guarding the Queen and her family, including high-profile members Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry.

Prince Charles was sufficiently concerned on learning of the proposed changes that he raised them with senior Met officers at Assistant Commissioner level. But the measures were implemented regardless of his intervention. It means the Yard's elite SO14 department has effectively been stripped of crucial back-up officer support.

The Met said the move is not about cost-cutting and insists there will be no impact on the safety of the royal family. But it will affect the security of all senior royals, including the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall.
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

TLLK

#3
August 02, 2014, 03:29:56 PM
Thank you PoP and Limabeany. Security for a nation's HoS and other public figures along with diplomatic missions is going to be an ongoing concern in this century.

Limabeany

#4
August 02, 2014, 06:18:20 PM Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 06:20:31 PM by Limabeany
I think the birth of George with William and Kate's abusive royal protection expenses was a game changer and the prospect of William continuing his normal lifestyle with no end date (yet again) at a tremendous increase in related security expenses to the taxpayers is bringing this about.
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

SophieChloe

#5
August 02, 2014, 07:29:38 PM
The abuse of tp money so she could be with her Mother was a disgrace - IMO. 

I'm off shopping in Reading tomorrow, I may swing by Bucklebury and see if there are any special police measures in place. 
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me

PrincessOfPeace

#6
August 02, 2014, 09:47:44 PM Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 09:56:32 PM by PrincessOfPeace
Quote from: Limabeany on August 02, 2014, 06:18:20 PM
I think the birth of George with William and Kate's abusive royal protection expenses was a game changer and the prospect of William continuing his normal lifestyle with no end date (yet again) at a tremendous increase in related security expenses to the taxpayers is bringing this about.

Its actually part of a department wide cut back that has been mandated by the Home Office. The Met is slashing its entire budget by 1/5 and this means there is a trickle down effect to SO14 Royal and Diplomatic Protection Group.

The other issue is manpower, there just aren't as many people joining up to the force so there are fewer officers to go around.

Limabeany

#7
August 02, 2014, 11:12:40 PM
Especially given William's long term demands for additional protection whenever a new career change strikes his fancy, first Anglesey and now, who knows, William has, since Anglesey, consistently, created an inconsiderate and inexcusable burden on police forces for an extended period, after Anglesey, it was Middleton Manor live-in, and since the Queen and Charles have decided to let him do as he pleases wherever he wishes to go, they will now be forced to pay for his whimsical lifestyle, at least in part. Good!
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

cinrit

#8
August 03, 2014, 12:12:15 AM
When did William demand additional protection?  Even in Anglesey, the protection officers would have been with him no matter where he was. 

Cindy
Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

Limabeany

#9
August 03, 2014, 02:41:26 AM
His choices demand additional protection and stress the local police forces who HAVE TO assist his POs who have to guard him for extended periods in remote locations.
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

PrincessOfPeace

#10
August 03, 2014, 02:50:24 AM
Berkshire is remote? Security follows every royal no matter where they go. Harry had his protection officers with him in Afghanistan and the base he was located on had to put in special measures to accommodate him but that's the nature of the beast.

Camilla keeps her own private home separate from Charles that requires full-time security.

Lady Adams

#11
August 03, 2014, 02:52:26 AM
Berkshire is remote in the same way Amner is -- not places where security for royals are already in place.  :unsure:

And I think Camilla's home is ridiculous as well.
"To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, and be nothing." --Elbert Hubbard, American writer

TLLK

#12
August 03, 2014, 03:32:52 AM
Quote from: PrincessOfPeace on August 02, 2014, 09:47:44 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on August 02, 2014, 06:18:20 PM
I think the birth of George with William and Kate's abusive royal protection expenses was a game changer and the prospect of William continuing his normal lifestyle with no end date (yet again) at a tremendous increase in related security expenses to the taxpayers is bringing this about.

Its actually part of a department wide cut back that has been mandated by the Home Office. The Met is slashing its entire budget by 1/5 and this means there is a trickle down effect to SO14 Royal and Diplomatic Protection Group.

The other issue is manpower, there just aren't as many people joining up to the force so there are fewer officers to go around.


Thank you for stating this PoP. IMHO I'm not surprised to see that the budget is a concern when the department has to provide protection to the BRF and the foreign HoS/dignitaries who come to the UK. Budget concerns like this one would likely have been comprised of a few years worth of documented material rather than just twelve months.

If there are fewer people who qualify for the program and choose not to join then that will be a concern. Also like a police/security forces the budget has to cover the cost of the officers' health, disability and retirement for the future. This type of career does take a physical and mental toll which often has people retiring at an earlier age than many other professions.

Limabeany

#13
August 03, 2014, 02:16:00 PM
 :goodpost: I so agree...

Quote from: Lady Adams on August 03, 2014, 02:52:26 AM
Berkshire is remote in the same way Amner is -- not places where security for royals are already in place.  :unsure:

And I think Camilla's home is ridiculous as well.
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

HistoryGirl

#14
August 03, 2014, 02:29:48 PM
Quote from: Lady Adams on August 03, 2014, 02:52:26 AM
Berkshire is remote in the same way Amner is -- not places where security for royals are already in place.  :unsure:

And I think Camilla's home is ridiculous as well.

Totally agree. This might be a stupid question as the answer would probably never be released, but does anyone know if there's ever actually been a threat to the senior royals recently?

Curryong

#15
August 03, 2014, 02:41:26 PM
It's a faint memory, but wasn't there a hint that Harry was in danger from a Radical Muslim group about a year ago, one of the reasons he had massive security of about six RPO's following him everywhere. I believe there was a meeting between Harry and the head of the Security Services at about the same time.

Limabeany

#16
August 03, 2014, 04:13:42 PM
A specific threat is quite different from moving somewhere requiring additional massive protection and round the clock burden on the local police force for 3 royals for months and years...
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions