The Duke of Sussex should not be entitled to government-funded security when he is in the UK, an online poll conducted on HELLO!'s website has shown.
Earlier this week, we asked our readers whether Harry should receive automatic paid protection whenever he returns home, such as this week for his High Court trial against Associated Newspapers Limited.
A majority 65 per cent of readers responded "no" while 35 per cent said "yes".
Furthermore, the comments on our original story were more telling, with many arguing that the Duke, who lives in California with his wife Meghan Markle and their two children, does not "deserve" such a benefit. "He doesn't need nor deserve government funded security," one reader, using the name Tnealb, wrote. Lina agreed: "I don't think Harry deserves it as it was his choice to leave the UK… He should be grateful for what he has." A third also stated: "He has literally burnt all his bridges."
One solution: hire private security
One reader Bea explained: "I don't feel he deserves it at any time. If I lived in the UK, I would be really upset about paying for his security when he no longer lives in England and doesn't even communicate with his father or brother. Therefore, he has contributed nothing but a book that destroyed his family's relationship with him and he knew how hurtful that was – didn't bother him in the least. He decided to move away, which means "move away"; you are no longer entitled to the benefits."
Bea offered a solution: "All celebrities hire their own guards. He needs to do the same. They are on their payroll, or they can hire through a security company. For summer events that he may be hosting in the UK this year, he needs to grow up and pay for his own security."
© Getty ImagesWhen there is an exception
Another reader Sandra suggested that if Harry were in the UK to carry out royal engagements, then he should be allowed taxpayer-funded security. But "if he is just over here for family/friends get-togethers, he should pay for his own".
Robert Jobson's analysis
The remarks about Harry's security were posted in response to royal author Robert Jobson's comment piece, in which he explained why the Duke, as fifth in line to the throne, should be entitled to taxpayer-funded armed protection from Scotland Yard when in Britain.
Jobson argues it is not because Harry is royal, but because he is a "named target", particularly after serving two tours in Afghanistan during his army days. You can read the full piece here.
Agree with these HELLO! readers or disagree? Click on the button below to leave a comment and let us know...
