Huge Majority of Express Poll Voters Reject Taxpayer-Funded Security for Harry and Meghan Ahead of UK Return

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s reported return to Britain has reignited the long-running debate over who should pay for their security — and readers responding to a new Daily Express poll delivered an emphatic verdict.

Asked whether the UK should help fund security for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, 96% of those who voted said no.

The poll ran from 10.30am on Friday, August 21, until 11am on Monday, August 24. Of those taking part, 28,825 voted against Britain contributing towards the Sussexes’ protection, compared with 960 who supported the idea. Another 180 selected “don’t know”.

The findings reflect the views of Daily Express poll respondents rather than a representative survey of the entire British public, but they come as Harry’s security arrangements are once again under scrutiny ahead of his reported return to the UK.

Readers deliver emphatic verdict

Several respondents argued that Harry and Meghan should personally cover the costs because they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.

One voter wrote: “ABSOLUTELY NOT! These 2 grifters had more than enough money to pay for their own security.”

Another argued that public money should instead be focused on people struggling with everyday expenses.

“We are all hard-pressed to pay for our everyday needs,” the respondent wrote, adding that there was “no spare cash” to fund the Sussexes’ private lifestyle.

A third compared Harry’s situation with other members of the Royal Family, pointing to the security arrangements surrounding Princess Anne and Prince Edward and arguing that Harry should pay for protection himself because he stepped back from royal duties.

Harry’s security dispute dates back to 2020

Harry lost the automatic level of publicly funded protection provided to senior working royals after he and Meghan stepped away from royal duties and moved abroad in 2020.

The decision was made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, which operates on behalf of the Home Office.

Because Harry was expected to visit Britain only occasionally, the committee determined that his security requirements would instead be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Harry subsequently challenged that decision through the courts, arguing that the circumstances surrounding his protection had not been properly considered.

However, three senior Court of Appeal judges rejected his appeal in May 2025.

Following the ruling, Harry described the outcome as “a good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up” and alleged that security had effectively been used to prevent members of the Royal Family from choosing a different way of life.

Security could be reassessed after UK return

Harry was later informed that his security arrangements would be reassessed, although it is understood that the review has not yet taken place.

The issue has become particularly relevant amid reports that Harry, Meghan and their children are preparing to spend significantly more time in Britain.

Reports have suggested that the Sussexes’ protection arrangements could therefore be reconsidered once their circumstances change.

For the thousands of Daily Express readers who participated in the latest poll, however, the question of who should ultimately pick up the bill produced a remarkably one-sided response: they overwhelmingly believe British taxpayers should not be responsible for funding Harry and Meghan’s security.