Priti Patel ‘thrown under the bus’ for daring to question Prince Andrew security decision
Dame Priti Patel was “thrown under the bus” for suggesting that decisions about the Royal family’s security should receive proper scrutiny, it has been claimed.
A letter sent by Dame Priti to Sir Clive Alderton, the King’s private secretary, in which she mooted a potential review of the decision to strip the Duke of York of his taxpayer-funded police protection was leaked to a tabloid newspaper.
The leak forced the former home secretary to apologise to the King for the “embarrassment and difficulties” it had caused.
But a source familiar with the situation said she had done nothing but point out the “blindingly obvious” when it came to the activities of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures – known as Ravec – which is responsible for such decisions.
‘Outrageous’
The source said: “It is outrageous that an email sent in confidence about sensitive security matters should be leaked less than a week after it was written.
“All she did was suggest that decisions made by Ravec about the security arrangements for high-profile individuals should have proper political accountability and be kept under review.
“Dame Priti has been thrown under a bus for simply raising a matter of process. Is she not entitled to express her view?”
The source suggested that the email was leaked as a warning to anyone who dared try to question the decision-making process.
The source added: “This leak could only have come from an official inside the palace, the Home Office or Ravec to warn off anyone – including the former home secretary – from asking serious questions about security policy.
“And this from the people employed to keep us and the Royal family safe? They should be ashamed.”
The Duke lost his Metropolitan Police protection when he was forced to step back from official royal duties in the wake of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
It is thought likely that he is keen to have his bodyguards – said to cost up to £3 million a year – reinstated.
The concerns raised by Dame Priti echo those outlined by the Duke of Sussex in his legal challenge of the decision to deny him and his family automatic police protection when in the UK.
The Duke won the right to a judicial review based on an alleged lack of transparency about Ravec’s composition and processes.
He said he had been denied a “clear and full explanation” of the composition of the Home Office committee and how it operates.
The Duke was denied the right to bring a second challenge based on his offer to pay for his own protection, which he argued should have prompted the Home Office to “quash and retake” its decision.
Ravec shrouded in secrecy
The membership of Ravec has traditionally been shrouded in secrecy.
But The Telegraph revealed last year that Sir Clive was among the 10 people tasked with making decisions on the level of protective security afforded to members of the Royal family and public figures at particular risk.
Chris Fitzgerald, the King’s deputy private secretary, also sits on the committee, as does a senior aide to the Prince of Wales.
Alongside the three senior members of the Royal household sit the chairman of the National Police Chiefs Council counter-terrorism coordination committee, the deputy assistant commissioner of specialist operations at the Metropolitan Police, the director-general of the Homeland Security Group at the Home Office, and the deputy director of the National Security Secretariat at the Cabinet Office.
The director of protocol at the Foreign Office and the head of royalty VIP and MP security unit at the Homeland Security Group are also on the committee.
