BREAKING NEWS: Loose Women star fumes over taxpayers funding Harry and Meghan’s security
Loose Women panellists clashed over whether British taxpayers should fund security for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after the couple moved Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet to a different school just days into the new term.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently returned to the UK with their children after several years living in the United States.
But shortly after Archie and Lilibet began attending school in Britain, Harry and Meghan decided to move them elsewhere following discussions with their security team about the practicalities of the daily journey.
A spokesperson for the couple stressed that the decision was not connected to any problem with the school itself.
“The parents remain extremely grateful to all the teachers and staff for the love, care and effort they have shown their family,” the statement said.
It added that the decision “should in no way be interpreted as a reflection on the school or the exceptional care the children have received there”.
The update became the opening topic on Loose Women, where Coleen Nolan, Brenda Edwards, Charlene White and Jane Moore debated whether the Sussexes should receive taxpayer-funded protection.
Coleen Nolan Defends Sussex Security
Coleen made clear she would have no issue with public money being used to protect Harry and his family.
“I haven’t got a problem with paying my taxes to keep them secure,” she said.
Coleen argued that Harry and his family remain closely connected to the monarchy and continue to attract an enormous amount of public attention.
She also admitted becoming frustrated by what she described as the “constant vitriol” directed towards Harry and Meghan.
“I just don’t get it,” she said, arguing that almost everything the couple do appears to trigger criticism.
For Coleen, the debate became especially important when Archie and Lilibet were involved.
“When it comes to their children and their safety, I’m all for it,” she said. “I don’t want to see anything happen to them.”
Jane Moore strongly disagreed.
She pointed to Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips, the late Queen Elizabeth II’s grandchildren, who did not receive full-time royal protection as children.
Jane argued that public money is limited and that protection cannot simply be provided to every high-profile individual who requests it.
Jane Moore Says Sussexes Should Pay
Jane noted that Harry and Meghan voluntarily stepped away from their roles as working members of the Royal Family.
In her view, state-funded security was connected to the job they chose to leave.
“You can’t choose to leave the Royal Family and everything that goes with it, and then say, these bits I want and I want the British to pay,” she argued.
Charlene pushed back by suggesting Harry and Meghan could not simply be compared with “everybody”, given their profile and connection to the monarchy.
But Jane remained unconvinced.
She also criticised the reported planning surrounding Archie and Lilibet’s original school run.
According to reports discussed during the programme, the family’s private security team became concerned about heavy term-time traffic and the predictability of travelling along the same route at similar times each day.
Jane questioned why those issues had not been identified before the children started school.
She argued that testing the route during the summer holidays would not have provided a realistic picture of normal school-term traffic.
“I’m not going to trust the security of my children to somebody that can’t work out that there’s going to be more traffic when schools are on,” she said.
Jane also pointed to the Sussexes’ considerable wealth, citing their properties in Montecito and Portugal before arguing: “Pay for your own security!”
Loose Women Viewers Deliver Their Verdict
The debate highlighted how divisive Harry and Meghan’s security arrangements remain following their return to Britain.
Supporters argue that the couple and their children remain exceptionally high-profile and could face risks regardless of whether Harry and Meghan are working royals.
Critics, meanwhile, maintain that leaving official royal duties means they should take responsibility for funding their own protection.
A poll conducted by Loose Women during the discussion suggested most participating viewers sided with Jane’s argument.
According to the programme, 18 per cent of respondents said Harry and Meghan should receive taxpayer-funded security, while 82 per cent said they should not.
The poll reflects the opinions of those who chose to participate rather than a wider measure of public opinion.
For Harry and Meghan, however, the immediate issue remains practical rather than political.
Their team has insisted that moving Archie and Lilibet was a security-based decision and not a reflection on their original school.
But as the heated Loose Women exchange demonstrated, every development surrounding the Sussexes’ protection arrangements continues to provoke an intense public debate.
