Prince Harry wrongly claims William is represented on committee responsible for determining royal security

Prince Harry's team has wrongly claimed a member of Prince William's staff sits on the nine-person RAVEC committee responsible for determining royal security arrangements.While King Charles's representation was previously known, it had never been reported that the Prince of Wales had any members of staff on the committee.Those close to Prince Harry have highlighted that three of the committee's nine members are drawn from the offices of both his father and brother.The Home Office and Buckingham Palace maintain that security decisions rest entirely with the committee's security professionals. TRENDING Stories Videos Your Say However, the Duke has long harboured suspicions that senior courtiers surrounding the King and Prince William oppose granting him taxpayer-funded protection.A highly sensitive security report obtained by ITV News reveals that Prince Harry faces threats from six terrorist plots, with five of these originating within the United Kingdom.The confidential document, prepared in February and submitted to the RAVEC committee, includes an al-Qaeda publication calling for the Duke's assassination.According to the assessment, Harry's absence of state-funded protection means potential attackers could conclude that The Duke is the most vulnerable member of The Family.The report identifies at least six plots against the Duke from jihadist and right-wing threat actors that have targeted other high-profile Britons.Harry's US-based security firm noted that the highest priority threat facing the Sussex family comes from stochastic terrorism (also known as grassroots or lone actor terrorism).The Metropolitan Police are currently monitoring nearly 500 potential stalkers who have targeted members of the Royal Family, according to the confidential threat assessment.Approximately half of these individuals have demonstrated threatening behaviour specifically directed at Prince Harry, Meghan, and their two children, Archie and Lilibet.The private security firm employed by the Sussexes is separately tracking 28 people who have exhibited dangerous stalking behaviour towards the family.The report also reveals that the current locations of four convicted individuals connected to terrorist threats against the Duke remain unknown to his protection team.Prince Harry is preparing to travel to the United Kingdom next week for a series of engagements, including events marking one year until his Invictus Games take place in Birmingham in July 2027.The Duke had previously announced plans to bring Meghan and their children on the trip, based on assurances that a review of their security arrangements would be conducted.However, Harry's office received correspondence at the end of last week offering only a police liaison officer's telephone number during the visit, with no additional provisions.The Duke has yet to decide whether his family will accompany him to a country he considers unsafe.Senior staff close to the prince maintain they were promised a Risk Management Board review ahead of the planned visit, though no such assessment has occurred since the couple relocated to California six years ago.The security assessment prepared for the Duke concludes that his private protection officers face significant limitations when operating on British soil, as they are prohibited from carrying firearms.Without access to lethal weapons, the report states, Harry's personal security team is prevented from adequately responding to an armed attack from a terrorist, criminal, or mentally unstable actor.The document emphasises that only UK police, with authorisation from RAVEC, can carry lethal weapons while protecting The Duke.UK authorities are much better positioned to provide him with more comprehensive protection, the assessment acknowledges.The firm's conclusion is unequivocal: the only way to mitigate residual risks to The Duke is to provide him with state-backed security.The report notes that safety risks to Harry and Meghan are considerably more elevated in Britain, where a majority of the most serious threats have originated. Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter