Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s upcoming Australia visit is gaining a lot of attention, not just for its high-profile events, but for who will handle and pay for their security.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are set to visit between April 15 and 19 for a series of private, commercially driven engagements. But with no clarity from officials and a public petition gaining traction, the trip is increasingly being seen as both a logistical challenge and a political talking point.
No clarity on who pays for protection
Government agencies in Australia have distanced themselves from the visit. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Department of Home Affairs both said they have “no involvement in Harry and Meghan’s visit.” The Australian Federal Police also declined to comment, stating it “does not comment on protection arrangements.”
This lack of transparency has raised questions about whether public resources could still be used if the couple appears in public spaces, particularly for crowd control and transit-related security.
Commercial tour raises different expectations
Unlike their 2018 visit, when they were senior working royals and received state-backed security, this trip is being positioned as private and commercial.
Prince Harry is expected to speak at the InterEdge Psychological Safety Summit in Melbourne for a mid-five-figure fee. Meghan Markle is set to headline a luxury “Her Best Life” retreat in Sydney, where tickets are priced at around $3,000. With the events being profit-driven, critics argue that any public funding for security would be inappropriate.
Petition gains momentum amid cost-of-living concerns
Public sentiment has been shown in a growing petition titled ‘No Taxpayer-Funding or Official Support for Harry & Meghan’s Private Visit to Australia.’ The campaign, which includes an image of the couple with the words “We Don’t Want You Here,” has gathered more than 35,000 signatures.
The petition explains, “At a time when Australians are facing significant cost-of-living pressures, including rising grocery bills, fuel prices, mortgage stress driven by interest rate hikes, and increasing energy costs, public resources must be used responsibly and applied fairly, without special treatment for high-profile individuals.”
Sussex team dismisses backlash as “stupid”
The couple’s representatives have pushed back strongly against the criticism. “It’s a moot point,” a spokesperson told The DailyMail adding, “The trip is being funded privately, so I’m not sure what this petition hopes to achieve.”
They further criticised the narrative around the petition to The DailyMail, “Of course, if you wanted to dive into the ridiculousness of this petition as an agenda for spreading misinformation, then one could equally hypothesize that there are approximately 26.5 million Australians (99.98% of the population) who haven’t signed it, who must therefore agree with the taxpayer picking up the tab for their visit…That is another equally stupid assertion to make, but hey, why let common sense get in the way of a good story…”
Security debate tied to past legal battle
Since stepping down as senior royals in 2020, Harry and Meghan no longer receive publicly funded UK police protection. Harry’s attempt to reinstate that protection was rejected in May 2025, with a court ruling his objections to the RAVEC decision were “superficial.” The matter remains under review, but the broader issue of security funding continues to follow the couple during international visits.
Event logistics add further complications
There are also concerns around the Sydney retreat Meghan is scheduled to headline. The event is being organised by The Gemmie Agency, a company that reportedly collapsed last year owing over $540,000 to the Australian Tax Office. Its founder, Gemma O’Neill, told liquidators earlier this year that she had limited income and no savings to repay the debt.
Separately, the venue itself is still under preparation. Reports suggest the infinity pool, spa, and leisure areas are unfinished, while the nearby Coogee beach has been dealing with ongoing pollution issues.