The Queen’s Prince Andrew move is far too late

Traditionally, the title of Duke of York has gone to the monarch’s second son, a custom that dates back to the 14th century when King Edward III got the idea in his head and gave it to his son Edmund of Langley. Like his uncle David and his toxic Duke of Windsor title, today, I think we can confidently say the current Duke of York will also be the last, so poisonous has the title become.

Overnight in London, Buckingham Palace put out one of its legendarily brief statements (a shockingly economical 42 words) revealing that Prince Andrew, the Duke of York has been stripped of his honorary military roles and official patronages and that he will no longer use his styling as ‘His Royal Highness’.

He will now fight the civil sex abuse case he is facing in the United States as a “private citizen”, having been accused by Virginia Giuffre (nee Roberts) of abusing her on three occasions when she was a teenager, an allegation he has repeatedly denied.

The Palace’s move brings the 61-year-old, friend to billionaire despots and a man who used to force his valet to travel with an ironing board, in line with his nephew and niece, Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. They similarly lost their official roles and ability to grandly deploy their HRHs with abandon when they had the temerity to quit the monarchy game (from royalty to royalties?).

But sorry Your Majesty. Today’s Andrew move is far too little, far too late.

Time and time and time again over the last two and a half years she has shown an appalling dearth of leadership when it comes to Andrew, protecting her darling boy ahead of doing what is morally right and putting his bloated ego ahead of what is best for the monarchy.

The entire Andrew debacle has been epically mis-handled by the palace dating back to 2011 when the photo of Andrew enjoying a stroll through central park with Jeffrey Epstein, by then a registered sex offender, appeared on newspaper front covers on February 20. Six days later, Giuffre first went public with claims of her association with Andrew and revealed the now infamous photo of him with his arm around her waist. (She would only later allege that she was forced to have sex with him.)

Rather than make her son pay any sort of his price for his appalling judgment, the following month, the Queen decided to give him a new shiny medal in a big show of regal support, investing him with the insignia of a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order before taking celebratory tea together.

Ditto in July 2019 when Epstein was arrested on sex trafficking charges. Make her son face the consequences of his abysmally-judged actions?

As if. She wedged the Savile Row-suited former spare in the back of her specially-made Bentley, with extra large windows so photographers and the public can see in, and took him to church in full view of the press. Mumsy was standing by her boy!

It was only in November of that year, after Andrew gave what might be the most damning royal interview (sorry Harry and Meghan, you did your darnedest) in history and managed to spend two hours telling the BBC’s Emily Maitlis how much of a victim he was without once uttering a single, solitary word of sympathy for Epstein’s victims that the Queen finally responded.

Even then, it was only days later, faced with a tsunami of roiling global public anger at the situation, and with both Prince Charles and Prince William reportedly pushing her to decisively act, finally, the Queen essentially forced Andrew to step back from public life.

However, still the former failed trade envoy held onto his military roles, including as the Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, and was able to use his styling as an HRH. Less than six months ago, in August last year, even after senior military sources spoke out, with one telling the Times it was “not tenable or viable” for him to retain his Guards role, the Queen “let it be known to the regiment” she wanted him to retain the prestigious position.

That Her Majesty only bit the bullet on his military roles and his HRH now is to her eternal discredit. No one has forgotten nor will anyone forget that she waited 790 days on the Andrew front after her hand was forced by developments over the last 36 hours.

The latest news comes after a judge in New York on Thursday dismissed Andrew’s attempts to have Ms Giuffre’s case thrown out, putting him on track to face trial later this year.

Then, Thursday in the UK, 152 veterans came together to express their outrage in an open letter, writing: “We are particularly upset and angry that Prince Andrew remains a member of the armed forces and continues to hold military titles, positions and ranks.”

The impression is that the 95-year-old has only acted now because, as with the Newsnight interview, her hand has been forced by events.

(Keep in mind too here that Buckingham Palace is busy gearing up for big jolly celebrations to mark the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. Best to get all this unpleasant business out of the way before anyone starts getting out the trestle tables for the street parties whatho!)

Moreover, this title news is like trying to put a Mickey Mouse kids bandaid on a mortar wound in terms of the monarchy. If anyone currently enjoying a cup of Earl Grey while ensconced in a castle is under the impression that this military role and HRH manoeuvre will cauterise the reputational bleeding then they are just deluding themselves.

Yes, Andrew has never been charged with a crime, nor has there ever been any suggestion he might be.

However, what is unimpeachable is that he chose – CHOSE – to spend five nights under the same roof as a man who was a convicted sex offender. That in and of itself should have been strong enough grounds for Her Majesty to take decisive action to insulate the monarchy from being contaminated by the fallout.

What cannot be undone or repaired or glossed over via press release is the irreparable damage the Queen’s handling of this mess has done to the reputation of the British royal family and the crown.

Prince Louis might only be three years old but, if things had played out differently, one day he could have expected to be made the Duke of York. No longer.

Now, 636 years after the house of York title was created, the final holder of the Dukedom will likely spend the rest of his desultory life slumped in front of the TV watching golf on Sky and probably doing his best to avoid contemplating his many, many mistakes.

How proud the Queen must be of her son today.

Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years experience working with a number of Australia’s leading media titles.

Originally published as Queen removing Prince Andrew’s titles is too little, too late