No-Longer-Prince Andrew

[Private Citizen]

Today there is this headline:

Government ‘warmly welcomes’ move to make Andrew an ‘ordinary member of the public’ – UK politics live

Chris Bryant also suggests Andrew should comply with any US Senate requests to travel to America to face questions about the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein

www.theguardian.com

"Government ‘warmly welcomes’ move to make Andrew an ‘ordinary member of the public’ – UK politics live"

Which to me is more indicative of those in government wanting Andrew 100% out then "what William wants, William gets"

I agree. Not just those in government, but those in politics - including opposition parties - were all supportive of this. Sentiment is overwhemingly against Andrew. A small faction of online commentors iin the conservative press are running with things like "harsh punishment," "unproven allegations," "not appropriate," but those comments are getting downvoted as much as they are upvoted. The public mood is clear.

Like others, I do wonder if there's more to come and if the King knows something we don't. This is a mic drop moment that several press outlets are calling "unprecedented." King Charles has been bolder on other issues, like climate change and interfaith relations, but I'm not sure anyone would have bet on this.

On the flip side I do think, or rather wouldn't be surprised, if in the future we get a slimmed down more European style of royalty. And in that situation the American wing could well lose their prince/ss in the same way the Danish queen stripped half of her grandchildren of royal titles. But I think Charles will clearly leave that for William to do.

I wonder if they'll approach it from a residency / domicile issue. To me, a UK prince / princess should live in the UK. Those who acquire permanent residence (possibly), citizenship by naturalisation (for sure), or domicile (15 out of 20 years) in another country should lose the title. Approaching it as a rule change, albeit one targeted toward the Sussexes, versus a one-off seems reasonable to me.

 

[Jenny]

I agree that this timing is about overwhelming public pressure to take a stand and do something decisive, and in the long run, protect the integrity of the family and the monarchy. Charles has spent his entire life preparing to be King, so I expect that he has a lot of ideas around what he wants to achieve, his own legacy and what he wants to pass on to his son and heir - and dealing with Andrew ain't any of that.

William likely did have a lot of say in this - but not in pressuring or bossing around daddy, but in the very heavy burden of stewarding the future of both the family and the monarchy, likely sooner than later. I think it makes sense that the two would be working together very closely on not just this issue, but on absolutely everything, and I'll further say that I think both Camilla and Kate are trusted advisors to both of them.

 

[Parsley Sage]

He has been removed from the Roll of the Peerage

https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/images/downloads/Roll_of_the_Peerage.pdf

 

[attyfan]

Apparently, neither his place in the succession nor his eligibility to serve as a counsellor of state are affected:

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains in the line of succession

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles, retains his place in the line of succession despite losing all his titles.

royalcentral.co.uk

 

[marbri]

Apparently, neither his place in the succession nor his eligibility to serve as a counsellor of state are affected:

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains in the line of succession

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles, retains his place in the line of succession despite losing all his titles.

royalcentral.co.uk

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is in line to the throne as a descendant of Queen Elizabeth II. An Act of Parliament would be required to remove him and it would also have to be agreed by all the other Commonwealth realms where Charles III is King.
His eligibility to be a Counsellor of State comes from his place in the succession.
The consort and the first four adults in the line of succession can be Counsellors of State – at the moment that is Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Princess Beatrice.

In 8 years Charlotte will bump him off the list if an Act of Parliament and agreement of the Commonwealth doesn't happen first.

 

[Karen-W]

Apparently, neither his place in the succession nor his eligibility to serve as a counsellor of state are affected:

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains in the line of succession

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles, retains his place in the line of succession despite losing all his titles.

royalcentral.co.uk

That would be correct. Removing him from the LOS would require not just an Act of Parliament in Westminster, but it would also require acts from the rest of the Commonwealth Realms, similar to what occurred when equal primogeniture was enacted prior to Prince George's birth in 2013. Same applies to the CoS as that status is determined by the Regency Act - though it seems more likely that could be revised and pushed through Parliament and the Commonwealth Realms more easily should King Charles pass away before Prince George is 18.

The Regency Act stipulates that Counsellor of State are the first 4 adults in the LOS over the age of 18 except for the direct heir apparent, who must be over the age of 18 as well as the monarch's spouse. Andrew will only be a CoS until Charlotte turns 21 in another 10.5 years; and Harry will only be a CoS until Louis is 21 in another 13.5 years. It may be, especially with Anne & Edward included as extra CoS due to Andrew's disgrace and Harry not living in the UK at this time, that the thought process is to leave well enough alone as, in due time, both Andrew & Harry will cease to be Counsellors of State.

 

[Karen-W]

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is in line to the throne as a descendant of Queen Elizabeth II. An Act of Parliament would be required to remove him and it would also have to be agreed by all the other Commonwealth realms where Charles III is King.
His eligibility to be a Counsellor of State comes from his place in the succession.
The consort and the first four adults in the line of succession can be Counsellors of State – at the moment that is Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Princess Beatrice.

In 8 years Charlotte will bump him off the list if an Act of Parliament and agreement of the Commonwealth doesn't happen first.

No, Charlotte won't bump him off until she turns 21. Only the direct heir (Prince George) becomes a Counsellor of State at age 18. All others become one at 21. So, Charlotte bumps Andrew out in May 2036 and Louis bumps Harry out in April 2039.

 

[puglover]

I really feel for King Charles. I also feel concern for Princess Beatrice who seems to get thinner and thinner.

 

[kwanfan1818]

What I saw on the actual news when it was first announced that Andrew would no longer USE his royal titles was that there were those in GOVERNMENT who didn't think it went far enough, that they felt he should be stripped of his titles.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is in line to the throne as a descendant of Queen Elizabeth II. An Act of Parliament would be required to remove him and it would also have to be agreed by all the other Commonwealth realms where Charles III is King.

Then they can put their money where their mouth is to show us the former.

King Charles’ actions have cleared the path.

 

[skategal]

Here’s some “more information” we were all expecting to drop.

Andrew had 40 prostitutes brought into five-star Thai hotel within four days

Andrew Lownie said that the former Duke of York had the prostitutes taken to his room while on a visit to Thailand for the king's birthday at the taxpayer's expense.

metro.co.uk

 

[Vagabond]

Dude could renounce his right of succession and should do so now.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Quelle surprise.

 

[skategal]

Quelle surprise.

We knew it had to be bad when the Monarchy made the move it just did.

 

[kwanfan1818]

It's almost certainly just the tip of the iceberg, too.

 

[Vagabond]

Andrew had 40 prostitutes brought into five-star Thai hotel within four days

Andrew Lownie said that the former Duke of York had the prostitutes taken to his room while on a visit to Thailand for the king's birthday at the taxpayer's expense.

metro.co.uk

However, according to Mr Lownie, who charted Andrew’s life as a royal in his book, the King, then Prince Charles, advised then PM Tony Blair against hiring his brother over concerns he would only ‘chase women and play golf’

A wise man, the King.

Tony Blair? Not so much.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Especially given how much Tony Blair sucked up to QE II, who didn't care what her middle son did.

I've always wondered what Princess Anne thinks of all of this.

 

[taf2002]

Furthermore, the Sussexes honored Tyler Perry as one of Lilibet's godparents. If you follow celebrity gossip & news in any way, you'll know that Tyler Perry has a lot of ugly rumors surrounding him.

I have never seen a whisper of ugly rumors about him. Most stories are about how kind he is. Can you elaborate?

I don't think it really matters about the Line of Succession. Andrew is too far removed to ever become king.

 

[Karen-W]

I have never seen a whisper of ugly rumors about him. Most stories are about how kind he is. Can you elaborate?

I don't think it really matters about the Line of Succession. Andrew is too far removed to ever become king.

Ugly rumors about Tyler Perry? I've seen & heard a range going from horrible/terrible boss bordering on tyrant to predelictions of the Harvey Weinstein/Sean Combs variety.

 

[Jenny]

I have never seen a whisper of ugly rumors about him. Most stories are about how kind he is. Can you elaborate?

Try googling "Derek Dixon."

 

[puglover]

I definitely think royalty should be held to a very high standard and I have no sympathy for Andrew at all but I am also very concerned about the "baby groupies" of the '70s. Some of these girls were really young - like 14 - and some millionaire rock stars are also pedophiles. I don't think anybody was checking birth certificates.

 

[MacMadame]

William wants to, if what I read is correct.

He can want. He needs a real reason and not the nonsense that Karen-W wrote about how they are friends with Tyler Perry. And that makes them Andrew & Sarah 2.0.


There is nothing in what they are doing that would prompt the King to strip their titles unless it was part of stripping down the monarchy and not personal and I don't see that changing when William is King.

Charles needs to be like Margarethe II of Denmark and strip his younger son's grandchildren of their HRH Prince/Princess titles now

That I agree with. But not because of anything any of them has done.

 

[Private Citizen]

I don't think it really matters about the Line of Succession. Andrew is too far removed to ever become king.

I hate to say it, but it could happen, e.g., (god forbid) a terrorist attack at an event where the first seven in line are all together.

The odds of him ever being king, while minuscule, have probably gone up. He’ll be the one missing in any mass attack (god forbid).

It would take a huge failing of national and world security, but I’d not take chances and remove him.

 

[MsZem]

I hate to say it, but it could happen, e.g., (god forbid) a terrorist attack at an event where the first seven in line are all together.

Given how freaked out Harry is about security, I can't imagine this scenario actually happening.

 

[Lynn226]

Given how freaked out Harry is about security, I can't imagine this scenario actually happening.

Plus, given the current state of his relationship with Royal Family, it's unlikely that he and his children would be at such a gathering.

 

[allezfred]

Ugly rumors about Tyler Perry? I've seen & heard a range going from horrible/terrible boss bordering on tyrant to predelictions of the Harvey Weinstein/Sean Combs variety.

That’s something that bothers you now? Interesting….

 

[canbelto]

This whole thing is definitely a stain on the Queen's legacy. She really let her spoiled, wastrel son run wild.

 

[Jenny]

This whole thing is definitely a stain on the Queen's legacy. She really let her spoiled, wastrel son run wild.

Agree, and it's puzzling in so many ways, and yet maybe not. She wouldn't be the first mother who even when confronted with undeniable facts that her child was a bad person stuck by him anyway. Why? Maybe guilt on her part, maybe she blamed his father for his bad behaviour and thought she had to be the one to love him anyway. Maybe the Queen herself had put up with so much - so many rumours over the years about Philip, plus of course Charles and Camilla's long time affair - because she thought she had to. The monarchy has a long history of open affairs, illegitimate children etc etc. And Harry's own record, while nowhere near Andrew's, is not exactly perfect either, and yet everyone stuck by him until he didn't want to stick by them any more.

It does seem clear she hoped it would blow over like every other scandal, gave him the Lodge to keep him close by, took him off public duty so he wouldn't get in more trouble, privately scolded him when he did, and kept loving him as a mother if not a queen. And hasn't a lot of it only come out since she died?

Families can be complicated, and never truly understood I believe unless you're part of it.

 

[Cachoo]

If he did, that would make him seem too petty, IMO. Then again, I’m not a royal so my opinion doesn’t matter.

I’m really glad they took this step against Randy Andy, as he was known back in the 80’s(ish)

Ah the 80’s—Whatever happened to Koo Stark?

 

[canbelto]

Agree, and it's puzzling in so many ways, and yet maybe not. She wouldn't be the first mother who even when confronted with undeniable facts that her child was a bad person stuck by him anyway. Why? Maybe guilt on her part, maybe she blamed his father for his bad behaviour and thought she had to be the one to love him anyway. Maybe the Queen herself had put up with so much - so many rumours over the years about Philip, plus of course Charles and Camilla's long time affair - because she thought she had to. The monarchy has a long history of open affairs, illegitimate children etc etc. And Harry's own record, while nowhere near Andrew's, is not exactly perfect either, and yet everyone stuck by him until he didn't want to stick by them any more.

It does seem clear she hoped it would blow over like every other scandal, gave him the Lodge to keep him close by, took him off public duty so he wouldn't get in more trouble, privately scolded him when he did, and kept loving him as a mother if not a queen. And hasn't a lot of it only come out since she died?

Families can be complicated, and never truly understood I believe unless you're part of it.

She wasn't a very present mother for her first two kids, and when she was around she either deferred to Philip or the staff. I think with Andrew she felt she could finally be a mother "the right way." And she ended up spoiling and indulging him.

I also think she was of a generation where SA and rape were simply not talked about or covered up or otherwise swept under the rug. It wouldn't surprise me if she wondered why Virginia Guiffre couldn't just go away.

 

[puglover]

Andrew is an adult and totally responsible for his own bad behaviour. I am personally sick of the blame the mother view so common now. Charles and Anne had a working mother and she had just taken on the mantle of Queen so she had to delegate much of their care but that is not too different from many modern mothers. Andrew made his own choices. No doubt wealth and privilege can corrupt and it must take real character to resist abusing it. The example the Queen set was one of duty, hard work and frugality. During her life time Andrew was stripped of much of his honours.
King Charles has been earnestly trying to push Andrew out of Royal Lodge etc.for some time but the difference now is Andrew can't fight it and he is finally on board.
I also feel it is very unfair to lump his daughters in with this shame.