Government rejects calls for debate on Prince Andrew
The government has refused to give MPs time to debate Prince Andrew’s titles or the taxpayer-funded house despite mounting pressure for scrutiny.
The decision effectively quashed efforts to introduce legislation that would strip Prince Andrew of his dukedom, just a day after former Labor MP Rachel Maskell introduced a bill to the House of Commons.
Downing Street rejected suggestions that this was “obstructing” the debate and said Prince Andrew accepted this. no longer uses titles Virginia Giuffre’s memoir has revived allegations about her ties to pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Sir Keir Starmer is facing Liberal Democrat calls for a select committee inquiry into the deal that allowed Prince Andrew to live rent-free at the 30-room Royal Lodge for two decades.
Journalists repeatedly asked the Prime Minister’s official spokesman whether the government, which controls the House of Commons calendar, would give MPs time to discuss Andrew’s titles and financial affairs.
“We understand that the Royal Family will not want to devote time to other important matters,” the spokesman said. he said.
Asked whether Prince Andrew could be brought before a select committee, they added: “Any decision taken by the committees to examine the developments is their own matter.”
Tory MP Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chairman of the influential public accounts committee, said he was writing to the Crown Estate and government in the coming days to “get more information about the Royal Lodge’s lease arrangements”.
Asked earlier this week whether it would launch an inquiry, a spokesman for the committee said its inquiry schedule was “full until the new year”.
Sir Geoffrey said the committee would decide next year whether to investigate the Royal Lodge when the Crown Estate’s next annual accounts are published.
Prince Andrew’s ties to Epstein came under renewed scrutiny after Ms. Giuffre revealed new details of allegations against the couple in her memoir, Nobody’s Daughter.
Reaching Prince Andrew Financial agreement with Ms. Giuffre in 2022He has always denied the allegations.
Ahead of the book’s publication, Prince Andrew announced he would give up his royal titles. His currently suspended duchy can only be formally abolished by law.
Calls for Andrew to give up his Royal Lodge home in Windsor Great Park have also intensified. It turned out that he had been paying “pepper rent” for more than 20 years.
Liberal Democrat Leader Sir Ed Davey called for Prince Andrew to be brought before MPs to give evidence of renting the Royal Lodge.
Responding to the Prime Minister’s spokesman’s comments, Liberal Democrat Cabinet Office spokeswoman Lisa Smart said “the government needs to give MPs time to discuss the issues surrounding Prince Andrew’s lease of the Royal Lodge – transparency about how taxpayers’ money is being spent is vital.”
“The public understandably wants answers,” he added.
There had been some confusion about whether a member of the Royal Family could be asked to testify in Parliament.
Earlier on Thursday, the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, said there was no ban on MPs discussing the behavior of a member of the Royal Family but that this should happen “on motion” rather than in regular question time sessions.
One option open to MPs is to use opposition or backbench debate time in the House of Commons to raise the Prince Andrew issue.
The results of these discussions, which are not controlled by the government, can create political pressure for policy change, although they are not legally binding on ministers.
The SNP had pressured the Leader of the House of Commons, Sir Alan Campbell, to give MPs time to discuss plans to strip Prince Andrew of his title.
Sir Alan said: “The Palace has made it clear that they are aware that there are other matters that this House needs to deal with and we are being guided by the Palace on this.
“That doesn’t mean that the House can’t find ways to discuss those issues, whether it’s the titles issue or the financial issues, which I know are being questioned here.”
Independent MP Rachel Maskell sought to change the law to allow the King to remove titles on the advice of Parliament or at the request of the title holder.
“The title of Duke of York may no longer be used by its holder, but it has not been abolished,” the former Labor MP said as he formally introduced the Abolition of Titles Bill on Wednesday.
As a private members’ bill it had little chance of becoming law, and the government’s decision not to give MPs debate time effectively killed it.
