MPs urged to confront royal family over Prince Andrew’s Epstein links | Prince Andrew

Parliament is under increasing pressure to examine what the royal family knew about Prince Andrew’s links to Jeffrey Epstein and introduce a mechanism to strip him of his titles.

There were calls on Sunday night for Andrew to launch a police investigation and enforce old rules that bar parliament from freely examining royals and formally removing their titles for review.

The Metropolitan police confirmed they were investigating allegations that Andrew asked the Met guard to gather information about Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of sexual assault, hours before the bombshell photo was published in 2011.

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said leaked emails purporting to show Andrew’s close protection officer Giuffre’s date of birth and US social security number were “deeply concerning”.

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: “We are aware of media reports and are actively investigating the allegations made.”

The developing scandal forced Andrew on Friday to give up some of his royal titles, including Duke of York, having lost the use of his HRH title after he ceased being a “working royal”.

He retains the duchy, which should be abolished by act of Parliament; Prince status can only be revoked when a letters patent is issued by the king. Andrew vehemently denied any wrongdoing, and the FBI formally ended its investigation into his connections to Epstein in July.

But MPs and campaigners have called for further action, including a Metropolitan police investigation into Andrew’s links to Epstein and a parliamentary resolution to formally strip the prince of his titles.

Rachael Maskell, Labor MP for York Central, said she had written to ministers this week to support the bill that would give the king or a parliamentary committee the power to formally strip Andrew of his titles.

“Every time this issue comes up, it’s really traumatic for victims and survivors, so it’s really important that this issue is addressed once and for all,” Maskell said. “There are mechanisms that need to be put in place to remove a title.”

Nadia Whittome, Labor MP for Nottingham East, said: “It should be accepted that the State strips Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor of his titles rather than allowing him to voluntarily disavow his titles and hide behind empty-mouthed statements incriminating his accusers.”

Maskell has proposed a repeal title bill in 2022 that would allow the monarch or a parliamentary committee to remove titles in Andrew’s case and in the future. A similar law was passed in 1917 to abolish the titles of nobles and princes who fought against the British in the First World War.

A senior Labor member and select committee chairman described Andrew as a “disgrace” and said he “brought shame to himself and those associated with him”.

“I would be happy to vote for the parliamentary motion to strip him of all his titles,” they said.

Asked by the BBC whether he would support such legislation, Miliband said: “The royal family will have to make their own decisions about what other steps can be taken” but suggested they “don’t want to take up parliament’s time with this”.

Norwich South Labor MP Clive Lewis called for a “thorough investigation into what happened”.

“It’s very clear that the sense of authority that Prince Andrew has comes from being a prince and being part of the monarchy. The big story here is the monarchy itself. So I think the king is closing up shop. It raises some very difficult questions about how power works in this country,” he said.

Labour’s George Foulkes wrote to clerks of the House of Commons and the House of Lords on Sunday night asking them to review rules restricting MPs from asking questions about the royal family.

Foulkes said earlier this year the Lords’ Bench office rejected questions he tried to ask about Andrew and his 10-year role as Britain’s special representative for trade and investment, and that the prince finally gave up in 2011 after a series of arguments.

“I wanted to ask questions about whether he had a security briefing, what his mission was, and a lot of other things,” Foulkes said. “The desk tells me that questions about the royal family are prohibited in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.”

Ultimately, Foulkes was allowed to ask some specific questions about the royal family’s expenses, and parliament was allowed to question them.

Parliamentary rules state more broadly that “questions that suggest opinions about the monarch or the royal family” are unacceptable. On Sunday, Foulkes called for the rules to be reviewed “in light of recent events”.

Meanwhile, more than 1,000 letters were sent to MPs over the weekend urging them to press for a “comprehensive parliamentary or independent investigation into the royal Epstein scandal”.

Supporters of the Republican campaign group wrote to MPs accusing them of being complicit in their silence and calling for an immediate investigation. Republic called for an investigation to examine the actions taken by the Met police and prosecute Andrew.

Republic’s Graham Smith said: “It is not credible to believe that the Met failed to inform senior royals about Andrew’s attempts to use them to smear Giuffre. There are also questions about why the Met continues to refuse to investigate, interview or charge Andrew.”

“What will drive this forward is public outrage, and there is palpable anger among the public who see Andrew being stripped of his right to use his titles as absolutely not a punishment.”

Last week, The Guardian published an excerpt from Giuffre’s posthumous memoir; in which Giuffre detailed her first encounter with the “entitled” prince, saying Giuffre “believed it was her birthright to have sex with me.”

The Mail on Sunday published messages Andrew sent in 2011 to Ed Perkins, then the queen’s deputy press secretary, saying he had asked one of his close guards to get information about Giuffre.

According to the messages, Andrew told Perkins he gave Officer Giuffre’s date of birth and nine-digit social security number and claimed she had a criminal record in the United States. The email was sent hours before the infamous photo of Andrew with 17-year-old Giuffre was published.

His family said he had no criminal record. There is no suggestion that the police officer complied with this request.

Another leaked email, obtained by the Mail on Sunday, suggests Andrew’s ex-wife Sarah Ferguson took Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, then aged 20 and 19, to visit Epstein in New York after he was released from prison.

After a 2011 newspaper interview with Ferguson, Epstein said his relationship with her had been a “terrible error of judgment” and in April 2011 wrote to his UK-based lawyer, Paul Tweed, saying he was “the first person to congratulate me on my release”. A source close to Ferguson said neither he nor his daughters remembered such a visit.