As a squirming Prince Andrew plunged the royals’ reputation into depths it has not plumbed since the death of Princess Diana, the question arose: why did they let him loose on Newsnight?
Why was the eighth in line to the throne allowed to defend his friendship with paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in a toe-curling TV interview with Emily Maitlis?
What of the Queen’s mantra of “never complain, never explain”, when that other second son, Prince Harry, had only weeks earlier slammed the press covering his tour of Africa, with Meghan moaning “no one has asked if I’m OK” while visiting some of the world’s poorest communities?
Constraints that had tethered The Firm to strict standards of behaviour seemed to have been loosened, and all the ego and entitlement was unleashed on a horrified public that pays for their palaces and privilege.
For decades, Prince Philip was the one to maintain discipline in the family with the unimpeachable Queen at its centre.
But since his retirement from royal duties two years ago the Duke of Edinburgh, aged 98 and in failing health, has been unable to continue – and no natural successor has emerged to keep the rest of them in check.
Insiders believe it is no coincidence his retirement was followed by a series of royal upsets including alleged squabbling between princes William and Harry, Charles’s displeasure at being overshadowed, and now Andrew’s horror show.
Veteran courtiers suggested that if Philip were around there is “no way on this Earth” he would have allowed Andrew to be interviewed on TV, having dealt with the fallout from previous shock royal confessionals.
Prince Charles felt his father’s wrath when he admitted in a 1994 TV interview that he had cheated on his wife, Princess Diana.
That interview, with veteran broadcaster Jonathan Dimbleby, was the first by a senior royal. Furious Philip told his son it could cost him the throne and threaten the monarchy as a whole.
The following year he was angered again when Diana gave a “revenge” interview to Martin Bashir on BBC’s Panorama. In it she made explosive statements about Charles’s affair with Camilla, saying: “There were three people in this marriage.”
The fallout from the interviews, which continued in the wake of Diana’s tragic death two years later in 1997, fuelled questions about whether the Royal Family should still exist.
Philip’s children had a deep respect for him as he upheld the family, but his relationship with them has at times been strained due to his forthright nature.
The Duke and Charles have been described as “chalk and cheese”.
Boisterous Philip excelled at sports and outdoors pursuits as a child, but Charles was a sensitive boy who preferred the company of his nanny.
It was thought Charles never forgave his father for sending him away to Gordonstoun, a Scottish boarding school founded by German education pioneer Kurt Hahn.
Philip was also reported to have reduced Prince Edward to “prolonged tears” after lambasting him for dropping out of Royal Marines training in 1987 after just a few weeks of a 12-month programme.
But now, as he stays largely alone at Sandringham or Windsor Castle, he can no longer fulfil his disciplinarian role.
Without him, former advisers to the Queen believe she too has sadly lost her grip on the family.
At 93 she remains incredibly active and engaging, completing dozens of engagements every year and taking a solid interest in what each member of the family is up to in their work and private lives.
It emerged last week she has made regular visits to Harry and Meghan’s Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor to offer counsel around the alleged rift with William.
But sources say she gave her approval to Andrew’s interview “given his insistence at wanting to put across his side of the story”.
One insider told me: “If the Queen didn’t want it to happen it wouldn’t have gone ahead. But Andrew was insistent, persuasive and no doubt played on his mother’s soft spot for him, assuring her he had control of the situation.”
Andrew’s adviser Jason Stein quit two weeks ago in an apparent row over Andrew’s decision to go ahead with the broadcast.\
Palace aides are scrambling to shift the blame over the lack of briefing the Duke of York seemed to have received. Courtiers have told of their “utter disbelief” and “astonishment” as they watched on Saturday night. It came just weeks after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex gave their own much-criticised interview last month.
Questions too will be asked over the role of Andrew’s private secretary Amanda Thirsk, director of his Pitch@Palace Global operation – which has lost its sponsorship from KPMG. It is understood she clashed with Stein and pushed hard for Andrew to do the interview against his initial scepticism.
A royal source said: “The question is who in their right mind thought this would be a good idea?
“Royal interviews like this don’t have a stellar history. Diana and Charles’s forays into the arena are still talked about, Harry and Meghan’s decision to sound off during a tour of Africa representing the Queen and now this. Heads should roll, but whether Andrew will have the capacity for introspection remains to be seen.”
Royal insiders suggest Philip will be dismayed at the fresh scandal surrounding The Firm.
A source said: “The Duke will be mortified at the fallout over Andrew’s ill-conceived interview and would be forgiven for thinking decades of hard work by himself and also the Queen – who is still revered in this country and around the world – have been grossly undermined. The fear of what such foolhardy decisions could do for the future of the monarchy must not be underestimated.”
Source: Read Full Article
