How the Prince Andrew fiasco has exposed the palace power struggle between the heirs and the spares Camilla Tominey
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/11/21/prince-andrew-fiasco-has-exposed-palace-power-struggle-heirs/
There has been an almighty power struggle going on all week and it has got nothing to do with the general election.
As Boris Johnson and his rivals have been relegated to the inside pages with the Duke of York sex scandal continuing to dominate the headlines, the brutal world of Westminster appears to have nothing on the internal politics of the Royal Family.
As the driving force behind her second, and some say ‘favourite’ son stepping back from public duties for the “foreseeable future”, the Queen’s decisive action in a face-to-face meeting at Buckingham Palace on Wednesday serves as a salient reminder that the royals will stop at nothing to preserve the institution of monarchy – even at the expense of those in it.
Alarm bells were said to be raised behind palace gates when the question of whether the House of Windsor was still fit for purpose came up during Tuesday night’s ITV debate.
The problem was not Jeremy Corbyn’s “in need of improvement” response or even the lacklustre reaction to Mr Johnson’s claim that the institution of monarchy was “beyond reproach” – but rather that the topic was even up for discussion in the first place.
Hence why efforts were made to insulate the Queen from the fall out of what is now widely considered as the most ill-advised royal interview in recent memory. It is once again worth noting that Buckingham Palace never did deviate from its original statement that Her Majesty was made aware of the interview but did not give it her blessing – despite Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis’s insistence that the Duke had sought approval from “higher up”.
The Prince of Wales’ fingerprints were also all over the sidelining of his 59-year-old brother after a week that has made the annus horribilis of 1992 look like a comparative picnic.
Although he is currently touring New Zealand with his wife Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, as has increasingly become the case in recent years, the heir to the throne worked hand in glove with the 93-year-old monarch on Andrew’s unprecedented statement in a bid to jointly mitigate the fallout.
It was the same when mother and son took the unexpected decision to deny the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a household of their own, insisting that their private office come under the auspices of Buckingham Palace. It came after an earlier attempt to merge all the palace communication teams to be under the prince’s ultimate control failed.
All of these significant moves chime with the future king’s transition plans. Charles is intent on slimming down the monarchy and when Andrew was hoisted by his own petard on prime-time television on Saturday night, an opportunity presented itself to kick-start a trimming exercise that will inevitably be ramped up in earnest once the Queen is no longer on the throne.
Already described as a ‘shadow king’, there has recently been revived talk of the 71-year-old royal becoming Prince Regent when the Queen turns 95 in two years time, although royal aides repeatedly deny any suggestion of ‘the boss’ taking a back seat while she is still perfectly in possession of all of her faculties.
But transition has long been the secret buzzword behind palace gates, with one insider describing how Charles’ staff were “already measuring the curtains at the ‘big house’”.
Those who serve royalty know that in order to survive, they have to keep one eye on succession. But this is also true of their masters.
It is perhaps no coincidence that reports yesterday suggested that the Duke of Cambridge had also been keeping a close eye on the scandal engulfing his errant uncle. “Don’t forget he has a long-term stake in this too,” said one friend of the family.
Of course, William is all too familiar with the perils of being the heir to a ‘spare’. As Prince Harry put it in that other significant royal interview of 2019, when he appeared to confirm reports of a rift between the two brothers: “We are certainly on different paths at the moment.” Now sixth in line to the throne, the ease with which the Duke’s services have been dispensed with will no doubt be giving Harry food for thought as he spends Christmas away from the rest of the royal brood at Sandringham.
Called “The Firm” for good reason, the Royal Family is effectively a body of shareholders (or in this case, households) in competition with each other to retain a slice of the pie. In times of crisis, ‘normal’ families are brought closer together but when it comes to the monarchy, the opposite is often true.
It quickly becomes a case of every royal for themselves as households not only go on the defensive but the offensive – sometimes even briefing against each other in the interests of self-preservation. As a source close to Andrew’s private office put it this week: “The thing that has surprised me most is the level of internal briefing that has gone on against the Duke.”
Yet it should not really surprise anyone with a scintilla of knowledge of British royal history. Our hereditary monarchy has not survived for centuries by accident. For the truth is, a dynasty like this – still operating in the 21st century – simply cannot afford to take any prisoners.
Comments are closed.
