Page 26 | Prince Andrew Thread 3

Roussette · 2022-01-09T19:25:12+00:00

Here is the previous thread... [[https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4443261-Prince-Andrew-Thread-2?watched=1&msgid=114083283#114083283]]

AllThePogs · 14/01/2022 11:23

@TheHairyDinosaur

He lost his metropolitan protection when all this first came to light didn't he, and he stepped back as a senior royal.

So whatever security he has, I do believe is privately funded already.

If that was true, the Minister would have said so. The fact he didn't means that we are all paying for it.

SerendipityJane · 14/01/2022 11:26

I think the Queen did this because if he's an HRH then her assets come under scrutiny

That's unlikely. How can the Queens courts act against the Queen ? It can't be done.

Most of this will have been done to try and clean the internet and google and divert trends.

JustLyra · 14/01/2022 11:26

Any members of the Royal Household can be appointed Councillor of state. 😳 it's normal first 4 in succession but it can be any member.

It’s not the case that it can be any member. It’s the first 4 in line who are over 21 (18 for the heir), in the line of succession, and who fit requirements such as being domiciled in the UK. If there are minors who are bypassed then they take their place when they come of age. The other is the consort.

To deviate from that would take a change of the law.

TheHairyDinosaur · 14/01/2022 11:27

@SerendipityJane

Any members of the Royal Household can be appointed Councillor of state. 😳 it's normal first 4 in succession but it can be any member.

So who did you vote for last time ?

You do know it's a turn of phrase, but if you wish to be pedantic carry on. 🙄

SerendipityJane · 14/01/2022 11:43

You do know it's a turn of phrase, but if you wish to be pedantic carry on.

I know that someone who can't tell the difference between elected and appointed is probably asking a friend what "pedantic" means.

My point stands. A PP suggested they would "vote" for a different member of the royal family to undertake certain duties. Which isn't how it works. We have no say. Whatsoever. We don't even elect the person who does the appointments.

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 11:43

@SerendipityJane

I think the Queen did this because if he's an HRH then her assets come under scrutiny

That's unlikely. How can the Queens courts act against the Queen ? It can't be done.

Most of this will have been done to try and clean the internet and google and divert trends.

The trial is in the US

I believe that PA ignores the US courts then he's found guilty by default and VG wins a judgement for US based assets. If PA is a private citizen then it's probably not significant but Google says that the RF itself owns US abased assets which could come under scrutiny

TheHairyDinosaur · 14/01/2022 11:50

@SerendipityJane

You do know it's a turn of phrase, but if you wish to be pedantic carry on.

I know that someone who can't tell the difference between elected and appointed is probably asking a friend what "pedantic" means.

My point stands. A PP suggested they would "vote" for a different member of the royal family to undertake certain duties. Which isn't how it works. We have no say. Whatsoever. We don't even elect the person who does the appointments.

No, I'm well aware what the word means. Must you stoop to a personal insults on my assumed lack intelligence.

Does it make you feel smart, big or clever? Do you feel good about yourself now, grinning with glee from behind your screen. Bet you've got the thrill the boost of thinking "look how smug I am"

You are a peculiar person....I suggest you do some reflection on your behaviour towards strangers on the internet.

StoatMilk · 14/01/2022 12:10

@Eastie77Returns

He doesn’t need a security detail. His daughters don’t have one (well none that are state funded) because they don’t perform royal duties. He doesn’t either so he’ll have to pay for it himself although I don’t know why he would need it. Ninth in line to the throne, cast out by the family. A nonentity.

I would assume that he’s more in need of protection than ever before, he’s become a social pariah, and there’s probably the risk that some vigilante will have a pop at him.

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 12:20

If gossip sites are to be trusted, the judge now has security because of concerns about the John Does about to be named. I think that Andrew needs to stay put in whichever ditch he's living in so that security costs are minimized. My understanding is that if he lives on a royal "compound" (not sure if that's the right word) then they have security so he can benefit from someone less security keepi b the area safe.

Original poster

Roussette · 14/01/2022 12:25

t’s peanuts in the catalogue of reasons to be angry about Andrew Windsor

Peanuts was £300,000 a year. I'm not angry with him about it compared to every other thing that he has done. It's just yet another factor.

So whatever security he has, I do believe is privately funded already

Privately funded = the Queen paying. There was a whole hoo hah about this a while back. She agreed to pay it. Now whether you consider that is us paying or not, is a grey area

cherronthecakes That's interesting.
I wonder if this abrupt withdrawing of military titles etc was as a result of something happening. I just have this feeling that all of this has opened a can of worms

OP posts:

DuncinToffee · 14/01/2022 12:26

Virginia's response to the ruling

I’m pleased with Judge Kaplan’s ruling yesterday that allows my case against Prince Andrew to go forward. I’m glad I will have the chance to continue to expose the truth & I am deeply grateful to my extraordinary legal team. 1/3
twitter.com/VRSVirginia/status/1481802659472551947?t=d7Ezc0id3vyQvWj5yCGsRA&s=19

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 12:39

I wonder if this abrupt withdrawing of military titles etc was as a result of something happening.

I know the Queen has a reputation of making decisions that are good for the country at the cost of her own family but I don't believe that she's done this because it's the right thing to do. I think that there's lots going on behind the scenes and she is protecting the monarchy.
I wonder why it's been leaked that Charles and William basically forced her into this decision? Is it to make the heirs look like moral men or are they sick of being asked about Andrew?

TheHairyDinosaur · 14/01/2022 12:47

@Roussette

t’s peanuts in the catalogue of reasons to be angry about Andrew Windsor

Peanuts was £300,000 a year. I'm not angry with him about it compared to every other thing that he has done. It's just yet another factor.

So whatever security he has, I do believe is privately funded already

Privately funded = the Queen paying. There was a whole hoo hah about this a while back. She agreed to pay it. Now whether you consider that is us paying or not, is a grey area

cherronthecakes That's interesting.
I wonder if this abrupt withdrawing of military titles etc was as a result of something happening. I just have this feeling that all of this has opened a can of worms

As I don't know HMQ finances in and out, but I do know that some from the public purse need to be accounted for and reported publicly. I can only assume some clever accounting will take place to ensure the "security fee" for Andrew will show under her "personal estate" meaning not public purse and doesn't need to be reported publicly. But I can't say that for definite.

As far as the grey area, I agree it is very grey, but The Royal family do have independent wealth so one can only hope any funding of Andy is coming from the personal catalogue of wealth. How they obtained that is a whole other discussion, but personally I'd put it down to "non public funded" but agree others may well say "any money held by the crown is public money and I accept that.

DGRossetti · 14/01/2022 12:47

@cherryonthecakes

I wonder if this abrupt withdrawing of military titles etc was as a result of something happening.

I know the Queen has a reputation of making decisions that are good for the country at the cost of her own family but I don't believe that she's done this because it's the right thing to do. I think that there's lots going on behind the scenes and she is protecting the monarchy.
I wonder why it's been leaked that Charles and William basically forced her into this decision? Is it to make the heirs look like moral men or are they sick of being asked about Andrew?

I know the Queen has a reputation of making decisions that are good for the country at the cost of her own family

Has she ? Can't say I know of any examples.

I wonder why it's been leaked that Charles and William basically forced her into this decision?

Given her age and certain inevitable events, it makes very good sense to get anything nasty unpleasant and distracting out of the way now, rather than as the very first thing a freshy rehabilitated King Charles has to deal with. Which let's face it, won't be decades away now.

Skiptheheartsandflowers · 14/01/2022 12:53

Under what circumstances have Counsellors of State had to take action in the past? Has it ever actually happened? And what have they had to do?

The nearest equivalent I can think of is when a prime minister has surgery under general anaesthetic and technically their deputy is in charge for a day. More seriously, Raab was technically running the country (shudder) for longer when Johnson was in hospital with Covid. I can't see that anyone stepping in for the Queen would need to do anything comparable. In short, the fuss over who they are seems fairly pointless. But I'm open to correction if there are dramatic interventions in history that I don't know about..

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 12:55

The putting country before her own family is a comment often made on here. Lots of examples of her putting the monarchy before them.

I think she should be taking it easy until the Jubilee events start. This should be a happy year untainted by issues like Andrew

JustLyra · 14/01/2022 14:00

The big issue with Counsellors of State us that when they do stuff there has to be two of the four/five of them do it. So with two of them out of action it’s problematic if they are doing delegated duties as there’s basically only two atm.

GellerYeller · 14/01/2022 15:10

@Vapeyvapevape I've not caught up with the full thread yet but I would enjoy it if the residents of York are given a referendum to select their own Duke or Duchess. Dame Judi perhaps?! I'm struggling to think of other famous York people! Shed Seven?!

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 15:24

I think Duke of York will disappear in the same way that Duke of Windsor has

DGRossetti · 14/01/2022 15:26

@cherryonthecakes

I think Duke of York will disappear in the same way that Duke of Windsor has

His forbear, Richard of York managed to disappear not one, but two princes in his reign.

Blossomtoes · 14/01/2022 15:41

@cherryonthecakes

I think Duke of York will disappear in the same way that Duke of Windsor has

You mean he’ll die? Or do you mean the title?

cherryonthecakes · 14/01/2022 15:58

I meant the title. Nobody in the future will want comparisons with Andrew

DGRossetti · 14/01/2022 16:02

@cherryonthecakes

I meant the title. Nobody in the future will want comparisons with Andrew

Ah, misunderstood, sorry.

Aren't Royal titles a little like vampires ? Didn't they have to resurrect the Wessex thing for Edward ? I'm sure Duke of York will remain in the portfolio. After all someone has to collect the rent I imagine.

TheHairyDinosaur · 14/01/2022 16:19

Louis would be the Next Duke of York wouldn't he? If they go by tradition.

And that wouldn't be for another 30odd or more years if and when he did get married, and if Andrew is no longer on this planet.

George would become the prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and Charlotte would be a stand alone Princess or Princess Royal of it were to be awarded to her by her father when he is monarch.

Maybe 30 years would be enough for the mud associated with the name to become unstuck possibly.

CathyorClaire · 14/01/2022 16:31

I wonder if this abrupt withdrawing of military titles etc was as a result of something happening

The news of the potential unmasking of the eight John Does dropping at a similar time to the BP announcement does seem quite a coincidence.

I know the Queen has a reputation of making decisions that are good for the country at the cost of her own family

An undeserved reputation.