The Yorks 2 !

[jeffgoldblum]

Sorry missed end of thread !
had a slight hiccup.
anyway thread 2 ready for tomorrows new article. 😁

In my opinion there are still too many people high up in the foreign office staff, politicians with connections and other highly connected people to allow an investigation into Andrew’s trade envoy exploits because he wasn’t operating in a vacuum.

There were many people enabling, supporting and paying for the trips and the things he got up to.

Those people don’t want their own actions exposed by an inquiry - especially if Andrew is only the visible tip of this type of activity.

Yes I agree. The Foreign Office is rife with cronyism. I suspect there was a huge amount of enabling of Andrew and quite a lot of 'enabling for honours'.
The sexual antics do seem very odd when concerning a child, but Im wondering whether the wording 'Andrew boasted that he lost his virginity' etc is explained further and the DM have just taken that salacious part out. It could be something that Andrew has boasted about to other people but there is no evidence that its true. Like schoolboys pretending they have lost their virginity when they haven't. Would his protection officers have allowed anyone near him at 11? I doubt it.

That’s simply not true. As Lownie highlights in this interview, Andrew was likely imposed on UKTI by the Queen, against the advice of Prince Charles and others who believed he was wholly unsuited for the role. Moreover, the nature of UKTI as a joint FCO/DTI body overseen by two Secretaries of State and lacking a cabinet position creates an unusual structure marked by amorphous and opaque accountabilities.

Having been involved in both UKTI and overseas operations during my career, my view is that operational difficulties in managing HRH would have arisen at relatively lower levels, presenting unique challenges. Officials were neither equipped nor authorized to push back against such a senior Royal. To blame the foibles of senior royals on hardworking, dedicated officials is simply a perverse misjudgment of the situation and an abdication of where the faults truly lay - at the feet of QE2 and her wayward favourite son.

Oh and Lownie says he has a number of diplomats on the record describing chapter and verse the problems that they faced with "Air Miles Andy".

I can and do believe that Andrew is guilty of most of what’s in the book but like you I feel queasy and uneasy about the highly sensational style. It deserves serious treatment but that’s not going to make Lownie his millions, is it?

‘Imposed’ or not - there will absolutely be a number of people protecting their own backsides not just Andrew’s in stopping the full trade envoy exploits coming out.

The monarch just doesn’t have the absolute power and protection you ascribe to it.

If politicians give into the monarch it’s because they want to, because they want something in return. If the government of the day - doesn’t want to do something the monarch wants they don’t do it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/mar/09/prince-andrew-foreign-trips-support?

The Duke of York is not alone in deciding it is a good thing to glad-hand foreign dictators, sheikhs and princes on behalf of British companies. His official trips abroad as a UK trade envoy are planned and sanctioned by powerful figures from the British establishment.

Prince Andrew's programme of overseas visits – in which he travelled to Davos, Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Dubai and China last year – is determined by the Foreign Office and UK Trade & Investment (UKTI), the government's export promotion arm, and approved by the royal visits committee.

This cabinet committee meets every six months and is chaired by Simon Fraser, the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, and includes the private secretaries to the Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, a representative from 10 Downing Street, the chief executive of UKTI and the director of protocol at the Foreign Office.

When a trade visit is approved by this committee it is, in effect, backed by the government at the highest level. Prince Andrew also has regular contact with British ambassadors and senior mandarins.

Only last week, after calls for his resignation from the role of UK trade envoy over his friendship with the American billionaire and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, he was briefed at the Cabinet Office and held talks with Jon Cunliffe, David Cameron's adviser on international economic affairs and Europe.

Cameron and George Osborne, the chancellor, have offered the prince their full support this week.

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said the ideas for places to visit came from a wide range of sources, including "the government, lords lieutenant [the Queen's representatives in the counties], direct from business, and ideas generated in the office as follow-up to the duke's activities – for example, visiting significant inward investors in the UK from key markets". All requests are reviewed in the Duke of York's quarterly programme planning meeting, which takes place every three months.

In some cases, the duke acts on his own behalf, still as the government's special representative for international trade and investment, but not at the behest of UKTI or the Foreign Office. It is sometimes a subtle difference, but in recent days it has allowed the government to distance itself from some of his more controversial activities.

Excellent points, @wordler .
Parliament is Sovereign. If politicians and senior civil servants choose to allow all this to happen, it's on them.
People act as if both the late Queen and current King were/are as powerful as Henry VIII.

I can well believe that Cameron and Osborne supported him.

So, will you campaign to reform the Erskine May conventions so that the monarchy is finally subject to genuine parliamentary scrutiny and real accountability? That means overhauling the honours system to eliminate conflicts of interest, opening an honest debate on limiting royal powers, extending Freedom of Information laws, and exposing matters like Prince Charles’s “spider” letters or will you instead hide behind convenient distractions to avoid the elephant in the room: the abhorrent, and potentially criminal, conduct of the King’s brother and his wife, which demands the full glare of truth upon their sordid, entitled, and privilege-soaked, ermine-tipped lives?

This cabinet committee meets every six months and is chaired by Simon Fraser, the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, now Sir Simon James Fraser GCMG

held talks with Jon Cunliffe, David Cameron's adviser on international economic affairs and Europe. now Sir Jonathan Stephen Cunliffe, CB

Also this bit made me lol

In some cases, the duke acts on his own behalf, still as the government's special representative for international trade and investment, but not at the behest of UKTI or the Foreign Office. It is sometimes a subtle difference, but in recent days it has allowed the government to distance itself from some of his more controversial activities.

I bet they were trying to distance themselves!

The blurb says it’s adapted for the paper, so it’s not the same wording as it would be in the book proper.

I’m finding this less and less fun-I didn’t like getting a 30 second TicToc with AL stating as a simple fact that PP and Susan Barrantes were having an affair. I’m perfectly prepared to believe it might be true- and I hope that there is actual supporting evidence for all these claims in the book, but the click bait style of promotion is distasteful, and it ir looking less and less like the work of a serious historian and more like that of a tabloid journalist.

Is anyone prepared to take one for the team and actually read the book and report back? Maybe hold a Q&A?

I vaguely knew Simon Fraser a highly competent and faithful public servant who served this country with integrity, not for vast remuneration. And then there’s the Yorks. Pick a side.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Fraser_(diplomat)

Why exactly are you attacking @OlympicWomen?
her opinion is as valid as yours and one that is frankly shared by quite a few of us!

The author and the paper want to sell books and page views. So the author has to release just enough in excerpts to make buying the book worthwhile and not so much as to make buying the book pointless.

The tabloid gets to spin the excerpts as much as possible to get their money's worth for buying exclusive access, before people start buying the book and blasting the 'good' bits over social media.

I don't believe Lownie wrote this book as some sort of moral crusade. He's picked a meaty topic that interests him and he wants to make as much money as possible.

If it has a side effect of pushing towards change and transparency in the way the head of state is managed then that's a good thing but the primary goal for the author and the newspapers is to make money.

Which is why it can feel a little grubby because all the clips and interviews are basically a sales pitch.

I’m in full agreement with you on this @CurlewKate!

I don't need to pick a side - the Yorks are awful - I thought this before this book came out.

I thought you picked that Guardian article to support what I was saying. Andrew didn't operate in a vacuum. He was supported by a team of people who on a regular basis discussed and helped send him on all these 'missions' and visits. Including the person in charge of protocol at the Foreign Office. And it went on for ten years.

There are quite a lot of people involved over those ten years who will not want it known that they enabled and gave a stamp of approval to Andrew's activities.

When a trade visit is approved by this committee it is, in effect, backed by the government at the highest level.

Well, I’m not, but I feel this is a subject on which I have some limited but relevant knowledge. It seems to have shifted from blaming Prince Andrew for his transgressions into a broader smear campaign, accusing committed and dedicated public servants who worked tirelessly to advance this country of enabling him. I get it some royalists are smarting at the revelations that strike at the very heart of an institution they love and cherish. I understand that, but sometimes we need to stand up for and support the truth, however unpleasant that may be.

Then I feel you are misreading what I was trying to convey. I'm sure there were some hard working, upstanding civil servants who felt they had no choice but to work with Andrew on this role.

However, they weren't being forced to do so by the Queen. They were being instructed to do so by their bosses - the government at the time.

I would love to see a full investigation into the whole trade envoy debarcle with Andrew, however the reason (in my opinion) that probably won't happen, is not because of the power of the current monarch and the royal family, it's because of the power and butt covering by the senior politicians, and most likely some of the senior civil servants who enabled Andrew to act as he did.

With the best will in the world, mn is an anonymous forum and many people claim to have inside information or be the friend of a friend of a palace worker!
you have made claims about your job and contacts , there is no proof and frankly therefore your posts are your opinion only just as others posts are their opinion.

In terms of Gulf diplomacy, Andrew was certainly useful. His hobnobbing with princes and other elites helped grease the wheels for arms contracts and similar deals. In that regard, he was unique and, probably as a result of that advantage, coupled with the fact that the Queen was his greatest champion, he got away with far more elsewhere.

Ah those virtuous public servants and politicians, only acting in the best interests of the people, if Andrew did all as is claimed without any help, knowledge or self interest from said public servants then I’ve a bridge to sell you @vera99.

Yep-I do understand how these things work!

So true !