The federal government is refusing to make time in parliament for MPs to debate the conduct of Prince Andrew amid a flood of latest allegations towards him.
The prime minister’s spokesperson instructed reporters: “Prince Andrew has already confirmed he is not going to use his titles.
“We support the decision made by the Royal Family, and we know the Royal Family would not want to take time from other important issues.”
The one approach for MPs to debate the disgraced royal’s friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his peppercorn hire for a mansion could be for the federal government to make time within the parliamentary timetable.
Politics newest: Starmer says he has ‘confidence’ in Jess Phillips
Please use Chrome browser for a extra accessible video participant
2:09
Royal supply: Andrew allegations needs to be examined
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has stated there is no such thing as a ban on MPs discussing the conduct of a member of the Royal Household, but it surely must be on a “substantive motion” moderately than throughout common query time classes.
Substantive motions will be tabled by the federal government, opposition events in opposition day debates, and by backbenchers by means of an software to the Backbench Enterprise Committee.
In response to repeated questions from journalists about why Quantity 10 was blocking a debate in the primary chamber, the spokesman stated: “I don’t accept that. Any decision by committees to scrutinise developments are a matter for them.”
Requested whether or not No 10 considered it as a waste of parliamentary time to debate Andrew’s lease of the Royal Lodge on a peppercorn hire, the spokesperson stated: “That’s not what I’ve said.”
The chair of parliament’s Public Accounts Committee, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, stated in a press release on Thursday that they are going to be “writing in the coming days to the Crown Estate Commissioners and HM Treasury, seeking further information on the lease arrangements for Royal Lodge”.
“We will review the response we receive to our forthcoming correspondence, and will consider at that time whether to seek further information,” he added.
The prime minister’s spokesperson stated earlier that Sir Keir Starmer “supports proper scrutiny of the crown estates and all uses of taxpayers’ money”, and appeared to again a committee investigation throughout Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday.
Requires dukedom to be revoked
Strain has been quickly rising on the King’s brother – who introduced final week he would cease utilizing his Duke of York title and his knighthood – after revelations within the posthumous memoir of his intercourse accuser, Virginia Giuffre.
Reviews additionally emerged over the weekend that claimed Prince Andrew requested a royal shut safety officer to “dig up dirt” on the late Ms Giuffre.
Because of these new allegations, the Metropolitan Police stated it’s “actively looking into the claims”.
There are rising requires his dukedom to be formally revoked, which may solely be finished by an act of parliament, and for him to surrender his 30-room Royal Lodge dwelling in Windsor Nice Park after it emerged he paid a peppercorn hire for greater than 20 years.
‘We’re guided by the palace’
Commons chief Sir Alan Campbell was requested on Thursday whether or not MPs would have time to debate a movement put ahead by the Scottish Nationwide Occasion to create a brand new regulation to formally strip Andrew of his dukedom.
The chief of the SNP in Westminster, Stephen Flynn, stated: “I have laid a motion before this House which calls on the government to listen to parliamentarians and to listen to the public and to listen to victims and take legislative action to remove the dukedom from Prince Andrew.
“When is the federal government going to return ahead with that laws?”
Please use Chrome browser for a extra accessible video participant
2:32
Ought to MPs have a say on Prince Andrew?
👉Hearken to Politics at Sam and Anne’s in your podcast app👈
Sir Alan stated: “I know that there’s been speculation about legislation. But the palace have been clear that they recognise that there are other matters that this House needs to be getting on with, and we are guided in this by the palace.
“That does not imply that the Home cannot discover methods of debating these issues, whether or not it’s the matter of titles, or whether or not it’s a matter of the funds, which I do know are below query right here.”
Prince Andrew has repeatedly and vehemently denied the claims towards him made by the late Ms Giuffre.
