The British monarchy has survived civil wars. The Windsors have outlasted countless European royal families, changing their name when Saxe-Coburg-Gotha didn’t suit the times during World War I. The Queen has counselled 14 British prime ministers and endured modern scandals. But Prince Andrew will be the House of Windsor’s slow undoing.
READ MORE: Sponsors leave Prince Andrew | Queen loses her grip on The Firm | Epstein interview sparks fake reviews, memes | Prince Andrew gives extraordinary interview over Jeffrey Epstein saga | Prince Andrew, again shows poor judgment | Prince Andrew joined paedophile’s island orgy, accuser claimed
It is not enough that the world’s oldest apprentice and his son may be earnest enough successors. It will take something more remarkable to lift the stocks of this royal family because, frankly, too many of them are useless, grating or, in Andrew’s case, entirely reprehensible. British taxpayers can’t be expected to pay for this mob much longer, and our Australian Constitution should not be tied to a monarchy in moral decline.
Only arrogance can explain Andrew agreeing to this interview just as people are starting to tire of this tawdry tale, during a wild election campaign, and on the same weekend that the latest series of The Crown landed on Netflix.
Early in the new season, an astute observation is made about the House of Windsor as a polycephalus, a two-headed eagle, made up of two necessary strains to survive. There are the dazzling, brilliant, individualistic and the dangerous Windsors. Then there are the dull, dutiful, dependable ones. For every Victoria you get an Edward VII, for every George V you get a Prince Eddy, for every George VI you get an Edward VIII. For every Lillibet you get a Margaret.
Sunday’s interview exposes a third variety that will blow the institution asunder: the supercilious, boorish nob who imagines that “people like me”— to draw from Andrew’s interview — can wangle their way out of the most dishonourable scandal.
The 59-year-old prince tried to convince his British subjects, and people in every commonwealth country, that the Queen’s second eldest son stayed at the houses of Jeffrey Epstein, a pedophile who trafficked hundreds of young girls for sex, travelling on his private planes, staying on his private island, but he saw absolutely nothing untoward.
Watching the BBC’s political journalist Emily Maitlis interview the gormless prince is like watching a David Attenborough documentary in slow motion: the sleek tigress surveys her target, inching forward slowly, with the fluid grace of her every move marking the imminent demise of her prey. Gripping does not begin to describe this Darwinian wreckage.
So, what insane level of hubris led Andrew to think he would emerge from an interview with Maitlis looking better than he did going into it? His advisers told him it was a “bad idea”. One quit over Andrew’s decision to proceed. That the Firm is losing its grip on its principals will cost it dearly.
While an unavoidable girl crush will lure you to watch Maitlis, Andrew’s dissembling performance will keep you enthralled. Here is the televised destruction of the royal family.
The Prince’s hubris, his risible excuses to explain away his involvement in or knowledge of child sex trafficking, makes one hanker for the quaint royal scandals of the 1980s and 90s, heartbreaking adultery, humiliating exposes of a future king yearning to be his lover’s tampon, and Fergie having her toes sucked in Saint Tropez.
It is true, the media is too intrusive, even more so today. But Andrew chose a carefully planned and practised interview. And it confirms he is a disgraced member of the British royal family, suspected of having sex with an underage girl and maintaining a friendship with a man who ran a sex trafficking racket for the rich and famous at his homes in London, New York, Florida and his Caribbean “orgy” island.
It is hard to settle on the worst moment, given every question solicits an answer more incredulous than the last. But first must go to the prince’s excuses for a four-day house party at Epstein’s New York mansion after Epstein was convicted of child sex offences, jailed, then released.
The poor bugger, who apparently has to couch surf due to his meagre royal wage, said it was “convenient” to stay there. He broke off the friendship during a walk in the park with the sex offender. But not one to turn down a free meal either, the eighth in line to the throne stayed as a guest of honour at a dinner party.
“I fully admit that my judgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable, but that’s just the way it is,” he said.
On last count, the gormless prince managed more than 35 excuses to explain why he was unaware that his friend was involved in trafficking underage girls for sex, and why he did not have sex with Virginia Roberts, the Australian woman who, as a teenager, was part of Epstein’s child sex ring.
Here is an abridged version: I can’t recall, I didn’t do it. Epstein is not my close friend. I never ever saw Epstein with a camera so the photo with me holding that young girl can’t be real. In any case, I’m a royal and I don’t do public displays of affection. I don’t sweat either so she’s wrong about a sweaty dance at Tramps nightclub. I can’t recall, I didn’t do it. I went to Epstein’s homes for scintillating conversations with a cosmopolitan group of “US eminents” — academics, politicians and people from the UN. I hosted a man being investigated for child abuse at Sandringham but, you must understand, it was just a simple shooting weekend. I can’t recall. I didn’t do it. People hide stuff from people like me. Because I’m a royal I’m used to seeing lots of ‘‘staff’’ walking around a house. Butt naked? No. Massages, no comment. I was at Pizza Express in Woking, not having sex with an underage girl. I recall going to Pizza Express in Woking because it is an unusual thing for me to do, a very unusual thing for me to do. I can’t recall, I didn’t do it. Oh, it’s been a terrible drain on me. It’s a mental health issue.
The only decent thing to come from this interview is increased business at Pizza Express in Woking, and a good laugh from mock reviews such as this on TripAdvisor: “Came here nearly 20 years ago, I’ve dined with presidents and kings since, but nothing sticks in my mind like that night.”
When the prince mentioned Epstein’s “unbecoming” behaviour, a hitherto composed Maitlis finally winced, visibly. “He was a sex offender,” she corrected him.
And so, at a time of sinking trust in institutions, the prince ended the interview as he started it, an arrogant, dissembling, privileged fool entirely untethered from the British people who fund his lifestyle and oblivious to the wider world around him. A world that includes young girls trafficked for sex. The 21st century won’t put up with the House of Windsor harbouring a prince who has raised even more suspicions that he was involved in a child sex racket.
Politically charged supermarket probe ends with a whimper
The ACCC’s supermarkets inquiry was always a political solution to a cost of living crisis that the Albanese government had been woefully slow to recognise.
Vague lawmaking risks creating ‘thought crimes’
Freedom of communication in Australia is dying because of unrelenting attempts to control what we say and what we think.
God save us. Because nothing will save the royal family. Not after Prince Andrew’s stinking interview on the BBC on Sunday. In an hour of astonishing television, a senior member of the royal family showcased why the Windsors will not survive as an institution in the 21st century.