Newly Released ‘Andrew Papers’ Spark Political Controversy
Bombshell revelations in the so-called ‘Andrew papers’ found that the late Queen had pushed for her favourite son to be appointed UK trade envoy in 2001 – while the government also admitted on Thursday there had been no formal vetting or due diligence done before he was given the role.
UPDATE: On Friday it emerged UK police were now investigating potential ‘sex crimes’. Andrew has always denied wrongdoing.
Documents Detail Royal Appointment Requests
The Starmer government was forced to release the tranche of papers by lawmakers. Extracts include a note from chief executive of British Trade International Sir David Wright, which read: “The Queen’s wish is that the Duke of Kent should be succeeded in this role by the Duke of York (Andrew).”
Head of Protocol Kathryn Colvin also wrote that Andrew preferred ‘sophisticated’ countries – and didn’t want to play golf. Notes for interviews are also published including questions and example answers to the likes of ‘what do you actually do?’ and ‘[what] about the reputed 100k in expenses’ it had been rumoured he had demanded – with a rebuttal too.
Scrutiny Continues Over Epstein Connections
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was stripped of his titles and royal mansion amid scrutiny over his alleged links to the late paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Images of them from the US DOJ Epstein releases are also included in this package, along with Ghislaine Maxwell – currently serving time in a US jail – and Andrew’s ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, who also strongly denies wrongdoing. Inclusion does not imply wrongdoing.
Andrew remains under investigation for misconduct in public office – allegedly sharing sensitive information with Epstein when he was said trade envoy – and vehemently denies any wrongdoing at all.
UK Government Faces Questions In Parliament
Footage from Monday in House of Commons also shows Trade Minister Chris Bryant addressing lawmakers on the publication – and being asked about if more would be forthcoming.
“The documents we do have clearly show concerns about the potential for conflicts of interest. It started with golf, but we all know what came next. Why did that not lead to any scrutiny or vetting, not just at the start but at any stage during his tenure as an envoy?” he was asked. “Can he please tell the House whether officials or ministers were aware at the time of Andrew’s connection to Jeffrey Epstein.”
Bryant hit back: “If I’m honest, I’m a bit miffed by the attitude of the Liberal Democrat front bench because I have regularly updated the Liberal Democrat front bench ever since the Humble Address was brought forward. I have been as open as possible with their front bench, and they have indicated privately, regularly to me, that they were perfectly happy with the progress that we were making.”
Aside from the royal scandal, the Starmer government is also under pressure over the ‘Mandelson papers’ – files on the appointment of the former US ambassador and his own links to Epstein. PM Keir Starmer has said he wouldn’t have appointed Peter Mandelson had he known the full story, while Mandelson also strongly denies wrongdoing.
