MPs openly criticising Andrew reflects shift in tradition

"Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was described as 'a rude, arrogant, entitled man who could not distinguish between the public interest, which he said he served, and his own private interest'. MPs shared their personal experiences of meeting the former prince, all of them resoundingly negative, during a debate called by the Liberal Democrats to demand the release of documents relating to Andrew's 2001 appointment as UK trade envoy."

"The debate took in privilege, deference, and holding power to account, with MPs questioning Andrew's appointment and what oversight existed during his decade-long tenure, and if lessons had been learned following allegations he shared sensitive information with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. MPs went on to back the motion calling for the release of documents."

"The fact that this debate happened at all is in itself significant. It reflects the heat of the Andrew story and how conventions are shifting with the public mood. Buckingham Palace will not be getting involved in the details of what was heard, but their position remains the same, with their focus on supporting the police investigation."

Members of Parliament held an unprecedented debate criticizing Prince Andrew, with the Liberal Democrats calling for the release of documents related to his 2001 appointment as UK trade envoy. MPs shared negative personal experiences with Andrew and questioned the oversight during his decade-long tenure, particularly regarding allegations he shared sensitive information with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The debate centered on accountability, transparency, and holding power to account. MPs voted to back a motion for document release. Andrew has not responded to BBC requests for comment on specific allegations emerging from US files released in January. The debate itself represents a significant shift in parliamentary conventions and public sentiment regarding the Royal Family.

Read at www.bbc.com