There are, you’ll note, two little words missing from the King’s statement on Andrew’s arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
It goes as follows:
‘I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office.
What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.
In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.
Let me state clearly: the law must take its course. As this process continues, it would not be right for me to comment further on this matter.
Meanwhile, my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all.
Charles R’
What’s missing are the words, ‘my brother’. There is nothing in this chilly missive to indicate that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is the King’s younger brother. The reference to ‘my family and I’ seems designed to suggest that the family in question does not include this particular black sheep. There is in fact nothing human or personal about it at all. Charles could have been writing about a stranger – though granted, the antics of Andrew as alleged in the Epstein files must have made him seem like one.
Charles could treat Andrew as a brother, not a PR problem, even while making clear his distress and embarrassment
There were ways for the King to have put things differently: if only to indicate that he feels sorrow and shame for his brother’s disgrace. As it is, he talks, with marbles in his mouth, only about ‘the news…and suspicion of misconduct in public office.’ He makes clear that ‘the appropriate authorities’ have his ‘full and wholehearted support and cooperation’. But when it comes to the man himself, he talks about Andrew as if they’ve never met.
This is of course damage limitation and no doubt it was written after being forewarned by the police and after drafting by lawyers. But there are times when the human thing is the right thing to do. Of course, Charles must say that he supports ‘the authorities’, but he could also say that he and his family are stricken by the news. He could, in short, treat Andrew as a brother, not a PR problem, even while making clear his distress and embarrassment. He has laid down his brother for his reputation and that of the monarchy, and his reputation will not be enhanced by it.
Let’s not forget that there was a time when Charles himself was far from being the people’s pet. When Diana made clear her hurt and distress that ‘there were three people in that marriage’, the third being Camilla, he brought the monarchy pretty close to the brink. But he didn’t bow to public pressure then. With characteristic stubbornness he made clear that Camilla was part of the deal if he was to be king, and so unprecedented effort was invested in transforming her from a mistress made good to a national treasure. The Andrew episode is, of course, different. Adultery is one thing; allegedly passing on information gained while a trade envoy to someone as dodgy as Epstein is quite another (Andrew has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein). The point is, that while has no choice but to support the police action and ‘the process’, there would be nothing to stop him taking the chilly edge off his statement with some familial feeling, even if that feeling is one of hurt and distress.
Did he send Andrew a card today for his 66th birthday, do you think, in his lonely Norfolk outpost? That too may have seemed too dangerous, too likely to be picked up by the press. But that too would have been the brotherly thing to do. The late Queen would, I think, also have supported the police action – she would have had no choice – but I think her statement would have been that of a mother as well as a head of state. Charles should call his brother, not to say that he’s been hard done by, but to say he’s thinking about him and praying for him.
Because that’s the other thing. The King is head of the CofE, and while that is no guarantee of good behaviour, it should be a warrant for Christian compassion towards a sinner – maybe a repentant sinner. The exclusion of Andrew from the Christmas Day service at Sandringham last year was, I think, a disgrace. Christianity is not for the perfect but for sinners. Charles should remember that as he hangs his brother out to dry. Andrew, for all his sins, deserves to feel that his family is still his family. They’re a callous lot, the Windsors – remember how they left the Romanovs to be murdered by the Bolsheviks for fear of hampering the war effort – but I think a little humanity wouldn’t go amiss right now. Kicking a man when he’s down is a mean trick, even if he’s your brother and a prince.
Comments