Andrew's hopes of redemption are undoubtedly on borrowed time. Photo / Getty Images
Opinion:
The Duke of Edinburgh's memorial service on Tuesday was supposed to have been a poignant family event – the kind of farewell that mourners at his funeral had been denied by Covid restrictions. It was also to have been a chance for a show of unity following a fractious year for the House of Windsor. However, behind the scenes, it has ended in acrimony – thanks mostly to the disgraced Duke of York having taken centre stage.
Prince Andrew's accompanying the 95-year-old Queen to her front-row position, on his first public appearance since paying millions to his sexual abuse accuser, didn't just raise eyebrows among the millions watching the Westminster Abbey service on television. According to insiders, it blindsided his siblings, too.
The official plan had been for the Queen to travel by car from Windsor Castle with Andrew, who lives in the estate's grounds, "for convenience". The monarch was then to be escorted to the pews by the Dean of Westminster, the Very Reverend Dr David Hoyle, with Andrew expected to walk to his seat with his daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands.
Yet to the surprise – and downright shock – of the congregation, the exiled royal, 62, took on a far more prominent role than had been originally envisaged, ushering Her Majesty by the elbow to her seat – in full view of the live broadcast cameras. It follows the Queen having suffered with mobility issues in recent months, with Buckingham Palace only able to confirm her attendance at the last minute.
Royals were later described as "dismayed" and "despairing" over Andrew's freelancing, with insiders expressing a "strong sense of regret" over his behaviour.
It has since emerged that while family members had overcome their initial discomfort over his presence at the 45-minute ceremony and were keen to put on a "united front" in Prince Philip's memory, they only found out the extent to which he was positioning himself as Her Majesty's "plus one" when it actually happened.
According to one insider: "They didn't know until it happened. The plan changed." Sources close to the duke deny this, insisting that it was a "mutual" decision, with one friend adding: "As the Queen herself has often said, sometimes people need to remember I have four children. We are a family."
Royal aides had hoped, however, that Andrew would use his "common sense" and not be half as visible as he proved to be.
After all, it is a little over a month since the Duke paid Virginia Giuffre a reported £12 million after she alleged she was forced to have sex with him after being trafficked by his paedophile friend Jeffrey Epstein. Andrew denies the allegations.
The palace powers-that-be had been doing everything they could to insulate the monarchy from the fall-out from the out-of-court settlement, not least after Andrew was forced to relinquish all his royal and military ties in January.
The duke was expected to completely disappear from public life. But what Tuesday's performance has highlighted is the lack of control courtiers are now able to exert over the Queen's second – and some say – "favourite" son.
It is no secret that Andrew is the Queen's most frequent visitor to Windsor Castle, which is just 5km from Royal Lodge, the seven-bedroom mansion he shares with his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson.
Now he has effectively been ex-communicated from the official institution of monarchy, royal aides have no involvement whatsoever in their interactions – or conversations. Some believe the duke has been positioning himself as Prince Philip's replacement as the Queen's closest confidante and unofficial adviser.
Hence the growing concern that an emboldened, and some say "tone-deaf", duke will attempt to use this summer's Platinum Jubilee celebrations as a further opportunity to rehabilitate his ruined reputation.
As far as courtiers are concerned, Andrew is to have "no involvement whatsoever" in the events in May and June. But ultimately it will be for HM to decide who is or is not invited to mark her historic 70-year reign.
If a thanksgiving service for the Duke of Edinburgh is deemed as a "family" event, they ask, what is to stop Andrew interpreting the planned St Paul's Cathedral ceremony in honour of his mother in exactly the same way?
Perhaps the more pertinent question is whether Prince Charles or the Duke of Cambridge are going to allow that to happen, after they were the ones who helped to convince the Queen that Andrew no longer had a rightful place on the Buckingham Palace balcony.
While sources close to both princes have played down yesterday morning's "screaming" headlines, there is no doubt there are genuine fears behind palace gates that the Queen risks not only being tainted by association with Andrew, but also overshadowed by the strength of public feeling against him. "The reaction wasn't quite as hysterical as suggested," said one insider. "All they want to do is protect the Queen."
Royal watchers have noted that the duke has not visited Clarence House in many months, suggesting that while he and the Prince of Wales share a love for their mother, they are not particularly close.
Since Charles, 73, has made no secret of his desire for a slimmed-down monarchy when the time comes, Andrew's hopes of redemption are undoubtedly on borrowed time.
As royal author Phil Dampier puts it: "The Queen has always been Andrew's greatest supporter, but I have my doubt over whether he can make a comeback when sadly she is gone. Without her protection, I can't see any way back for him, if Charles and William get their way."
And what of Prince William's attitude towards his uncle? Sources close to the duke say his role in Andrew's downfall has, in fact, been overplayed.
As second in line to the throne, he is involved in decisions that affect the future of the institution he will one day lead, but he is not in a position to influence a relationship he is one generation removed from.
"This is more of a matter for the siblings," said one insider. Another was keen to point out that Prince William wanted the focus of the thanksgiving service to remain on his beloved grandfather.
Yet the way William plans to rule as King does, of course, have a bearing on the direction of travel.
His recent comments on the Commonwealth – and the suggestion he may ditch the Queen's tried and trusted "never complain, never explain" mantra – suggest changes are already afoot.
Last week, the duke acknowledged that he may not succeed his grandmother and his father as head of the Commonwealth, vowing not to "tell people what to do", as he reacted to criticism about his eight-day visit to the Caribbean.
William also admitted that the tour of Belize, Jamaica and the Bahamas had "brought into even sharper focus" questions about the past and the future.
As the father-of-three prepares to turn 40 in June, he has done "a lot of thinking" about what kind of king he wants to be, when the time comes, and how certain protocols and strategy will need to evolve.
Yet far from distancing himself from the Queen's rather more tight-lipped approach, insiders say William simply wants to "leave less unsaid".
The old guard took the view that blood is thicker than water, but now the Duke of Cambridge clearly believes they can and should speak more freely about the mistakes and flaws with the monarchy – just not in an overt, Oprah way.
As one source explained: "William is not going to start tearing up the royal rule book. His view is slightly different to the view of bygone days where you leave things unsaid. When he released the statement at the end of the Caribbean tour, it was about admitting 'We didn't get everything right'. Don't just say nothing, but put your hands up and encourage a discussion. I think what he wants are healthy debates."
And that doesn't mean he is suddenly going to start complaining about everything, either. As another insider put it: "Harry and Meghan complained about everything all the time and he didn't like it. It's self-indulgent. He knows the public doesn't want to hear that – they just want the royals to get on with it, like the Queen."
As the sovereign herself has always insisted, the royals are only around for as long as their subjects want them to be there.
Despite what the Duke of York may think, there can surely be no way back for someone who appears anathema to the majority of the general public.
Ultimately, while the Queen remains on the throne, it will be for her to decide what future role Andrew has to play in family life. But as far as the Firm is concerned, he's finished.
New York Times: Here’s what dermatologists think.