Andrew’s place in line of succession must be considered ‘when time is right’
Sir Ed Davey said the monarchy will want to ensure the former prince cannot become king.
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s place in the line of royal succession is something Parliament “is going to have to consider when the time is right”, Sir Ed Davey has said.
The Liberal Democrat leader said the monarchy will want to ensure the former prince, who is still eighth in line to the throne despite having lost his title, cannot become king.
An act of Parliament would be required to remove Andrew from the line of succession.
“The most important thing right now is that the police be allowed to get on with their job, acting without fear or favour,” Sir Ed said.
“But clearly this is an issue that Parliament is going to have to consider when the time is right, naturally the monarchy will want to make sure he can never become king.”
Detectives continued to search Andrew’s former home in Berkshire on Friday, following his release from custody on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
He was held on Thursday morning after allegations were made against him following the release of files related to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Andrew has denied any wrongdoing over his Epstein links, but has not directly responded to the latest allegations.
Following Andrew’s arrest, the King said in a statement that “the law must take its course” and the police have “our full and wholehearted support and co-operation”.
Recent YouGov polling shows the majority of Britons (82%) think the former prince should be removed from the line of succession, just 6% believed he should not.
Various MPs and party leaders have called for a full statutory inquiry following the arrest, with some demanding a debate on the future of the monarchy.
Green Party leader Zack Polanski described the situation as “pretty awful” and said there are many questions to be answered.
Speaking while campaigning in Gorton, Greater Manchester, Mr Polanski said: “We obviously need to wait for the legal process to make its way, but I would say we really need a full statutory inquiry into public figures from institutions, where crimes have been committed – if they’ve been committed – what we knew, what other people in those institutions knew and, where necessary, to make sure that the appropriate people are removed.”
Mr Polanski said he did not believe the country should have a monarchy.
He said: “The monarchy are doing a pretty good job in themselves of not having their proudest moments over various issues we’ve seen in the last couple of years and, when the public are ready to have that national conversation about the monarchy, I think issues like this certainly don’t help the monarchy’s case.”
Labour MP Rachael Maskell told the Press Association that all allegations against Andrew should be scrutinised “in the appropriate way”.
“From the evidence already held in the public domain, it is clear that his position as a Counsellor of State and with succession rights are removed, as well as all titles,” the York Central MP said.
“I trust that legislation can be passed to achieve this. I am glad that the King seeks to be as helpful as he can, and providing support to Parliament to act would assist in this.”
Neil Duncan-Jordan, Labour MP for Poole, told the Press Association he has tried on numerous occasions to try and raise matters relating to the royal family.
“Every time I’m told they’re off limits,” he said.
“The Andrew affair needs to be the start of rolling back that approach.
“Parliament must have the right to debate any aspect of the royal household – particularly in relation to income and expenditure.”
On X, Labour’s Richard Burgon (Leeds East) called for an independent inquiry into what the royal family knew about Andrew’s Epstein links.
He said: “It’s time for a serious national debate about abolishing the monarchy.
“Even if you disagree, we should discuss the role of hereditary privilege in our democracy.”
