Does Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Represent the Problem with Having a Monarchy?
Image Credit: The Coronation of Alexander (Unknown) via Wikimedia Commons
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s involvement with convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein is a case study in the danger of power and privilege. It is the tragically perfect example of a society that continues to allow the rich and powerful to abuse and exploit with such little consequence. To me, this is a clear representation of the problem with having a monarchy exempt from proper legal and financial scrutiny.
Justifiably, numerous questions have been raised over the nature of Andrew’s friendship with Jeffery Epstein, who was first accused of sexual assault of a minor in 2005 and later jailed in 2008. Andrew, who had known Epstein since 1999, told the BBC that he visited him three times a year on his private island and his homes in Palm Beach, Florida, and New York. Despite Andrew being accused of sexual abuse by Virginia Giuffre, in his infamously disastrous 2019 Newsnight interview, he denied ever meeting her. His simple denial even when faced with photographic and written evidence tells us that he is a man who views his word as more powerful than proof.
It is outrageous that despite being gradually frozen from royal life, Andrew has continued to benefit from royal privileges. Shelter estimated that at least 354,000 people are homeless in the UK today. Yet for 21 years, a man accused of sexual abuse continued to live in the 30 room, 98 acre Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park. Such levels of inequality illustrate the injustice inherent in allowing one family access to unearned wealth and influence - wealth that is not even publicly accounted for as they are exempt from the freedom of information act. Andrew is, of course, not the only Royal benefitting from such undeserved luxury. King Charles, for example, received £24.4 million in annual profit from the monarch’s private estate the Duchy of Lancaster in 2025. Therefore, merely attempting to resolve the ‘Andrew problem’ should not leave the Monarchy free from scrutiny, instead, it is evidence that now is the time to challenge such a privileged institution.
However, difficulty arises when trying to discern the source of the Royal Family’s wealth as the distinction between public money and the Royal’s private wealth is unclear since their finances are neither publicly accounted for nor scrutinised by Parliament. Emily Maitlis, the co-star in Andrew’s disastrous 2019 Newsnight, suggested that all possible sources of his income can be either directly or indirectly traced back to the British taxpayer. Consequently, the Monarchy is reportedly worth £510 million, taxpayer money that could surely be spent on the UK’s crumbling public services, not unelected aristocrats.
Furthermore, Andrew’s case follows a familiar pattern of elites using their wealth and status as a get out of jail free card. Rather than face trial, the Telegraph reported that Andrew had reached a £12 million settlement using money given to him by his mother Queen Elizabeth II; in the same Britain, 30% of children are living in poverty.
The Queen’s protection of Prince Andrew was the pursuit of personal over national interest that allowed money to prevent legal justice. Clearly, the bad apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.