Like any politician, they’ll be playing nice because they are thinking about post-government peerages, or more. This morning, it seemed that Prince Andrew’s position would become “untenable” if more allegations came to light. It is also not the right thing to upset the monarchy anyway, and any politician of any hue seems to cow-toe to them (apart from Dennis Skinner) regardless of any upset they may have caused.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12665981

SO messer Blair et al judgements fine then. As a trade envoy that goes where the government of the day advises he can go any meeting must have the tacit approval of that government.

Oh the irony in this statement is almost overwhelming. The entire failboat fleet has sunk!

Is that entirely true for him though? I know that he is not accountable to Parliament in any manner so I wouldn't be surprised what other rules don't apply.

If any MP was friends with a paedo I can't see them staying in their job. It's just a bit sickening seeing a load of MPs sucking up to him whe we know full well he'll resign and it'll be an issue they can push to one side.

To be fair to prince tw4t, how is he supposed to know if one of his friends is a bit of a deviant behind closed doors?

Probably because his mate went to prison for it.

OH NOES!!!!!! He's friends with a nonce. Sack him. [/sarcasm]

Does nobody else find it disturbing that a reputation can be destroyed by the media simply by someone associating with a criminal? Has Prince Andrew personally done anything wrong? No. But he's famous and royal and therefore a fair target. However, simply meeting with a persona non grata is enough to make anyone the devil himself.

The politicians and the moguls that own most of our media spend most of everyday associating with criminals, shady businessmen, fraudsters, deviants and war criminals but we don't hear anything about that do we? How quickly we forget about Cameron going to Egypt to hawk weapons or New Labour selling jets to Indonesia that would be used in East Timor. How many of those criticising Prince Andrew have associated with the corrupt, war-mongering and brutal leaderships of USA, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, North Korea, China, Indonesia, Madagascar, Somalia, Sudan, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela etc. ad nauseum?

The hypocrisy in this episode is mind-shudderingly sickening. The Labour Party especially can cram it in its cramhole.

Has Andrew done anything wrong? Perhaps - there was the sale of his former home to an associate for several million more than the asking price. That's downright odd, if you ask me.
Add to that Fergie selling 'access' to him which was famously caught by one of the rags (I think we can assume that he was complicit in the arrangements made by his ex, it'd be odd if the first time she sets up something like that and ta-da, there it is on camera) and frankly he's starting to look pretty sleazy. Then there's the comments he made that came to fore in November thanks to Wikileaks - this guy isn't some do-gooder with our best interests at heart.
Like the rest of them, he's in it for himself.
Take a look at the Court circulars and see what he gets up to. It's my fathers favourite past time. He keeps friends in very odd places that would apparently have little to do with the majority of UK trade centres.
So just what is he up to?

Wildside theory : He thinks that after his mother finally pops her clogs there will be so little enthusiasm for his big brother to take the throne that it may possibly lead to a republican movement in the UK finally gaining a strong following. As a result his family may suddenly be quite a lot less wealthy than they were before. Not poor by any means, but just 'rich' instead of 'ludicrously rich' and without any great influence on anyone. In preparation for that event he's doing everything he can to get himself a great fat swiss bank account that will allow him to continue living in the standard to which he has become accustomed.

Jon

Someone has to pay for what Johnny Rotten once described as “Fergie’s frumpy tents”.

I think it's primarily because there seems to be different rules for the Royals.

Be it being chummy with a sex offender and being photographed with your arm around his 17 year old 'personal masseuse' and getting paid several million pounds over the odds for one of your properties by a business associate you made as Trade envoy, to another going around the world and making blatantly racist and stupid remarks, to yet another turning up to parties in a Nazi uniform.

Oh, let's not forgot that the anti sexism laws that have been pushed and supported throughout the land also seem not to apply as women born into the family who have to wait behind all the males before they can be crowned.

If you're looking for hypocrisy the Royals and the UK's attitude towards them is a prime example.

You cant blame the Royals for something that requires an act of parliment to change. If the Government wished to change the succession laws they can, regardless of what the Royals think of it.

You're missing the point, it was more to do with attitudes towards them. Half the time people say treat them like normal people but then make no sound when they feck up and no noises about the fact that sexism is rife in the basic makeup of their system of succession.

I'm sure they wouldn't have a problem with a change, why they seem to be excluded is beyond me. Mind you in a democracy why one gene pool is treated as special is also beyond me.

I see the big flaw in your reasoning. You appear to think we live in a democracy, where the will of the people actually matters

You've got me there mate, silly old me living in a fantasy world again.

Now I have Imaginaton's 'Just An Illusion' in my head.

Apparently, this is being discussed. It’s getting the constitutional people whipped up in a fervour as they have to make sure that it will sit comfortably with tradition, with protocol and with all the CofE countries out there - some of which are a little fundamentalist and twitchy about such things.

The fact that it’s out of step with society’s views is meaningless.