Prince Andrew is set to face another setback as a parliamentary committee has confirmed its demand for more information regarding his lease agreement for the Royal Lodge. The Duke of York’s 30-room residence in Windsor Great Park has come under scrutiny, with increasing calls for him to relinquish it after revelations that he has been paying only a “peppercorn rent” for over two decades.
The Public Accounts Committee is now seeking additional details about this peppercorn rent lease arrangement, and today, the chair of the committee has issued a statement. Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, stated: “The Public Accounts Committee which I Chair will be writing in the coming days to the Crown Estate Commissioners and HM Treasury, seeking further information on the lease arrangements for Royal Lodge.”
He added: “In the correspondence, our cross-party Committee will be raising a number of questions with the Crown Estate and HM Treasury. This forms part of our long-standing remit, on behalf of Parliament and the British public, to examine the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of public spending, and ensure the taxpayer is receiving best value for money.”
Sir Geoffrey also noted: “Our Committee has a further opportunity in 2026 to consider the Annual Report and Accounts for the Crown Estate, and will make a decision on whether to undertake any work on this in the normal way. We will review the response we receive to our forthcoming correspondence, and will consider at that time whether to seek further information.”
The late sex accuser of Prince Andrew, Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir revelations have intensified the pressure on the brother of the King, who recently announced he would cease using his Duke of York title. He refutes all allegations levelled against him, reports the Mirror.
However, the news of the committee requesting additional information follows Downing Street’s statement that MPs will not be allocated time in the House of Commons to debate Andrew’s behaviour as the Royal family wishes Parliament to concentrate on “important issues”.
The Commons could only delve into Andrew’s association with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein and his rent-free mansion if a formal motion was presented, but the Government dominates most of the parliamentary time.
Downing Street stated it wouldn’t set aside time for a debate in the chamber, although MPs could still examine the situation in committees.
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle clarified there was no prohibition on MPs discussing the conduct of a Royal family member, but it would need to be on a “substantive motion” rather than during regular question time sessions.
When questioned whether ministers would allocate time for a debate, a No 10 spokesman said: “Prince Andrew has already confirmed he will not use his titles.
“We support the decision made by the royal family and we know the royal family would not want to take time from other important issues.”
In response to numerous queries about a Commons debate, the spokesman stated: “We support the decision made by the royal family and we know the royal family would not want to take time from other important issues.”
Over half of those surveyed believe there should be an Act of Parliament to remove them. More than four fifths of Britons hold a negative view of the prince.