Latest / DEEP INSIGHT / MP calls for law change to strip Duke of York of his title

Transcript

MP calls for law change to strip Duke of York of his title · DEEP INSIGHT

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome back now a Buckingham Palace sources Tolska News this
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: afternoon that the Royal family believes that allegations against Prince
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: Andrew should be examined in the proper and fullest ways.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: On Friday, Andrew of course announced that he was relincouraging
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: the use of his titles and honors, and he again
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: denied any wrong doing. But the move has renewed cause
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: from some MPs to change the law so that the
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: King has the power to remove titles on his own initiative.
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: As it stands, only Parliament can officially remove a person's titles. Well,
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: one of those MPs is the MP for York Central,
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: that's Rachel Mascot, and I spoke to a little earlier
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: about the bill that she's proposing. Rachel, very good evening
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: to you. You are talking about trying to change the
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: law here, or to bring a law into Parliament. Just
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: just exactly what do you want to bring about when
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: it comes to Prince Andrew.
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: Well, we know at the moment whilst the Duke of
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: York Calaia's site is title, he still holds his title.
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: And I brought forward a private members legislation in the
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: past in order to see titles removed, not just around
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: this case, but it would be for all cases. A
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: very simple amendment could be made to a constitutional bill
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: or a private member's bill could come forward to retake this,
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: and all that we need to do is either to
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: establish a ground committee of both houses of Parliament, the
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: Lords and the Commons coming together making recommendation to the King,
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: or the King himself making a decision, or a future
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: monarch to be able to do that of removing a title.
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: It probably comes as a great surprise that you can
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: give a title, but you can't remove it. So that's
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: why I researched this issue, and of course because of
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: the associations of Duke of York with the city. I
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: represent the City of York, and we wanted to see
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: that separation between the two when old eighty eight percent
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: of my constituents say that they didn't want the to
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: carry a title bearing the name of our city. And
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: that's why I follow through on this issue, and since
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: many of my constituents have written to me about this matter.
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: Insane, I mean, I think there is precedent for some
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: of this. I mean the Duke of Albany. I think
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: back in the nineteen ten's lost the title four people
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: did after they sided with the Germans during the First
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: World War. I think if you did want that to happen,
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: there is simply just an act of parliaments to that.
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: Well, you're referring to the Title's Deprivation Act of nineteen seventeen,
• 2:33
  Speaker 2: which was exercised as a result of being on the
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: enemy's side during the First World War. The problem with
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: that legislation is that it named individuals within the clauses,
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: whereas my legislation would be able to then be applied
• 2:45
  Speaker 2: to anybody in the future as well, so we wouldn't
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: have this situation ever having to occur again, where we
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: don't have the mechanisms in order to achieve the aim,
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: which is obviously to end the use of the title.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: The main problem here, though, is that Prince Andrew hasn't
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: done anything wrong when it comes to the eyes of
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: the law. He's not been convicted of any crime here.
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: He's always denied any wrongdoing. I mean, under what circumstances
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: would you be removing these titles?
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: Well, I'm not playing Jedge Drury here, I'm just simply
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: saying to create the mechanism by which that could occur,
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: But you're.
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: Doing this in the context of you're doing this in
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: the context of Prince Andrew. Let's be honest, the reason
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: we're talking about this today is because of him, and
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: we're back.
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: In this space again where there's been an unsatisfactory outcome,
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: and this is what the victims and survivors' families are saying,
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: and that they're the people we really do need to
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: listen to today about all the associations. I mean, it's
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: very clear that Andrew.
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: We have to talk about the alleged victims here because,
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: as I say, he has not been convicted of anything.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: No, no, no, I didn't make that association at all.
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: What I said is that he had associations with Jeffrey
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: X sign of which there were victims and survivors from
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: that abuse that we do know took place. So of course,
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: what we want to make sure is that there are
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: mechanisms in place, whether they're triggered or not. That I
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: am not making that call. What I'm saying is that
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: there aren't those mechanisms in place, and really there should be,
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: and this would address issues around all titles and peerages
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: as well.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: It might build with well just finally on that, I mean,
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: you talk about the mechanism here, but there will have
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: to be someone making that judgment call, doesn't there I
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: mean who would that be? And isn't the concern then
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: that this could become party political that essentially not maybe
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: necessarily in this case of further on the line, but
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: that at some stage politicians could use it against people
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: that we just do not politically like.
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: Not at all. What it actually does is move the
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: powers into the hands of the monarch, and that's what's
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: really important. But setting up the mechanism has to go
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: through parliament, because there are no mechanisms at the moment.
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: I mean, I think in reality what there will need
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: to be is a discussion between the Palace in Parliament
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: to determine exactly how far reaching those measures are. But
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: ultimately there would have to be a clause in a
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: constitutional bill or a private members bill or some other
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: government bill to be able to exercise that measure and
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: put that in place.