Why the scandal of the royal formerly known as Prince won’t remove Australia’s King

February 27, 2026 — 4:00am

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

Save this article for later

Add articles to your saved list and come back to them anytime.

Can you hear that sound? That incessant rumbling of republican agitation? The growing protest that Australia remains formally under the reign of the British monarchy, even as a truly dark scandal surrounds it? This disquiet over the fact that the Andrew formerly known as Prince, recently arrested, could theoretically become our head of state?

No, me neither. The odd shout, yes, but nothing to dissuade Prime Minister Anthony Albanese from so confidently reiterating this week that even Andrew’s “extraordinary fall from grace” doesn’t revive his interest in pursuing a republic. His government, he explained, had already held one referendum, soundly beaten. About nine months after that, in his first cabinet reshuffle, he abolished the portfolio he’d earlier established of the assistant minister for the republic. That portfolio was unprecedented – a signal of intent. Its abolition signalled an emphatic return to precedent.

By that stage, Andrew had faced allegations of having had sex with minors as part of Jeffrey Epstein’s circle. He denied these, and settled a civil case with his accuser, Virginia Giuffre, out of court. But since, the Epstein-Mountbatten-Windsor scandal has only deepened. British newspapers reported then-prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein had exchanged emails about a year after Andrew had said he’d cut off contact. By the end of the month, King Charles stripped him of his royal titles, including prince. In January this year, when the US government released a tranche of........

© Brisbane Times