After she and Prince Albert bought Balmoral for £32,000 (the equivalent of £5million today) in 1852, Queen Victoria described the Aberdeenshire estate as her ‘dear paradise in the Highlands’. The Scottish retreat was so close to the late Queen Elizabeth’s heart that she chose to spend her final days there.
Now, King Charles and Queen Camilla are at Balmoral for their summer holiday, with Prince Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York among their first guests. But there is, I hear, trouble in ‘paradise’.
While the royals enjoy their grouse shooting, salmon fishing and picnics in what Princess Eugenie has called ‘the most beautiful place on earth’, her parents are likely to know there is one subject they must broach with the King, however awkward.
According to a Palace insider, that’s his apparent campaign to force them out of Royal Lodge, which has been Andrew and Fergie’s family home in Windsor Great Park ever since they paid £1million for a 75-year lease in 2003.
Prince Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson currently live at the 31-bedroom Royal Lodge, in the grounds of Windsor Great Park
The mansion is not owned by the King but by the independent Crown Estate, and it could not be let to a private tenant instead of the Yorks
The latest move by the monarch, which was disclosed by a newspaper last weekend, is to lay off Royal Lodge’s ten-strong security team. King Charles is said to have told the detail they will no longer be needed from the autumn.
The King has been paying for private guards at the 31-room mansion, which was the Queen Mother’s home until her death, since Andrew’s £3million-a-year armed protection officers were removed in 2022.
That was after Andrew ‘stepped back’ from royal duties following his disastrous interview with the BBC’s Newsnight programme over his friendship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
A Palace insider was reported by The Sun on Sunday to have told the paper about the King’s plan to remove Andrew’s guards: ‘Everyone is speculating this means the Duke will have to leave Royal Lodge because what other reason could there be to take his security away? They are all working the final weeks of their contract till the end of October. It’s not thought anyone is being lined up to replace them. It isn’t a secret that the King wants him out.’
This week, friends of the Duke and Duchess of York declined to discuss the row, no doubt fearful of increasing tensions while they are spending time with the King and Queen.
I understand, however, that they have been left bemused by the attempts to evict them from what they always assumed would be their ‘forever home’ – one they could pass on to their daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, if they so wished.
They don’t believe the King can be motivated by saving money. After all, not only did he receive £86.3million via the Sovereign Grant to fund the working royals last year, but he was also handed more than £27million from the Monarch’s Duchy of Lancaster estate, to spend as he sees fit. And that’s before he dips into his private fortune.
Royal Lodge is not owned by the King but by the independent Crown Estate and, despite claims to the contrary, could not be let to a private tenant instead of the Yorks.
A National Audit Office report in 2005 made clear this was ‘because of the sensitive location of the property in the centre of the Windsor Great Park with its consequential management considerations, and because of security concerns surrounding the Royal Family’s access to the Royal Chapel’.
The King is reportedly laying-off the private guards that he has employed for Prince Andrew since 2022, when his £3million-a-year armed protection officers were removed
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have this week been on a faux-royal tour of Colombia
The Royal Chapel of All Saints – where Andrew’s daughter Princess Beatrice married Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi in 2020 – sits in the grounds of Royal Lodge.
The Crown Estate, meanwhile, has taken the view that it would be appropriate for the property to remain under the occupancy of the Royal Family. As I reported in June, that position hasn’t changed.
Intriguingly, more than one friend of the Yorks has suggested the same theory to me as to why this eviction ‘campaign’ has begun: could it be that the King sees Royal Lodge as a potential future home for Queen Camilla, were she to outlive him?
Whatever the motivation, it seems bizarre to me that the King is stepping up pressure on his brother when he should be concentrating his attention on another former working royal: his younger son, Prince Harry.
For all his failings, Andrew can never be accused of disloyalty. Despite the myriad indignities he has suffered, neither the Duke nor the Duchess of York has ever whispered so much as a word of criticism against the Royal Family.
That stands in stark contrast to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have made a career out of disloyalty.
Surely, the King doesn’t want to risk his brother and Fergie following the example of Harry and Meghan and seeking to make a fortune out of criticising the monarchy?
Andrew’s worst sin has arguably been his poor judgment when it comes to friends and associates, such as Epstein. He has denied being a co-conspirator with Epstein and denied his accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s claims he sexually abused her when she was 17 – although he did reach a settlement with her thought to be worth £12million.
My advice to His Majesty is: stump up the security bill for Royal Lodge without complaint and let Andrew stay. Rather than get bogged down in this particular dispute, the King ought to turn his sights on Harry and Meghan before they set off on yet another trouble-making faux-royal tour.
That doesn’t mean Andrew should go unpunished. Along with Harry, he should be stripped of his role as a Counsellor of State. He and Harry should also both be removed from the line of succession.
The prospect of either of them anywhere near the throne is enough to turn this ardent monarchist into a republican.
To sign up for Richard Eden’s royal newsletter, click here.
