The atmosphere in the House of Commons was heavy from early morning.
MPs came and went in the corridors with files in their hands, journalists had flooded the galleries, while in the seats of the Labor and Liberal Democrats the discussions took place in a low tone but with obvious tension.
The first 31 pages of the so-called “” had just been released – with large sections already erased or removed – and the Westminster political establishment was scrambling to assess the extent of the damage.
“We expect thousands more pages to come out about this appointment and the result will be very bad – another mega-earthquake for the government,” a Labor MP told BIMA, describing the climate of panic that prevails within the party.
And while Westminster is still reeling from the infighting and political upheavals facing Keir Starmer, the opening of files on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s decade-long tenure as the UK’s trade representative has explosively brought Jeffrey Epstein’s shadow back over the Palace and government.
The Queen personally wanted Andrew in the position
The declassified documents reveal that Andrew’s appointment in 2001 was not simply a government choice but a personal wish of Queen Elizabeth II.
In a 2000 internal memo, then-head of British Trade International, David Wright, noted to then-Foreign Secretary Robin Cook that “the Queen’s wish is for the Duke of York to succeed the Duke of Kent in the role”.
The same document stated that Elizabeth was “highly desirous” that her son should assume “a prominent part in the promotion of national interests”.
The revelation is causing a political backlash not only because of the extent of royal influence, but also because the government has now officially admitted that no evidence has been found to show that any meaningful security screening or vetting process took place before the appointment.
“No security rating”
The most explosive point of the documents concerns precisely this lack of control.
Undersecretary for Trade Chris Bryant acknowledged in parliament that there was no indication that any “formal due diligence or vetting process” had been applied to Andrew before he was given such a sensitive international role.
The revelation caused an immediate political firestorm.
“It is shocking that Andrew was allowed to become a trade envoy without any checks. No one should be above the basic safety rules. The government must immediately commit to mandatory vetting for any relevant role in the future.
Jeffrey Epstein’s victims deserve a full public investigation into his British connections,” a Green MP told BIMA exclusively.
The Lib Dems, who triggered a rare parliamentary process to force the files to be released, are now calling for all documents to be released in full.
The “sophisticated countries” and personal preferences
Political issues aside, the documents also shed light on how Andrew understood his role.
A letter from diplomat Catherine Colvin stated that Andrew preferred to travel to the “more sophisticated countries”, while there were clear instructions to avoid official golf events during overseas missions because he believed that an 18-hole round should be “private time”.
The documents also note that he preferred ballet to the theater in his cultural appearances and that he took a particular interest in high technology, military relations, Commonwealth and international affairs.
Officials at the time described his role as a combination of diplomacy, commercial influence and personal access to powerful business circles.
Epstein’s shadows return
The timing of the disclosure is considered extremely critical.
Although the government insists only evidence related to active police investigations or other members of the royal family was removed, the case inevitably brings Andrew’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein back into the spotlight.
Government sources say they “moved as quickly as they could” to release the files and even publicly thanked the royal family for their cooperation.
However, many at Westminster consider the first 31 pages to be just the beginning.
The three scenarios from now on
1. Complete political crisis
If the next few thousand pages reveal contacts, interventions or sharing of sensitive information, then the pressure for a public commission of inquiry will become almost impossible to prevent. In this scenario, the Starmer government will be faced with a deep institutional crisis that will also affect the Palace.
2. Controlled damage
The second scenario predicts that most new documents will concern procedural weaknesses, personal quirks and problematic handling, but without direct evidence of serious wrongdoing. In this case, the government will attempt to reduce the issue to a “mistake from another era”.
3. New government-monarchy conflict
The most sensitive scenario concerns the possibility of reinforcing the impression that the monarchy was directly influencing government decisions without sufficient institutional checks. If this image takes hold, then Britain may find itself facing a new public debate about the limits of the royal family’s role in modern political life.
