For years Prince William has laboured under a misunderstanding. Fiercely opinionated in private, his public pronouncements have been measured, even evasive.
This has contributed to a view that while passionate about issues that move him, he remains at times a reluctant actor on the royal stage. It would be a mistake, however, to interpret these misgivings as weakness.
As the crisis over his uncle Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor deepens, any lingering doubts that William lacks the resolve to deal decisively with events that now threaten the very existence of the monarchy and his place in it must surely be reassessed.
However, much time remains to his father as King, the Prince knows Charles’s reign will forever be soiled by the institution’s response to – and fallout from – the Andrew affair.
Among figures close to the Royal Family, there is a view that the slate can never entirely be wiped clean until there is a change at the top. In other words, when William, along with Catherine, comes to the Throne.
As a team they have already proved themselves, doing so much to rebuild the image of the Royal Family shattered by Prince Harry’s exit from royal life and the wounding barbs he directed at his brother and sister-in-law.
Not only are they the most popular royals – with 74 per cent of Britons having a positive opinion of them, according to YouGov – they are also blessed with a natural ability to connect with the public, reminiscent of William’s late mother.
They come across as united, devoted to one another and each protective of the other. If there has been any criticism, it is that their glad-handing and winning smiles are no more than a professional performance.
There is a view that the slate can never entirely be wiped clean until there is a change at the top. In other words, when William, along with Catherine, comes to the Throne
But this week a fascinating insight into their steeliness emerged in a new biography of the couple which revealed how they ruthlessly cut off their friendship with ITV News at Ten anchor Tom Bradby, a once-close confidant who was invited to their 2011 wedding as a personal guest.
According to the writer Russell Myers, the break was because Bradby had helmed a documentary with Harry and Meghan during their 2019 tour of South Africa which gave the Sussexes their first platform to unveil their grievances. It was in this film that Harry disclosed he and his brother were on ‘different paths’.
It was during the same explosive interview that Meghan told Bradby that she was surviving rather than thriving in the Royal Family. Speaking of the unbearable pressure of life in the spotlight she laid bare her profound unhappiness insisting it was no longer enough for her to just ‘survive it’. William thought the participation of Bradby had let him down and took the view that the film had ‘crossed a line’.
Myers claims in his book, William And Catherine – The Intimate Inside Story: ‘On his return from Africa, Bradby contacted William to say he was concerned about Harry’s well-being.
‘A source said William was furious that, as he saw it, Bradby had taken Harry’s side. He told Bradby he would speak to Harry to ensure he was OK but ended the conversation abruptly.’
This was said to have left the prince feeling ‘betrayed and severely let down’. Myers continues: ‘He considered Tom a friend and Harry was close to him, too, but [William] never thought [Bradby] would take a side like he did.’
One of the sticking points for William was that Bradby, who conducted the prince’s joint engagement interview with Kate, ‘appeared unwilling to quiz Harry or Meghan about what was going on inside the royal household’. William was said to be ‘perplexed at Bradby’s willingness to be a conduit for Harry and Meghan’.
At the time, rumours were multiplying about Meghan’s alleged bullying and shoddy treatment of royal staff. Myers quotes a source as saying: ‘Tom knew full well what Meghan was accused of and chose not to raise it in the documentary, while she ran roughshod over the family. As far as [William] was concerned, the friendship was over there and then.’
This was not the only time William has demonstrated his implacable character. Take the episode in January 2021, when he confronted a photographer near his Norfolk home, Anmer Hall on the Sandringham estate.
The Prince knows Charles’s reign will for ever be soiled by the institution’s response to the Andrew affair (William, Kate and Andrew at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral last year)
The footage of what followed, leaked online, showed the future king was incandescent. ‘You were out here looking for us,’ he told the intrusive cameraman, accusing him of ‘stalking’ his children.
Off camera, Kate is equally direct: ‘We are out for a bike ride with our children, we saw you by our house.’ Some around the Prince of Wales tell us that this is not an aberration but part of a pattern. Household staff, royal aides, even family members, tread lightly around William, mindful of his mood swings before raising sensitive issues.
He can be fiery, occasionally difficult to handle. Even Palace switchboard operators are careful about which calls they put through.
On one occasion, an official, acting on the King’s orders, was instructed to obtain William’s written acknowledgment of the security risks of flying his entire family in one helicopter.
William point-blank refused. His colourfully worded reply was said to have been reported directly back to the King.
There’s no question that William knows his mind – as illustrated by what’s become known as ‘the kilt issue’. Despite holding the Scottish title Duke of Rothesay and Lord of the Isles, William chooses not to wear one, as his father does when North of the border.
The King has suggested it would help cottage industries in the Highlands. William will not budge. These then are not the instincts of a man who yields to others.
And nowhere is this clearer than on the Andrew saga. After the former prince’s catastrophic BBC Newsnight interview in 2019, William demanded immediate action, reportedly insisting that Andrew ‘shouldn’t be anywhere near the family under any circumstances’.
What separates William from his father is not his short fuse – King Charles has one, too – but his refusal to let it go (Left to right, Andrew, King Charles, William, Queen Camilla, Kate and Prince Harry)
With that in mind his visible discomfort at his uncle’s presence during the funeral of the Duchess of Kent last year speaks volumes.
Sidling up to his nephew on the steps of Westminster Cathedral, he attempted to engage him in conversation. William, conscious of the watching media, barely acknowledged him but his face darkened. Sources later described him as ‘boiling with anger’ at the crass intervention.
As the Daily Mail reported yesterday, matters came to a head at the 2022 Order of the Garter ceremony when William threatened to withdraw from the event if Andrew, a fellow Garter knight who loved parading in his regalia, dared to turn up.
The Prince of Wales’s intervention, which forced Andrew to stand aside, undoubtedly saved the family from further embarrassment.
Only last year he appeared to suggest that the late Queen – and by implication his father – had moved too slowly in dealing with the escalating crisis. It was also recognition that the issue was no longer a family crisis but a dynastic one. Confined by protocol – and by respect – for his grandmother, he offered a careful but pained critique of how matters relating to his uncle had been handled historically.
In other words, the Queen’s deep affection for a wayward son may have delayed more decisive action. Of course, he was also mindful of other sensitivities, such as Andrew’s mental well-being.
Surely though with the monarchy on the ropes these impulses are needed more than ever.
What separates William from his father is not his short fuse – King Charles has one, too – but his refusal to let it go. The King tends to simmer down and forget what ever enraged him, quickly, apologises and moves on. William is different. As a source close to the King puts it: ‘The Prince of Wales doesn’t have the same forgiving attitude.’
In such unprecedented times, these may be vital qualities.
This uncompromising attitude applies particularly to the brother to whom he was once so close. ‘William will never, ever forgive Harry for what he has done,’ says a figure who knows him well.
In many ways, Prince William is assuming the role of his late grandfather Prince Philip, as the family enforcer, now. ‘He draws lines and holds them,’ says the friend. ‘Philip would have recognised the instinct entirely and backed it.’ Which is why there was some disappointment with William’s statement distributed before he travelled to Saudi Arabia last week, his first on-the-record intervention on the Epstein crisis. Issued on his behalf by Kensington Palace, it contained no mention of his uncle by name and critics said it was vague, smacking not of leadership but rather of damage control.
The clamour for transparency will not be silenced by Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest. If anything, it is likely to increase (Andrew with ex wife Sarah Ferguson at the funeral last year)
It felt that a moment that cried out for a personal intervention had been missed.
The clamour for transparency will not be silenced by Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest. If anything, it is likely to increase. The demand for answers about what the royals knew is coming not just from the victims of Jeffrey Epstein but also from the public.
The longer the truth is hidden, the greater the chance that it will fall to William to deal with matters. It is unlikely to be the only obstacle that must be overcome if the royals are to reset their relationship with their subjects. Central is the widespread exasperation at Andrew’s continued presence in the line of succession. He is currently eighth.
Somewhere there is a file at Buckingham Palace where this very issue was pored over more than 25 years ago. Charles was fleshing out his ideas for a slimmed-down monarchy and among suggestions put forward by courtiers at the time was slashing the line of succession.
It would end with the monarch, his or her heir and their family. In those days it meant the line ending with Harry.
During Queen Elizabeth’s lifetime, the proposals were quietly forgotten and allowed to gather dust. Now it is front and centre if the royals wish to regain public affection.
Instead of a never-ending line of princes and princesses, dukes and duchesses, the list of those in line to the throne would stop with William’s three children.
Not only would Andrew be removed (and his daughters Beatrice and Eugenie) but so too would Prince Harry. No wonder there is private talk among supporters of the Royal Family that this could represent an opportunity for the Windsors to regroup and renew.
Of course, should anything happen to William before Prince George reached his majority, there would need to be contingencies. Princess Anne would be the most popular and credible choice – disciplined, experienced, trusted and entirely without vanity.
Prince Edward could also be in the frame. But Anne’s long record and public standing make her the strongest candidate and bridge to a young king’s 18th birthday.
It would mean a monarchy that was leaner in structure and clearer in purpose. More importantly it would be more aligned with the country it serves.
Charles may not have the opportunity to act. William, however, might be the man to seize it.
Robert Jobson is author of The Windsor Legacy