Buckingham Palace has “failed to grasp the magnitude” of the Prince Andrew problem and is simply plastering over the cracks for some good PR, the Yorks’ biographer has claimed.

Andrew Lownie, who earlier this year published a book critical of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson, his ex-wife, said that the King should have been firmer and acted much sooner.

He claimed Buckingham Palace had been put under pressure to act by the Government, which had finally had enough after years of inaction.

“I think this is just window dressing,” Mr Lownie told the Telegraph. “I think it’s a fudge, it’s all symbolic and doesn’t really change anything much.”

He said the King should have removed his brother’s titles entirely, rather than just allowing him to put them in abeyance. He said he should have found a way to remove him from Royal Lodge, his vast home in Windsor, and forced the Prince to co-operate with the authorities so that the full extent of his dealings with Jeffrey Epstein, the late sex trafficker and paedophile, was finally uncovered.

The royal historian also claimed the King should have made the announcement himself, demonstrating that he had taken the lead rather than allowing the Prince to suggest he had made the decision himself for the good of the country,

“The fact is that he continues to deny the allegations,” Mr Lownie said of Prince Andrew.

“The statement should have come from Charles. He should have said, ‘Look, I’ve talked to him, we sorted the problem out, we’re appalled by what’s happened and we distance ourselves.

“Instead, Andrew has been allowed to say ‘I’ve decided this and that’ when of course he hasn’t decided anything.”

He said Prince Andrew’s claim that he had stepped aside was “ridiculous” as he had essentially been forced out more than five years ago. “It’s just mealy mouthed stuff, I think the palace must be in another world,” Mr Lownie added.

His book, Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York, charts Andrew’s fall from Falklands war hero to national disgrace, detailing his lucrative business connections with an array of dubious characters in excruciating detail.

The royal is depicted as an arrogant, sex-obsessed womaniser who long courted his position for his own personal gain.

Mr Lownie insists there is more to come.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “I think the palace is worried about new allegations that will emerge Stateside, they know there is more damaging stuff to come.”

In 2023, it emerged that the York family had received a series of payments totalling around £1.4m from Selman Turk, a former Goldman Sachs banker accused of stealing some £40million from a Turkish millionairess, Nebahat Evyap Isbilen. The Duke later reached a confidential settlement with Mrs Isbilen, while Turk, who was jailed for 12 months for contempt of court last year failing to produce evidence, denies fraud.

Meanwhile, among the many opaque business deals involving the Yorks were “unexplained” loans of more than £500,000 paid to Sarah Ferguson by Gate Ventures, a troubled theatre and film investment company whose investors were largely Chinese, when she was a director between 2017 and 2019.

Mr Lownie added: “Neither Sarah or Andrew have ever explained any of their dealings with Epstein. They’ve not explained what this money was that Selman Turk was giving them, what Gate Ventures was paying Sarah for… The real story has yet to come out.”

On the announcement that Prince Andrew had agreed not to use his titles, he said: “I just think that people will feel he hasn’t really paid any penalty for what he’s done.

“There’s been no apology from anyone to the victims, just attempts to distance themselves. It is just a way of trying to tidy up things, to satisfy public opinion. And I am told this came from pressure from the government, not from Charles.

“In the meantime, Andrew gets to live as he always has done. Nothing changes for him. He’ll still have his DoY nameplates, he’ll still have his shooting weekends, he’ll still be making money, quietly, as will she.”

‘Opportunity to lance the boil’

He added of the palace: “This was a real opportunity to lance the boil but all they’ve done is pricked a little corner of it. They could have said, ‘OK, look, you’re on your own now, and we will let the National Crime Agency investigate you’.

“There’s so much more that could be done if they really wanted to deal with it, But they’re just trying to kill off the current headlines – a little bit of plaster on a huge problem.

“Everyone’s saying it’s wonderful, and the monarchy is so open and accountable and responsive, but this is just a fudge.”

b’

‘