Category Archives: In the News

The New Lord Speaker

Posted on by
Reply

Following the slightly-expedited retirement of the Lord McFall of Alcluith, the Lord Forsyth of Drumlean today sat on the woolsack for the first time as Lord Speaker.

Michael Forsyth’s political career began with a five-year stint (beginning 1978) on Westminster City Council, followed by a fourteen year tenure as Member of Parliament for Stirling, where he was unseated in 1997. In the 1990s he served in a rapid succession of Minister of State roles before peaking at Secretary of State for Scotland in 1995.

He spent two years out of Parliament before receiving a life peerage in 1990. He never returned to ministerial office but did serve in a lot of important (if unglamorous) committees. He was declared Lord Speaker-elect on 12th January, having beaten the crossbencher Baroness Bull (former creative director of the Royal Opera House) by 383 votes to 297. His royal confirmation was notified to the chamber by the Lord Chamberlain of the Household, Lord Benyon. A hustings for the election was filmed by the Hansard Society in December.

Now that the office of Lord Speaker is nearing its twentieth anniversary and is on its fifth holder, it may be prudent to review some statistics:

  • The office has been held by two Ladies (Hayman and D’Souza) and three Lords (Fowler, McFall and Forsyth).
  • Three were born and raised in England (Hayman, D’Souza, Fowler) and two in Scotland (McFall, Forsyth).
  • Two came from the Conservative party (Fowler, Forsyth), two from Labour (Hayman, McFall*) and one the Crossbenches (D’Souza).
  • Hayman and Fowler attended Cambridge (Newnham and Trinity Hall respectively), D’Souza UCL and then Oxford (Lady Margaret Hall), McFall Paisley College of Technology, then the Open University, then the University of Strathclyde; Forsyth the University of St Andrews.
  • The five have had varying levels of prior political experience: Fowler spent thirty-one years in the Commons, eleven of them as Secretary of State; Forsyth had fourteen years, of which two as Secretary of State and five as Minister of State; McFall twenty-three years, of which two-and-a-half as a very junior minister then nine as a very senior committee chair; Hayman spent under five years as an MP (all on the backbenches) but then had four years of ministerial experience in the Lords, of which two in cabinet. D’Souza is the only one never to have been a minister nor a member of the Commons.
  • D’Souza was a peer for seven years before becoming Speaker, Hayman ten, McFall eleven, Fowler fifteen, Forsyth twenty-six.
  • Hayman took office aged 57, D’Souza 67, Forsyth 71, McFall 76 and Fowler 78.

As I have mentioned before, no armorial bearings are known for the first four Lord Speakers (despite Hayman having been on Flags & Heraldry group). Forsyth breaks this trend, as I found his blazon on page 470 of Debrett’s Peerage 2015. The illustration below is by Cakelot1.

  • Escutcheon: Argent a chevronnel engrailed Gules between in chief two griffins respectant Azure armed and membered Gules crowned Or and supporting a square block of roughly dressed sandstone Proper with a ring at each end Sable and in base a hurt charged with a mascle Argent.
  • Crest: A griffin sergeant Azure armed and membered Gules crowned Or and charged on the shoulder with a mascle Argent.
  • Supporters: Two griffins Azure armed and membered Sable crowned Or and each charged on the shoulder with a mascle Argent.
  • Motto: Learn From The Past

It is worth noting also that McFall interviewed Forsyth on the Lord Speaker’s Corner podcast in December 2023. Last week, in the final episode before the handover, McFall was himself interviewed by the Baroness Hazarika (incidentally he interviewed her almost exactly a year before).

*Although McFall had left the Labour group and sat as unaffiliated from 2016.

Reformare vel Florere

Posted on by
Reply

Photograph from 9th July 2024 in the House of Commons Chamber

It has been widely reported in the past few months that Reform UK has experienced significant growth in Parliamentary representation. In July 2024 its caucus in the House of Commons had five members:

  • Lee Ashfield (Ashfield)
  • Nigel Farage (Clacton)
  • Rupert Lowe (Great Yarmouth)
  • James McMurdock (South Basildon & East Thurrock)
  • Richard Tice (Boston & Skegness)

(Anderson is not included in the photograph above because it was an event for new MPs and he had already served since 2019. More on that later.)

Given the history of parties with which Farage has been associated, it should be no surprise that this combination did not last long.

Lowe was the first to go: On 7th March 2025 he was suspended from the party due to bullying allegations. On 30th June that year he launched his own party named Restore Britain. Oddly, on 1st December he then launched a second (though as yet unregistered) local party named Great Yarmouth First. I don’t know of any precedent for the same person leading two self-founded parties simultaneously.

Mc Murdock wasn’t long behind him: On 5th July, the anniversary of his election declaration, he was suspended due to allegations that he fraudulently claimed state loans for his businesses during the pandemic. Three days later he resigned from the party and now sits as an independent.

Losing forty per cent of your original parliamentary party in the first year of that Parliament’s sitting is, to say the least, unfortunate, but the party gained MPs faster than it lost them:

On 1st May 2025 Reform candidate Sarah Pochin narrowly wrought the seat of Runcorn & Helsby in a by-election, following the resignation of disgraced Labour MP Mike Amesbury. On 15th September the shadow junior minister Danny Kruger (East Wiltshire) defected. In January 2026 there were three further defections from the Conservatives to Reform:

  • Robert Jenrick (Newark) on 15th.
  • Andrew Rosindell (Romford) on 18th.
  • Suella Braverman (Fareham & Waterlooville) on 26th.

Rosindell has been mentioned on this blog once before. He is relatively-low profile, being a junior shadow minister under both Cameron and Badenoch (the latter right up until his defection) but missing out on any actual post while his party was in government. Jenrick and Braverman are relative high-flyers, having both been Secretaries of State since 2019 and both contested the Conservative Party leadership at least once.

On 6th December last year, the Lord Offord of Garvel (a junior minister from 2021 to 2024) joined the party, and on 15th January was appointed head of its Scottish branch with the intent to lead the party into the Holyrood elections in May. This gave Reform its first representation in the upper house, but the experience was short-lived because he formally retired on Friday.

Looking at the Reform group in the House of Commons now, this is what we get:

  • Lee Ashfield (original)
  • Suella Braverman (defection)
  • Nigel Farage (original)
  • Robert Jenrick (defection)
  • Danny Kruger (defection)
  • Sarah Pochin (by-election)
  • Andrew Rosindell (defection)
  • Richard Tice (defection)

Nineteen months from the general election, the original group have already become a minority, outnumbered by the newcomers — which feels oddly poignant given how much of the party’s support is based on anxieties about immigration. It’s worth remembering that even among the original group, Ashfield was not new to the House of Commons, having been elected as a Conservative candidate in 2019 and served as that party’s Deputy Chairman as recently as January 2024. It remains to be seen how stable this association will be given that it involves at least two people who only joined the new party after trying and failing to win the crown of the old, and who may not be comfortable for long submitting to the authority of Farage when he has so much less legislative and governmental experience than they do.

As has been pointed out in numerous articles and editorials by now, this illustrates the dilemma facing Reform: They have long leaned on their “outsider”, “anti-establishment” status under their charismatic leader, but now as it looks ever more likely that they could actually win power they obviously need to start acting more like a serious party of government rather than a protest movement, which means getting people on board with experience of how to operate in Whitehall and Westminster. Unfortunately for them, the Conservatives aren’t necessarily sending their best people, so that Farage could end up being forced to present the electorate with a supposedly-revolutionary government composed in no small part of the very same individuals who created the mess against which he’s revolting!

As a counter all this, a new movement has recently emerged called Prosper UK. This is a group within the Conservative Party, rather than a new party in its own right, though ironically the same name was used in 2018-20 for an unrelated (and unsuccessful) minor party under Alan Sked, the original founder of UKIP.

Prosper is predominantly a campaign for the liberal, moderate, “One Nation” (and also Remain-voting) Conservatives who have found themselves increasingly marginalised following the referendum ten years ago.

The Baroness Davidson of Lundin Links, Co-Founder and Co-Chair of Prosper

I found the group’s Wikipedia page with a simple list of the names of its supporters taken directly from its own website. Bit by bit I transformed the simple list into a sortable table with photographs and notes. Unlike the ill-fated Change UK/Independent Group from 2019, Prosper launches with seventy prominent names attached, many of whom have held senior government posts. The downside is that the group looks to be mainly a collection of yesterday’s stars: Among the seventy names in that list I found only three who are currently holding an elected public office (one council leader and two police commissioners). There are no incumbent members of the House of Commons at all, instead the vast majority are former MPs who either stood down or were voted out out some time ago. Fifteen of the former MPs now sit in the House of Lords, as do two of the party’s former leaders in the Scottish and European Parliaments (Davidson and Kirkhope respectively).

Shortly after the launch, Kemi Badenoch gave a speech explicitly rejecting a return to centrism, which means that their prospects of meaningful influence over the direction of the wider party are likely to be very limited for the foreseeable future. Still, at least this whole exercise helped me to bump my edit count up. Labutnum rank, here I come!

Some Small Trifles About Titles

Posted on by
Reply

There was a fair bit of media interest generated two days ago when the Prince of Wales took his elder son to London homeless charity The Passage.

Nowadays most television news broadcasts have a ticker graphic at the bottom of the screen which gives the top few trending headlines. News headlines often adopt a strained form of English which omits various words from a sentence for the sake of concision. When it comes to ticker reels, this is often so that the sentence can fit within the width of the screen without needing to use an illegibly-small font*.

In this case, the BBC ticker reported the royal headline as “George joins Prince William in preparing meal for homeless“, raising the awkward question of why the former’s princely title was omitted while the latter’s was retained. The next was an entirely-unrelated headline about the final of the latest series of Strictly Come Dancing, in which the celebrity finalists were Amber Davies, Karen Carney and George Clarke. The ticker omitted all their surnames, resulting in two adjacent titles involving apparently-mononymous Georges. A viewer unfamiliar with the subject matter could have thought they were the same person. There may have been yet another headline about “Andrew” in the same rotation, but I can’t find the clip on iPlayer to check.

Prince George of Wales in 2023

George Clarke in 2024

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As it turned out, there was a royal connection in the Strictly story: The Queen had written a message to two outgoing presenters, which was read aloud by Craig Revel Horwood during the broadcast. The online text of the message was headed by the Timothy Noad illustration of the royal arms (rather than the impaled arms of the actual sender, as might have been more appropriate), and signed “Camilla R”. Horwood read it out as “Her Royal Highness, Queen Camilla” which of course is not correct. The page on his clipboard is briefly visible but never properly shown to the camera.

For the past year Sir Stephen Fry has been playing the role of Lady Bracknell in a production of The Importance of Being Ernest. He performed a small skit in that role for this year’s Royal Variety Performance. Jason Manford, the host, introduced the character as “Lady Augusta Bracknell”. This another pet peeve of heraldists, for she derives her title as the wife of a peer (of unspecified rank, but presumably not a duke) rather than as the daughter of an earl or above.

*This is less of a problem when the text continually slides from right to left instead of the bar rotating vertically every few seconds.

Jimmy Wales on the BBC

Video

Reply

Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, yesterday gave an interview about the challenges of keeping the project running, including maintaining fidelity in the age of misinformation and staying neutral in the face of (often bad faith) bias allegations from both sides of a paranoid partisan divide. These are of course issues with which the BBC itself is all too familiar.

Two months ago Wales gave a similar interview to Channel 4.

The King’s Cancer Message

Posted on by
Reply

Since the announcement last February that His Majesty had (an unspecified form of) cancer, speculation about the monarch’s health was inevitable. In just the past few days I found a handful of headlines suggesting that he was on death’s door:

The above are the few I can find that are close to original. There were plenty of duplicate headlines either from other news sources that were mirror sites of these, or that repackaged the same articles, or at least referred to these as their source. They all seem to come from one interview with an unnamed royal insider and the story was not picked up by any of the remotely reputable British papers (or even some of the fairly disreputable ones) so I would judge that it is safe to dismiss as trash.

Early yesterday it was announced that Charles III himself would release a message about his experience. Some outlets referred to this as his “cancer journey”. Based on the headlines above, one would expect the message to be that he would soon, well… arrive. The message wasn’t actually released until after 8pm, so for the entire day viewers were held in suspense. This strikes me as perhaps a misstep, since the vacuum allowed further morbid rumours to circulate.

The King actually announced that he was recovering and his treatment could be reduced next year. Clearly, he does expect to see the Christmases of 2026, 2027 and beyond after all.

The message was uploaded on the royal family’s official YouTube channel as a standalone video but it was also broadcast on Channel 4 as part of an episode of Stand Up to Cancer. The video on the YouTube channel was clearly extracted directly from the television broadcast as, unlike their other videos, there were no title cards featuring any royal insignia. Instead all the onscreen graphics were from Channel 4, and it even had the “4” logo in the top left corner throughout. This could be an oversight, or perhaps it was at the channel’s own insistence.

Notes on the German State Visit

Posted on by
Reply

Last week Windsor Castle hosted the last of three state visits this year, featuring Frank-Walter Steinmeier & Elke Büdenbender, President & First Lady of the Federal Republic of Germany.

This one made the news far less (most likely because it was far less controversial) than that of Donald Trump in September. Unlike Trump, Steinmeier was able to partake in the public-facing elements of a state visit, such as the carriage ride through the streets of Windsor and an address in the royal gallery of the House of Lords.

This was in some ways the reciprocation of the state visit which our King & Queen made to Germany in 2023. In his state banquet speech Steinmeier said to Charles

“the fact that your very first trip abroad as King brought you to Germany was a special symbol of the German-British friendship, a gesture of appreciation which meant a great deal to me and to us Germans.”

This is not strictly true as Their Majesties had been planning to visit France first, but that visit was postponed a few months as Macron dealt with protests over state pensions.

The King’s speech at the same event included this quip

“our languages, English and German, [ ] share such deep common roots, but now do sound a little different. It is undoubtedly true, that your language contains a very large number of very long words. As someone who has spent some time trying to learn a little Welsh, I have some sympathy for the proposition that needless gaps between words are a dreadfully inefficient use of paper… “

There was no exchange of honours this time, as Steinmeier had already been appointed an honorary GCB during the aforementioned 2023 visit. He and Charles both wore their red sashes to dinner. The Prime Minister, a KCB, notably continues not to wear his badge.

The Duke of Kent did not attend the state banquet but he later separately met the Bundespräsident at a service at Coventry Cathedral, to commemorate its bombing during the Second World War. It is worth remembering that the Duke is now the only living British prince to have been born before that war started. We got a rare glimpse of his royal cypher on a wreath lain at the old altar.

Steinmeier also had a meeting with Sir Keir Starmer at 10 Downing Street. While his state visit was still going on Starmer also had an unrelated meeting with the Prime Minister of Norway, and already since the President’s departure he has held another “Coalition of the Willing” meeting including Chancellor Merz.

From a ceremonial perspective there is little innovation here (bar a lot of stories about tiaras), as the proceedings stuck closely to the template established by recent precedents. The most interesting parts are His Majesty’s and His Excellency’s speeches, which I think, well, speak for themselves.

Recent state visits have been good opportunities for uploading free-licence photographs to Wikimedia Commons but sadly on this occasion the pickings have been very limited as the government Flickr accounts’ only pictures of Steinmeier are of his visit to Downing Street, leaving out anything involving the royals. Those on the Parliamentary accounts are not released under the correct licence, and it doesn’t look as if the German government has the same attitude to copyright that the British one does so finding anything from their end is also unlikely.

David Lammy and Bleak House

Posted on by
Reply

David Lammy, in his new role as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain and Secretary of State for Justice, has recently announced plans to tackle a long-running backlog of cases in the English & Welsh judicial system by severely narrowing the circumstances in which juries are used for deciding the verdicts in criminal cases, transitioning trials for less serious offences to relying solely on the judge. These plans are highly controversial, with detractors expressing suspicion that he will undermine long-standing principles of English constitutionalism as well as scepticism that the move will actually save any time or money.

Lammy has attracted particular ridicule for a comment in an interview that was reported in The Times two days ago:

I remember studying Bleak House for my A-levels, and the Jarndyce and Jarndyce case that went on and on and on. We cannot go back to a Victorian system in which all new people who are the victims of crime don’t get justice.

The 1853-2 novel Bleak House is a satire of the English court system of the early nineteenth century and is credited with spurring on reforms later in that century, but to use the Jarndyce case (or any of the real one inspiring it) as a justification for Lammy’s proposals is nonsensical as this was a probate case in the Court of Chancery (later succeeded by the Chancery Division in the High Court of England & Wales) not a criminal case, and crucially it did not involve any juries!

Then again, the Lord Chancellor is not the only one to fail to understand that story: Over recent years (well, decades really) there have been growing concerns among the intellectual classes that their own numbers may functional literacy among the populations of developed countries is going into decline. One particular alarm bell was sounded last year in A Study of the Reading Comprehension Skills of English Majors at Two Midwestern Universities, entitled “They Don’t Read Very Well“, which used the first seven paragraphs of Bleak House as the yardstick. A worrying proportion of English majors (for whom reading literature should really be a specialist skill) struggled to understand it.

I listened to the LibriVox recording of Bleak House in 2022 and watched the BBC adaptation of it in 2024. I know from reading through Great Expectations that Dickens, being paid by the word, had a habit of using far too many when far fewer would do, but the idea that his works may be slipping out of human comprehension, even among those who have specifically chosen literature as a course of study, has implications which themselves are bleaker than the house could ever be.

Ongoing Heraldic Stories

Posted on by
Reply

In this post I have new updates on three different heraldry-related stories that I have covered before.

The Greater London Authority

The campaign by the Greater London Authority to acquire the iconic armorial achievement of its predecessor body the Greater London Council has been successful. The King issued a royal warrant on Thursday 13th November authorising the transfer, though frustratingly it the corresponding notice in the London Gazette was not published until yesterday.

British Passports

(I’ve discussed this topic ad nauseam by now so won’t link specific earlier posts.)

It was announced by the Home Office in October that a new British passport design would be coming out which featured Timothy Noad’s illustration of the royal arms with the Tudor crown in place of the previous design favoured by Elizabeth II. Recently the story has been picked up by newspapers as the new passports actually come out.

The Prince & Princess of Wales

I and other heraldists have been waiting for some time to see evidence of William & Catherine updating their personal heraldry to reflect the former’s status as heir apparent. While searching for news stories about the GLA I found articles in Hello!, People, Marie Claire and The News International (though curiously none of the more mainstream outlets) reported that when the couple attended the Royal Variety Performance last month, their invitation printed by the charity featured their conjugal coat of arms in the updated format. The style is very clearly Sodacan, and it looks as if the particular image was created on 12th April 2023 by user Mangwanani but not actually used in any articles until 22nd November this year, presumably for lack of evidence of real-life usage. Whoever found the image for the invitation must have dug rather deeply into Wikimedia Commons to find it. Reports in the aforesaid magazines that the Prince & Princess have made this change themselves seem a little misguided as it would not have been their own office in charge of producing the image, and recent evidence of their own correspondence still shows their old-style cyphers in use (not the lack of an arch on the coronet). This is thus yet another example of Wikipedians not just getting ahead of real life, but actually pushing it along a little, however inadvertently.

The new programme can be contrasted with this one from 2023, which still uses their conjugal arms as Duke & Duchess of Cambridge (or rather as son & daughter-in-law of the heir apparent), even though the new graphic image had already existed for seven months and William had held the status of heir apparent for more than a year. The old graphic still showed Catherine’s shield with a cordelière around it to balance William’s Garter circlet, even though she had been made a GCVO in 2019. Note too that the great many depictions of the main royal arms still alternate between old and new variants.

Update on Andrew

Posted on by
Reply

It has been just over a month since Buckingham Palace announced that Prince Andrew, Duke of York, would be formally stripped of the title of Prince as well as the title Duke of York. Notices to this effect were published in the London Gazette (see my previous posts). I submitted a Freedom of Information Request to the Ministry of Justice to see the full texts of the legal instruments in play. The answer arrived yesterday:

Your request has been handled under the FOIA. I can confirm that the MoJ does hold some information related to your request, it has no plans to publish the texts of the Warrant and Letters Patent relating to the Peerage Roll and title “Prince”. The Warrants relating to the Order of the Garter and Royal Victorian Order are not matters for this Department and you may wish to contact the Cabinet Office to request this information.

This feels like a refusal, and indeed the Ministry’s response does not include the documents I requested, and yet those very same documents were released to the public yesterday.

In the run-up to this I emailed Jason Loch of A Venerable Puzzle, François Velde of Heraldica and David Torrance of the House of Commons Library (no reply from the latter). I also wanted to inform Benjamin Lewis but could not find his contact details. Loch had submitted his own request and has already put out his analyses of both documents. There are many peculiarities compared to other such instruments which might be considered the nearest precedents.

Notable in the patent is that it begins with “AND WHEREAS” in the first clause, when logically that shouldn’t happen until the second. It also doesn’t refer to “Prince Andrew” first and then explain that he is being renamed “Andrew Mountbatten Windsor” but instead refers to him by his plain name from the start. There’s also the fact that the patent omits any greeting and the warrant declines to name a recipient. A lot of the flowery formalities normally seen in documents like this are likewise notable for their absence.

In part these oddities may be a deliberate choice by the Palace in response to the circumstances which forced this action (e.g. Andrew can hardly be called “Most dear and entirely beloved”) and in part they could be explained by the extreme haste in which this operation has been carried out. Even so, questions about constitutional propriety are likely to linger.

There have been further notices in the Gazette yesterday that Andrew’s appointments to the Royal Victorian Order and the Order of the Garter have been revoked. Jason or I may need to submit another request to see those legal instruments now as well.

It should be noted too, that since these instruments were originally signed off Andrew has gone through yet another change of name, very petty this time: The patent and warrant, along with the press release on 30th October, give him the surname “Mountbatten Windsor”, omitting the hyphen that normally appeared there. This was corrected twelve days later, and the Gazette notices from yesterday show his surname in the hyphenated form. This, of course, required the third movement of his Wikipedia page in the space of two months.

UPDATE (29th December)

Loch has appeared on this podcast to discuss the issue.

Belize, Paddington and Royal Variety

Posted on by
1

The Royal Variety Performance for 2025 was held last night, though it won’t be broadcast until next month. This time the Prince & Princess of Wales attended, as they have done in every odd-numbered year since 2015. I mentioned last year that the Royal Variety Charity was extensively using Sodacan’s Wikipedia illustration of Elizabeth II’s British heraldic achievement. Looking at this year’s photographs it appears nothing has changed.

I mentioned last week the oddity of having the Prince of Wales and his aunt the Princess Royal both undertaking prominent overseas diplomatic visits to different places at the same time. This week the Firm leaned further into this by having a married couple, the Duke & Duchess of Edinburgh, simultaneously touring different continents.

The Duke flew to Nigeria to meet with the President and attend a meeting of the Duke of Edinburgh’s International Award programme, founded by and named after his father Prince Philip.

The Duchess went on a tour of South and Central America. She visited the Republics of Peru, Panama and Guatemala, finishing in Belize. The first three were standard-fare bilateral diplomatic visits on behalf of Britain, with the Palace news page explicitly saying they were requested by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (specifically the Foreign part in this instance). In some of the photographs we can see her meeting the host president with a Union Flag prominently displayed beside that of the host state.

The visit to Belize is the more interesting one as, unlike the others, this is a Commonwealth Realm, and indeed this is highlighted multiple times in the press releases, with the Palace Twitter feed even calling it “the Realm of Belize” despite the country having no official long name. By strict Commonwealth constitutional logic Sophie should have been there in her capacity as sister-in-law to the King of Belize, acting on the advice of the Belizean government. Despite this, many of the official reports mentioned bilateral ties between Belize and the United Kingdom, which suggests a deliberate straddling of both thrones. I can’t see any royal standard flown by the Duchess on the other visits, but in Belize she was clearly photographed flying the generic ermine-bordured version. As I have lamented before, royals other than the sovereign himself do not have dedicated heraldic flags for each specific realm save Canada so must default to their British arms even where this causes constitutional confusion.

It is also worth remembering that recently there have been reports of Guatemalan military personal making illegal incursions onto Belizean territory, which was condemned by the Commonwealth. It is a little strange, therefore, that a senior royal should visit both countries in such rapid succession without the incident being brought up.

On a final note, two of the aforementioned stories featured appearances by Paddington Bear: The Duchess of Edinburgh posed with a plush toy of him at the British Embassy in Lima (Peru of course being the character’s country of origin), then the Prince & Princess of Wales greeted an actor in costume at the Royal Albert Hall. Paddington Bear has long been an international icon of British culture. Since his appearance in a video for the Platinum Jubilee celebrations in 2022, he has been particularly associated with the royal family. Some have criticised an apparent cult forming around him. This year Spitting Image created a parody of him to appear alongside the Duke of Sussex in a spoof podcast, which at time of writing is the subject of a lawsuit by Studio Canal.

EXTERNAL LINKS

DUke of Edinburgh

Duchess of Edinburgh

Paddington Bear