Prince Andrew will have to step down if he fails to make some effort at repentance

When ‘Fergie’ disgraced herself and fell far from public favour a quarter of a century ago, she shed her royal status and became plain Sarah, Duchess of York. This could be a path of rehabilitation for the duke

How do you sack a prince?

In operational terms, the fate of Prince Andrew illustrates the operational procedure perfectly. A statement is issued from Buckingham Palace which states that His Royal Highness has withdrawn from public duties for the foreseeable future, and the Queen has given permission for him to do so. What little of the prince’s dignity is preserved, and the royal family hopes that it can move on.

No one, however, is fooled, and the widespread assumption is that he was forced out by a combination of the Queen, Prince Charles, palace advisers and, possibly, ministerial advice, is near enough to the mark. Just as surely as an idiot team leader on The Apprentice returning from some ill-judged adventure, only to be told “you’re fired!” by Lord Sugar, the Duke of York is being forced to pay for his misjudgements.

Now it is open season on him, appropriately enough for a man who regards a weekend’s shooting of game on a grand royal estate as a perfectly routine way to spend his leisure time (famously in contrast to a trip to Pizza Express). The media are full of even more lurid rumours about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, about his bizarre claims about his inability to perspire, and about which of his outside sponsorships and connections are about to shun him. Another BBC interview, this time with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, is set to pile further shame and ignominy on his name, and drag the royal family into fresh rows, right in the middle of a general election.

Plainly stepping back from public duties may not be enough to satisfy an appalled public, with the prospect of the duke being questioned by the FBI as a strong one for the medium term, as the various cases concerning Epstein make their slow progress through the American courts. At the very least he should volunteer a witness statement. A more recent statement that attempts to redress some of the damage done in his TV interview is no more than a start on this important work.

But the fact remains that he is in an unusual position. If he was an MP, a minister, a CEO, a headteacher, a bishop, a doctor, a naval officer (as it happens)... almost any comparable job in the public realm, he would have had to quit by now, return to obscurity and slowly work his way back into the public’s approval through a long period of penance in hard charitable work.

Yet the Queen’s second son cannot resign from being her second son. He cannot easily be stripped of his royal status or royal titles. He cannot, from the point of view of the royal family, be left to fend for himself by getting a job, assuming anyone would be rash enough to employ him.

The Duke of York, then, is a problem. One possible route to rehabilitation is provided by the example of his former wife. When Sarah Ferguson disgraced herself and fell from public favour a quarter of a century ago, she shed her royal status and became plain Sarah, Duchess of York. She hasn’t enjoyed unalloyed success even in that role, but she is at least sufficiently distanced from the royals’ core activities for that to no longer be much of an issue.

Could Andrew follow the same path – but one that might in due course lead to a more complete restoration of his reputation? It would be a more obviously and complete act of contrition, but the essential task of dealing with the Epstein business is still left undone. Prince Andrew and the institution itself cannot move on until and unless he gives a full and proper account of his behaviour and activities. So far, he has shown a certain reluctance to do so, but the furore after his Newsnight interview proves that he cannot avoid it for ever. As the Prince of Wales starts to think about the monarchy’s medium-term future, it was always going to be difficult for the increasingly marginal Yorks to play much of a useful role, and certainly not a constitutional one. Now they are likely to be shoved further to the sidelines. Like the Kents and Gloucesters before them, they will be peripheral figures.

An abdication, of sorts, will be needed if Andrew fails to make some effort at repentance. If it can be done for a king, as in 1936 via an act of parliament passed in one day, then it could be done for a duke.

As Jeremy Corbyn recently remarked, the monarchy does need some attention. The Queen and the Prince of Wales realise full well that they only reign by the consent of the people – the lesson that was relearnt after the death of Diana in 1997.

They have to move with the times, and respect public opinion. The times are #MeToo, not m’lord. And the public opinion about Prince Andrew could not be clearer: the less seen and heard of him the better, unless the welcome news arrives that he is doing something concrete about helping his former friend Epstein’s victims. It’s the honourable thing to do.