On Monday, November 24, 2025, the Mid and East Antrim Council will convene to discuss a proposal that has stirred both local and national attention: the potential renaming of Prince Andrew Way in Carrickfergus, County Antrim. The street, which has carried the name of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor for nearly four decades, now finds itself at the center of a wider debate regarding the Royal Family, public memory, and the evolving standards by which public honors are bestowed—and, sometimes, withdrawn.
Originally named in 1986 to commemorate Andrew’s marriage to Sarah Ferguson, Prince Andrew Way has for years been just another street sign to most passersby. But the events of recent months have transformed it into a lightning rod for controversy. According to BBC, the King initiated a formal process in October 2025 to remove his brother’s royal titles. This move followed renewed scrutiny over Andrew’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein—a relationship that has cast a long shadow over the Royal Family. The controversy deepened after the emergence of emails from 2011, showing Andrew in contact with Epstein months after he had publicly claimed their friendship had ended.
In a personal statement issued in October 2025, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor announced he would be relinquishing all of his royal titles, including the Duke of York and Baron Killyleagh—titles that had been part of his identity for decades. The formal stripping of these titles was published earlier this month, marking a significant and public break from royal tradition. As the BBC reports, this included the title of Baron Killyleagh, which had been awarded to Andrew by his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, on his wedding day in 1986.
The proposal to rename Prince Andrew Way was put forward by the Alliance party and is scheduled for discussion at the council’s monthly meeting. The motion itself is carefully worded, calling for a new street name that would "maintain the important link to the Royal Family" even as it distances the community from the controversy now associated with Andrew’s name. One suggestion gaining traction is to rename the street in honor of Queen Elizabeth II, as a "fitting tribute" to the late monarch and a way of honoring her legacy while moving forward from the current difficulties.
Other political parties, including the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), have also voiced support for renaming the street. However, as of the council’s meeting date, it remains unclear exactly how long the process will take should the proposal be approved. Local government procedures for street renaming can be protracted, involving consultations with residents, businesses, and possibly even postal authorities. For the small number of homes and businesses situated on Prince Andrew Way, the change would mean new addresses, updated records, and perhaps a period of adjustment—though for many, the symbolic importance of the move far outweighs the logistical inconvenience.
This is not the first time a community has grappled with the question of whether to maintain honors for a public figure whose reputation has been tarnished. In fact, debates over statues, street names, and public memorials have become increasingly common across the United Kingdom and beyond, as societies reckon with the legacies of historical figures in the light of contemporary values. What makes the Prince Andrew Way case particularly notable, however, is the recency of the events and the direct involvement of the Royal Family—a family whose public image is often carefully managed and fiercely protected.
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s association with Jeffrey Epstein has been a source of ongoing difficulty for the Royal Family. Despite Andrew’s repeated and strong denials of any wrongdoing, the re-emergence of the 2011 emails and the subsequent decision by the King to initiate the removal of Andrew’s titles have only intensified public scrutiny. According to BBC, the formal process to strip Andrew of his titles was not only initiated but completed and officially published within a matter of weeks—an unusually swift timeline for such a significant royal action.
The Alliance party’s proposal to rename the street while still maintaining a connection to the Royal Family reflects a desire to balance respect for tradition with the need to respond to changing public sentiment. The suggestion to honor Queen Elizabeth II, in particular, has broad appeal across the political spectrum. As the motion notes, the council has been "considering ways to honour Queen Elizabeth II," and a street renaming could serve as a "fitting tribute"—a gesture that acknowledges both the community’s history and its present-day values.
For residents of Carrickfergus, the debate is about more than just a street sign. It is a reflection of how communities choose to remember, honor, and sometimes reevaluate their connections to national figures. Some locals see the proposed change as overdue, given the gravity of the allegations surrounding Andrew and the decisive actions taken by the Royal Family. Others are more cautious, emphasizing the importance of due process and the risks of erasing history rather than learning from it.
Political leaders in the area have, for the most part, rallied around the idea of renaming the street. The DUP’s support, along with that of the Alliance party, suggests a rare moment of consensus in a region often marked by political division. Still, the actual process of change—should it be approved—will require careful navigation of both bureaucratic and emotional hurdles.
As the council prepares for its meeting, the eyes of local residents and national observers alike will be on Carrickfergus. The outcome may set a precedent for how other communities across the UK handle similar situations in the future. Will more streets, buildings, or public spaces bearing the names of controversial figures be reconsidered? Or will communities seek to contextualize, rather than erase, the legacies of those whose actions have come under question?
For now, the fate of Prince Andrew Way hangs in the balance, awaiting the outcome of a council vote that is as much about the past as it is about the future. Whatever decision is reached, it will speak volumes about how this corner of Northern Ireland—and perhaps the country as a whole—chooses to navigate the complex intersection of history, honor, and accountability.
