MPs have backed a motion from the Liberal Democrats calling for the release of documents on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's appointment as a UK trade envoy.

Before it was passed, Trade Minister Chris Bryant told the Commons the government would comply with the motion "as soon as practicable and possible within law". But he said the release could be constrained by the ongoing police investigation into Andrew.

The former prince faces allegations of sharing sensitive information with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein while in the role. He was arrested last week on suspicion of misconduct in public office and was later released under investigation.

Andrew hasn't responded to the BBC's requests for comment on specific allegations which emerged after the release of so-called Epstein files by the US in January. He has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein.

Meanwhile, in response to calls for Andrew to be removed from the royal line of succession, Bryant said the government is working "at pace" to bring forward legislation to do so.

We're ending our live coverage. You can read more here:

• MPs back move to release files on Andrew's appointment as trade envoy

Image source, UK Parliament/PA

Despite a relatively empty chamber - as noted by our reporter in the Commons - the debate on the release of files relating to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's appointment as trade envoy was almost three hours long.

In the end, the Commons passed the motion demanding the release of files without a vote taking place.

• Leader of the Liberal Democrats Ed Davey, whose party put forward the motion, said: "Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has shamed our country and the Royal Family"
• Trade Minister Chris Bryant called the former prince a "rude, arrogant and entitled man"
• He said the government supported the motion to release the files, but warned that the release of the documents could take time
• In the Commons, MPs did not hold back with their language on Andrew, our royal correspondent reports
• One Lib Dem MP called Andrew's association with Epstein "poisonous", while a Green MP said the Royal Family has historically been "sheltered from scrutiny in too many ways"
• The Tory shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, meanwhile, said the government "could have been much more proactive on this issue right from the start"
• As a reminder, Andrew has not responded to the BBC's requests for comment on specific allegations that have emerged after the US release of files in January related to the late financier. He has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein

Just before MPs passed the motion, Bryant took a moment to "praise the work of our present trade envoys", who he said are "all accountable through the minister of trade and through the department".

Pivoting to calls for Andrew to be removed from the line of succession, Bryant said the government is "working at pace on this and we intend to be able to bring forward legislation when we can" - but said he wasn't able to commit to a specific date.

The minister said this situation "wasn't about power, this was about influence and influence can be just as pernicious".

"I would dearly, dearly love to be able to stand at this despatch box and say that it will never happen again," he said, "but I would bet my bottom dollar that there are young people today who are being abused by rich, wealthy, arrogant, entitled people and it will continue".

He added: "We must do everything in our power to make sure that the deference, influence and complicity does not allow that to happen. But in the end, the only recourse we have is the court of law."

The chamber passes the motion without a vote.

As a reminder, the motion submitted by the Liberal Democrats requests the release of documents related to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's appointment as a UK trade envoy in 2001 - more on what's included here.

Bryant finishes the session by restating that the government intends to comply with the motion "as soon as practicable and possible within law".

He says it will work "for maximum transparency and timeliness", but adds that "where documents may speak materially to the offence of misconduct in public office, or any other offence that may be considered by police, we will have to follow the advice of prosecuting authorities".

In response to calls from MPs to launch an inquiry, Bryant says he is "somewhat cautious" about the process of seeking multi-part public inquiries in relation to this.

The minister adds that the timeline for prosecuting authorities is down to them, and that they must "proceed without fear or favour".

Closing remarks will give sense of what government is willing to commit topublished at 15:26 GMT

15:26 GMT

Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons

Speaking now is Trade Minister Sir Chris Bryant - and his winding up speech will be worth listening to.

The Lib Dems have quite a shopping list of suggestions - a full public inquiry, legislation to remove Andrew from the line of succession, ending the convention that prevents MPs from criticising the Royal Family, or even mentioning them, in debate.

They also want unredacted documents to be published.

Bryant is unlikely to commit to all - or any - of these, but he may give a sense of where the government are on them.

Away from the Commons, and the chair of the Business and Trade Committee says a potential inquiry into the trade envoy system can only begin once legal proceedings against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor are concluded.

The former prince was appointed as a trade envoy in 2001 and held the role for 10 years. The cross-party committee has been considering whether to launch an inquiry.

Chair Liam Byrne says the committee will "begin gathering information immediately so that we might stand ready to launch an inquiry into the governance regime for trade envoys at the moment the police and criminal justice system action has concluded".

He adds that the committee will write to ministers and only launch the inquiry depending on "the information we receive."

Today's debate in the Commons is still ongoing - you can watch live at the top of the page.

Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons

The debate seems to be drawing to a close, as Lib Dem leader Ed Davey returns to the chamber and the party’s Cabinet Office spokeswoman, Lisa Smart, begins her speech.

The motion is likely to go through on the nod, without a vote.

Liberal Democrat MP Luke Taylor turns to Andrew's position in the line of succession - he is currently eighth in line to the throne.

Taylor says that when pictures of Andrew and Epstein walking together in New York were published in 2011, the King's brother was fourth in line to the throne.

"At the time that that scandal was occurring how close he was to the throne. It's disgusting," Taylor says.

"I'm going to ask the minister specifically if he can give us an update on legislation that the government might bring forward to remove Andrew from the line of succession," he adds.

• For context, the government is considering introducing legislation to remove Andrew from the line of succession. Removing him would require an Act of Parliament, as well as the consent of the other countries in the Commonwealth where King Charles is currently head of state

Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons

This is starting to feel a bit like the Lib Dem conference, as their MPs interrupt each other to make supportive comments and suggestions.

Image source, UK Parliament

Speaking about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, Lib Dem MP Helen Morgan says: "This association with one of the most despicable paedophiles in history, at the heart of the British establishment, is absolutely poisonous".

• As a reminder, Andrew has not responded to the BBC's requests for comment on specific allegations that have emerged after the US release of files in January related to the late financier. He has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein

Morgan gives way to fellow Lib Dem Daisy Cooper, who asks whether she agrees what is unfolding is a "conspiracy of silence".

Morgan agrees, saying: "What we have seen here, is complicity by people at the heart of the British establishment, who we are in the right place to hold to account."

Image source, House of Commons

"The Royal Family is sheltered from scrutiny in too many ways," says Green Party MP Sian Berry. "It's very clear now what a risk this can pose."

She cites Section 37 of the Freedom of Information Act, which she says exempts communications between "relevant authorities" and "not just the King, but wider members of the Royal Family", from being publicly disclosed.

"This is a serious transparency loophole for royals that must be closed," Berry says.

She says that she has tabled a motion for the release of all communications between members of the Royal Family and Jeffrey Epstein.

"If reports are correct, that the Royal Family were aware of concerns about Andrew's financial dealings ahead of his appointment [as trade envoy]", she says, and "there are serious questions about whether and how that knowledge matches the King's statement" released in the aftermath of Andrew's arrest.

• For context, following Andrew's arrest, the King released a statement saying that he had "learned with the deepest concern" about the allegations against his brother, but that the police had his "full and wholehearted support and cooperation"

In response to those reports over the weekend, Buckingham Palace said it would not be making any comment while the police investigation is ongoing.

Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons

Liberal Democrats leader Sir Ed Davey nods vigorously as O’Hara asks what else Davey could have said when he was asked about Andrew’s performance in the role of trade envoy when he was a junior minister.

Davey has come in for a lot of flak for saying Andrew was doing an “excellent job” in 2011, which has taken some of the shine off his party’s big Commons moment today.

O’Hara is making a strong attack on the convention that prevents MPs from criticising members of the Royal Family.

He quotes the “late great” Labour MP Paul Flynn who said MPs have “to remove the bandages from our mouths” when it comes to the Royals.

Davey had accused Flynn, a staunch Republican, of “spreading innuendo” about Andrew in 2011. The Lib Dem leader has said he now regrets his comments.

The SNP's Brendan O'Hara says files relating to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's appointment as trade envoy must be released in full, and it is "the very least [Epstein's] victims and the survivors deserve".

He says there are "serious questions" that need to be answered about Andrew's appointment.

This, he says, includes: "Who vetted him? Was he vetted at all? What role did Peter Mandelson play in making this appointment happen? What in his previous life made him uniquely suitable for the position of UK trade envoy?"

He also asks about warnings that were given about Andrew's character, and who scrutinised his behaviour.

Pressure on the Royal Household to answer questionspublished at 14:28 GMT

14:28 GMT

Daniela Relph
Senior royal correspondent

This won’t be an easy watch for Buckingham Palace - it is uncomfortable and unsettling to hear a member of the Royal Family criticised so heavily.

There is pressure on the Royal Household to answer so many questions.

But for now, the Palace believes their role is to support the Thames Valley Police investigation.

Lib Dem MP Monica Harding says that in the early-2000s she was working overseas with the British Council, in a location Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor visited as part of his role as a UK trade envoy.

She says: "His reputation preceded him.

"I was told... that overseas missions feared putting him out there in case he said something inappropriate, that he was arrogant, and that he wasn't on top of the detail of his brief... it was thought that he would do damage."

Harding continues, asking: "On what basis for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor given the role as trade envoy? Who put him forward and was there resistance to it?"

Image source, House of Commons

Image source, UK Parliament

Labour MP Rachael Maskell says: "The web of abuse surrounding Epstein and his associates must be brought to book."

She adds that "Mr Mountbatten-Windsor, as a known associate, must also be held to account in his role as a special trade envoy, and for his associations too."

• As a reminder, Andrew has not responded to the BBC's requests for comment on specific allegations that have emerged after the US release of files in January related to the late financier. He has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein.

Maskell says it needs to be understood "how signing off for massages became the duty of the taxpayer", and that there needs to be processes where "people can raise concern wherever they see that".

The Labour MP is referring to a claim from whistleblowing retired civil servants that Andrew charged taxpayers for massages and excessive travel costs while working as the UK's trade envoy.

The Department for Business and Trade has not challenged the claim about Andrew's time as envoy, between 2001 and 2011, but has referred to the ongoing police investigation into the former prince.

MPs are not holding back in their language on Andrewpublished at 14:07 GMT

14:07 GMT

Daniela Relph
Senior royal correspondent

It is incredibly striking to hear a member of the Royal Family discussed in this way in the House of Commons.

MPs sharing their experiences of Andrew Mountbatten Windsor – not holding back in their language and description of him.

But the conversation is changing on a story that touches on privilege, deference, public money, political influence and the Royal Family.

Convention and restraint no longer feel right when the public wants answers or - at the very least - hear conversations are being had at the highest level.

Next up is Alex Burghart, the Conservative shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

He says his party supports the motion, and that it is "quite right that this House is enabled to scrutinise what went on and how it went on".

Burghart says he "appreciates the way" the government is going to co-operate with the motion, but says it "could have been much more proactive on this issue right from the start".

Image source, House of Commons

The government will make sure "every single part of government co-operates entirely with both the Thames Valley Police and any other investigations by any other police force that there may be on whatever they may be investigating", Bryant says.

Lib Dem MP Tessa Munt asks the minister whether he agrees that it is "timely" that the government now "presses ahead with the Public Office Accountability Bill", and passes an amendment which would allow an "independent... High Court judge [to] say what may and may not be released".

Bryant replies: "We will put everything into the public domain when we can. I don't want to do so at a time which would make it impossible for the police to secure the proper processes."

He adds that he is "not sure that adding an intervening person helps that process".