administrative
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 5:00 pm
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Cc: Matt Torbit [DPMC] <[email address]>; Kathrine Wigley [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hi Finn (Matt and Kathrine, fyi)
Here’s a suggested response with an outline of the process. 9(2)(g)(i)
In October 2025, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor made a public statement that he no longer
intended to use the honours that had been conferred on him. The New Zealand 1990
Commemoration Medal had been conferred on him, along with other members of the
Royal Family, in 1990.
When a person voluntarily relinquishes an honour, the award still needs to be formally
cancelled. In the case of an award of the 1990 Medal to a member of the Royal Family, the
warrant establishing the medal states that it must be the Sovereign who cancels the award
(not the Governor-General).
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/1990/0024/latest/whole.html
The Prime Minister wrote to the King in November 2025 to recommend that the King direct
that the award of the 1990 Medal be cancelled and annulled, and that Mr Mountbatten-
Windsor’s name be erased from the Register of the Medal. The Palace advised that the
cancellation had been approved in December 2025. The Clerk of the Executive Council
wrote to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor in December 2025 to inform him that the award of the
Medal had been cancelled.
The warrant establishing the 1990 Medal does not require the publication in the New
Zealand Gazette of the cancellation of an award of the Medal. This is in contrast to a
number of other honours, where gazettal of forfeiture is required.
Happy to discuss further. If you could forward me your final response, I’ll let the Palace
know.
Rachel
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 3:47 pm
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: FW: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
From: Journalist 9(2)(a)
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 3:26 PM
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
Thanks Finn, yes I saw the statement, thank you.
RE: the medal, I can't see any notice or reporting of this. What was the process - did
the PM write to the GG? Can we get a copy of the letter? And how come it wasn't
made public at the time (apologies if I am missing it).
--
Journalist 9(2)(a)
On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 3:20 PM Finn Stichbury
<[email address]> wrote:
Hi 9(2)(a)
The award to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor of the New Zealand 1990 Commemoration
Medal was cancelled in December 2025, by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister.
On your second question, assuming you’ve now seen our statements on it but the below
is attributable to a spokesperson for the PM:
“If the UK Government proposes to remove Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the order
of succession, New Zealand would support it. The UK Government has said any
proposals would come after the police investigation concludes.”
Cheers
Finn
From: Journalist 9(2)(a)
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 11:27 AM
To: PMO-Press <[email address]>
Subject: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
Kia ora all,
In 1990, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was awarded the New Zealand 1990
Commemoration Medal (to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the signing of
the Treaty of Waitangi).
Can I ask if the PM has written to the Governor-General about beginning the
procedure of stripping him of the medal? If so, can you give more detail (such as
when, and what is the process?)
The Australian government has confirmed it would support any proposal to
remove Mr Mountbatten-Winsdor from the royal line of succession. Does the NZ
government support this move and has support been expressed?
Many thanks,
Journalist 9(2)(a)
--
Journalist 9(2)(a)
The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is
subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of the copyright owner. If
you have received this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. Stuff
Limited does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet
communications are not secure, therefore Stuff Limited does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or attached
files.
The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have
received this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. Stuff Limited does not
guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not secure,
therefore Stuff Limited does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Grace Miles [DPMC]; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
Subject:
FW: UK Cabinet Office
Date:
Tuesday, 24 February 2026 2:46:40 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
Just confirming that I have spoken to Finn and indicated the areas where the timeline has
got confused.
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 2:01 pm
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>; PMO-Press <PMO-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: UK Cabinet Office
Thanks Rachel, can you please cast your eye over this rough transcript and I’ll give you a
call soon:
Amelia Wade: Why is New Zealand supporting the removal of Andrew Mountbatten?
PM: Oh look, the UK Government’s leading that work and that decision. All I’ve said is we’ll
definitely support whatever they come to and we would definitely support that. We’ve been
in contact with the UK Cabinet Office over the last week or so and our view is the UK
Government wanting to put all options on the table. Obviously, the investigation needs to
close out before they would then pass legislation to remove him from the line of
succession. The bottom line is no one’s above the law and once that investigation’s
closed, should the UK Government decide they want to remove him from the line of
succession.
Adam Hollingworth: So you wouldn’t go in like Anthony Albanese and pre-emptively write a
letter then?
PM: We’ve already been in conversation with the UK Cabinet Office and they know we are
supportive should they remove him from the line of succession, we would be very
supportive of that decision.
Jason Walls: What do those conversations look like, with the Cabinet Office, who were you
specifically talking to?
PM: Well our Cabinet Office talks to their Cabinet Office and we have conversations with
the UK Government at an official level all the time.
Jason Walls: Was it you personally?
PM: No. But it’s our officials and our position’s well understood and that’s been important
and I’m telling you what our position is now.
Jason Walls: Do you think it’s important that prime minister Anthony Albanese made this
very public declaration, he wrote a letter, do you think it’s important that you do something
the same, rather than leaving it at an official to official level?
PM: Well I think it’s important that the UK Government are leading on their thinking around
the line of succession. They will only pass legislation once all investigations are
completed. All I’ve signalled to them and they well understand out position which is that
we would very much support that. They have to go off obviously and get support of 14
Realm countries around the world and should they come to that decision, that’s something
we would be very supportive of.
Amelia Wade: Why was this announcement made in a WhatsApp message rather than an
official letter?
PM: We can announce it any way, our position is clear. It’s the same position as the
Australian position but rather than a formal letter, we’ve been having conversations
directly with the UK Government as you’d expect.
Jason Walls: Why not do both? A formal letter is a powerful message to something that has
been a messy saga really underplays it. (?)
PM: So guys, I just say, if you want to get caught in process, this is a story where we’ve
made it very clear. Should the UK Government remove him from the line of succession
after they’ve completed all investigations, which is what the UK Government is telling us is
what they would do. All we’ve signalled is that we would support that. I’m telling you
publicly, we’re talking about it now. That’s the key thing. Should he be removed from the
line of succession, New Zealand would support that decision.
Amelia Wade: Do you think this whole saga has been damaging for the royal family?
PM: Well again, nobody’s above the law. I’m conscious there’s an ongoing investigation in
place but we expect everybody to be treated by the law. What we have seen has been
incredibly disturbing, incredibly concerning. But as I said, should he be removed? And
that’s something the UK Government wants to do and if there’s anything else, they’ve got
all options on the table.
Amelia Wade: Why is this action [unclear] and it wasn’t [unclear] on the release of Virginia
Giuffre’s memoir?
PM: Well again, new information has come to light, obviously the UK Government leads a
conversation about line of succession. It does need the sign on of 14 other Realm
countries, from memory. And all we can do is say “look, we’d be very supportive of that,
should that be the decision of the UK Government.” We would sign up for that. This has
been a horrific amount of abuse that has taken place across this country, across the world,
you’ve seen elites involved and connected to Epstein in a way that is just utterly
unacceptable but again, we’ve got an investigation going on. The UK Government by its
own admission says that all options are on the table. But they will look at legislation and
what they need to do post that investigation playing out.
Jason Walls: This saga has again spurred republicans in New Zealand to ask the question,
should we still be part of the commonwealth?
PM: I haven’t seen a lot of public media reporting of republican views in light of all of that. I
think everyone finds the Epstein situation abhorrent. Everyone finds the abuse of young
women in the way that has clearly happened unacceptable and just abhorrent again and as
you know it’s about a specific issue in this case, which has been talked about in the UK this
week. We just want to reassure the British Government that should they make that
decision, we would support that.
Adam Hollingworth: [Unclear] a bad egg isn’t it?
PM: We don’t make that decision. You make the process in terms of constitutional line of
succession. It’s legislation that needs to get passed, led by the UK Government but with
the endorsement and support of the other Realm countries. The UK Government has
stressed to us, there’s an investigation ongoing. That needs to get closed out before any
legislation would be implemented and brought to their parliament. Of course, all I’m
signalling is should they wish to remove him from the line of succession, we would support
that.
Jason Walls: On the communication between our Cabinet Office and their Cabinet Office,
did that happen before or after Anthony Albanese’s letter?
PM: We’ve talked about this over recent days.
Jason Walls: So before the letter came out?
PM: Yes.
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 1:28 PM
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>; PMO-Press <PMO-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: UK Cabinet Office
Importance: High
Further to this Finn, we’ve just seen Stuff reporting the PM as saying the NZ Cabinet Office
had communicated its position prior to Mr Albanese’s letter to Keir Starmer – the inference
in the article is that the position we communicated before the Australian letter was that NZ
would support removing AMW if the UK proposed it. As you know, that’s not correct – you
may wish to clarify.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360942752/luxon-says-he-open-andrew-being-cut-line-
succession
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 1:22 pm
To: Finn S tichbury <[email address]>; PMO-Press <pmo-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: UK Cabinet Office
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora Finn
Just noting for your information the dates of our exchanges with the UK Cabinet Office
about the line of succession and AMW:
Sunday 22 February late evening: the UK Cabinet Office sent us an email setting out
the UK government’s position on succession. I responded to acknowledge receipt.
Monday 23 February – NZ Cabinet Office informed the UK Cabinet Office that in
response to media queries PMO would point to the UK position.
Tuesday 24 February – NZ Cabinet Office advised UK Cabinet Office that if the UK
Government proposes to remove Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the order of
succession, New Zealand would support it.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Finn Stichbury; PMO-Press
Cc:
Nicola Purvis [DPMC]; Grace Miles [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: UK Cabinet Office
Date:
Tuesday, 24 February 2026 2:06:32 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
Thanks Finn – call when it suits you.
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 2:01 pm
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>; PMO-Press <PMO-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: UK Cabinet Office
Thanks Rachel, can you please cast your eye over this rough transcript and I’ll give you a
call soon:
Amelia Wade: Why is New Zealand supporting the removal of Andrew Mountbatten?
PM: Oh look, the UK Government’s leading that work and that decision. All I’ve said is we’ll
definitely support whatever they come to and we would definitely support that. We’ve been
in contact with the UK Cabinet Office over the last week or so and our view is the UK
Government wanting to put all options on the table. Obviously, the investigation needs to
close out before they would then pass legislation to remove him from the line of
succession. The bottom line is no one’s above the law and once that investigation’s
closed, should the UK Government decide they want to remove him from the line of
succession.
Adam Hollingworth: So you wouldn’t go in like Anthony Albanese and pre-emptively write a
letter then?
PM: We’ve already been in conversation with the UK Cabinet Office and they know we are
supportive should they remove him from the line of succession, we would be very
supportive of that decision.
Jason Walls: What do those conversations look like, with the Cabinet Office, who were you
specifically talking to?
PM: Well our Cabinet Office talks to their Cabinet Office and we have conversations with
the UK Government at an official level all the time.
Jason Walls: Was it you personally?
PM: No. But it’s our officials and our position’s well understood and that’s been important
and I’m telling you what our position is now.
Jason Walls: Do you think it’s important that prime minister Anthony Albanese made this
very public declaration, he wrote a letter, do you think it’s important that you do something
the same, rather than leaving it at an official to official level?
PM: Well I think it’s important that the UK Government are leading on their thinking around
the line of succession. They will only pass legislation once all investigations are
completed. All I’ve signalled to them and they well understand out position which is that
we would very much support that. They have to go off obviously and get support of 14
Realm countries around the world and should they come to that decision, that’s something
we would be very supportive of.
Amelia Wade: Why was this announcement made in a WhatsApp message rather than an
official letter?
PM: We can announce it any way, our position is clear. It’s the same position as the
Australian position but rather than a formal letter, we’ve been having conversations
directly with the UK Government as you’d expect.
Jason Walls: Why not do both? A formal letter is a powerful message to something that has
been a messy saga really underplays it. (?)
PM: So guys, I just say, if you want to get caught in process, this is a story where we’ve
made it very clear. Should the UK Government remove him from the line of succession
after they’ve completed all investigations, which is what the UK Government is telling us is
what they would do. All we’ve signalled is that we would support that. I’m telling you
publicly, we’re talking about it now. That’s the key thing. Should he be removed from the
line of succession, New Zealand would support that decision.
Amelia Wade: Do you think this whole saga has been damaging for the royal family?
PM: Well again, nobody’s above the law. I’m conscious there’s an ongoing investigation in
place but we expect everybody to be treated by the law. What we have seen has been
incredibly disturbing, incredibly concerning. But as I said, should he be removed? And
that’s something the UK Government wants to do and if there’s anything else, they’ve got
all options on the table.
Amelia Wade: Why is this action [unclear] and it wasn’t [unclear] on the release of Virginia
Giuffre’s memoir?
PM: Well again, new information has come to light, obviously the UK Government leads a
conversation about line of succession. It does need the sign on of 14 other Realm
countries, from memory. And all we can do is say “look, we’d be very supportive of that,
should that be the decision of the UK Government.” We would sign up for that. This has
been a horrific amount of abuse that has taken place across this country, across the world,
you’ve seen elites involved and connected to Epstein in a way that is just utterly
unacceptable but again, we’ve got an investigation going on. The UK Government by its
own admission says that all options are on the table. But they will look at legislation and
what they need to do post that investigation playing out.
Jason Walls: This saga has again spurred republicans in New Zealand to ask the question,
should we still be part of the commonwealth?
PM: I haven’t seen a lot of public media reporting of republican views in light of all of that. I
think everyone finds the Epstein situation abhorrent. Everyone finds the abuse of young
women in the way that has clearly happened unacceptable and just abhorrent again and as
you know it’s about a specific issue in this case, which has been talked about in the UK this
week. We just want to reassure the British Government that should they make that
decision, we would support that.
Adam Hollingworth: [Unclear] a bad egg isn’t it?
PM: We don’t make that decision. You make the process in terms of constitutional line of
succession. It’s legislation that needs to get passed, led by the UK Government but with
the endorsement and support of the other Realm countries. The UK Government has
stressed to us, there’s an investigation ongoing. That needs to get closed out before any
legislation would be implemented and brought to their parliament. Of course, all I’m
signalling is should they wish to remove him from the line of succession, we would support
that.
Jason Walls: On the communication between our Cabinet Office and their Cabinet Office,
did that happen before or after Anthony Albanese’s letter?
PM: We’ve talked about this over recent days.
Jason Walls: So before the letter came out?
PM: Yes.
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 1:28 PM
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>; PMO-Press <PMO-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: UK Cabinet Office
Importance: High
Further to this Finn, we’ve just seen Stuff reporting the PM as saying the NZ Cabinet Office
had communicated its position prior to Mr Albanese’s letter to Keir Starmer – the inference
in the article is that the position we communicated before the Australian letter was that NZ
would support removing AMW if the UK proposed it. As you know, that’s not correct – you
may wish to clarify.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360942752/luxon-says-he-open-andrew-being-cut-line-
succession
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 1:22 pm
To: Finn S tichbury <[email address]>; PMO-Press <pmo-
[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: UK Cabinet Office
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora Finn
Just noting for your information the dates of our exchanges with the UK Cabinet Office
about the line of succession and AMW:
Sunday 22 February late evening: the UK Cabinet Office sent us an email setting out
the UK government’s position on succession. I responded to acknowledge receipt.
Monday 23 February – NZ Cabinet Office informed the UK Cabinet Office that in
response to media queries PMO would point to the UK position.
Tuesday 24 February – NZ Cabinet Office advised UK Cabinet Office that if the UK
Government proposes to remove Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the order of
succession, New Zealand would support it.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Grace Miles [DPMC]; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
Subject:
Fw: can you send me the final wording of your response on succession?
Date:
Tuesday, 24 February 2026 12:12:45 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
I've just let Finn know he should tell Hon Goldsmith's office as Justice administer the
Royal Succession Act - I'll give Kim Smith at MOJ a call.
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 11:53:20 AM
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: can you send me the final wording of your response on succession?
Here is a comment attributable to a spokesperson for the Prime Minister:
If the UK Government proposes to remove Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the order of
succession, New Zealand would support it. The UK Government has said any proposals
would come after the police investigation concludes.
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 11:53 AM
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Subject: can you send me the final wording of your response on succession?
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
classification - administrative
So I can send it on – the PM can then say the UK government has been informed.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Finn Stichbury
Cc:
PMO-Press; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]; PM Office staff
; ^Parliament: Cameron Burrows; Grace Miles
[DPMC]
9(2)(a)
Subject:
Re: Draft comment on Andrew
Date:
Tuesday, 24 February 2026 11:21:05 am
Thanks Finn - just confirming there are 15 Realms.
9(2)(g)(i)
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 10:52 AM
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Cc: PMO-Press <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>; ^Parliament: SarahBoyle
PM Office Staff 9(2)(a)
; ^Parliament: Cameron Burrows
<[email address]>
Subject: Draft comment on Andrew
Hi Rachel,
Here is a draft response for feedback.
Attributable to a spokesperson for the PM:
9(2)(g)(i)
Finn Stichbury
Chief Press Secretary
Office of Rt Hon Chris Luxon
021 528 488
From:
PM
To:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Office
Cc:
Nicola Purvis [DPMC]; Grace Miles [DPMC]
Staff
Subject:
RE: line of succession
Date:
Monday, 23 February 2026 4:08:34 pm
9(2)(a)
Attachments:
image001.png
Thanks Rachel
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 23 February 2026 3:48 PM
To: PM Office Staff 9(2)(a)
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: line of succession
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora 9(2)(a)
Just letting you know as our chief PMO Royal person that we had correspondence from the
UK Cabinet Office over the weekend, setting out their public position on calls to remove
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession:
6(a) & 6(b)(i)
I have shared that with Finn and PMO Media, and they are using a standard line to respond
to media inquiries – there have been a couple from the UK today.
You may remember the process that New Zealand went through when the law of
succession was amended in 2013 so that it was no longer based on gender. The changes
were agreed at a meeting alongside the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in
Perth, Australia, in October 2011, and in subsequent discussions between the Realms.
New Zealand had to pass its own legislation, which occurred in 2013, but the
commencement of that legislation had to wait until all the Realms were in a position to
introduce the changes, to avoid asymmetric rules of Royal succession arising across the
Realms. That took quite a while - by agreement, all the Realms finally took steps to
commence their legislation on the same day in March 2015. Hopefully that experience
ironed out the process so it would be more streamlined today if further changes were to be
made.
New Zealand took a leading role in those reforms, in terms of coordinating the Reams, at
the request of the Palace. If a change is proposed to remove Mr Mountbatten Windsor from
the line of succession, I anticipate that the UK would take the lead this time.
This is all just for your information at the moment, but always happy to discuss.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
DPMC Media [DPMC]
To:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC];
DPMC Media [DPMC]
Cc:
Cherie Blithe [DPMC]; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]; Grace Miles [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Monday, 23 February 2026 9:45:34 am
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Great, thanks Rachel. I can let MFAT know it will go to PMO
-Blair
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 23 February 2026 9:27 am
To: DPMC Media [DPMC] <[email address]>
Cc: Cherie Blithe [DPMC] <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>; Grace Miles [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Thanks Blair – we’ve had a bit more info over the weekend from the UK Cabinet Office, so
we might have a more than no comment response – leave it with us to prepare a response
for PMO.
From: DPMC Media [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 23 February 2026 9:25 am
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Cc: DPMC Media [DPMC] <[email address]>; Cherie Blithe [DPMC]
<[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>; Grace
Miles [DPMC] <
[email address]>
Subject: FW: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Kia ora Rachel,
We’ve received the below from MFAT on AMB – let us know your view on DPMC taking this
one, or passing to PMO (noting the appropriate response either way will be no comment)
Ngā manaakitanga
Blair
From: MEDIA <
[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 23 February 2026 8:58 am
To: DPMC Media [DPMC] <[email address]>
Cc: MEDIA <[email address]>
Subject: FW: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
[UNCLASSIFIED]
UNCLASSIFIED
Morning!
Is this one we can send your way? Or more appropriate to send to PMO?
Cheers
Sarah Robson
Senior Media Adviser
Communications Division
New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade | Manatū Aorere
9(2)(a)
|
E [email address]
UNCLASSIFIED
From: Journalist 9(2)(a)
Sent: Saturday, 21 February 2026 10:18 am
To: MEDIA <[email address]>
Subject: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
You don't often get email from Journalist 9(2)(a)
Learn why this is important
Hello,
I've been given this email by someone in the press office, I am a general reporter for
Press Association in the UK. I'm emailing to ask for a comment on removing Andrew
Mountbatten-Windsor (the former prince) from the line of succession following his
arrest for misconduct in public office.
Kind regards,
Journalist 9(2)(a)
Journalist 9(2)(a)
General News Reporter
Journalist 9(2)(a)
Registered Address: PA Group Limited, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London,
W2 1AF
Registered in England No.4197
Please consider the environment before printing this email
This email is from the PA Media Group. For more information, see
www.pamediagroup.com. This email may contain confidential information. Only the
addressee is permitted to read, copy, distribute or otherwise use this email or any
attachments. If you have received it in error, please contact the sender immediately.
Any opinion expressed in this email is personal to the sender and may not reflect the
opinion of the PA Media Group. Any email reply to this address may be subject to
interception or monitoring for operational reasons or for lawful business practices.
The information contained in this email message is intended only for the addressee
and is not necessarily the official view or communication of the Ministry. It may be
legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose,
copy or distribute this message or the information in it as this may be unlawful. If you
have received this message in error, please email or telephone the sender
immediately ..
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Finn Stichbury
Cc:
PMO-Press; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]; Grace Miles [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: RNZ request
Date:
Sunday, 22 February 2026 11:04:12 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
Hi Finn
Further to our exchange on Friday about the line of succession, I’ve just had an email from
the UK Cabinet Office on that topic – there has been a lot of reporting on the UK
government’s position over the weekend.
6(a) & 6(b)(i)
Cheers
Rachel
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Sent: Friday, 20 February 2026 10:42 am
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Cc: PMO-Press <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: RNZ request
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hi Finn
You could say that while no specific advice has been sought, yes, legislation would be
required, and it would require coordination and agreement between all the Realms - as it
did in 2013 when the Royal Succession Act was introduced which changed the order of
succession. (That came into effect in 2015, in coordination with the UK and other Realms.)
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
From: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, 20 February 2026 10:27 am
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Cc: PMO-Press <[email address]>
Subject: FW: RNZ request
Hi Rachel,
We won’t be doing this but do you have a suggested approach on the line of succession
thing please?
Cheers
Finn
From: Journalist 9(2)(a)
Sent: Friday, 20 February 2026 10:26 AM
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Subject: RNZ request
Hi Finn,
Journalist 9(2)(a) here at RNZ Midday Report with Guyon Espiner.
Would the Prime Minister be available for a quick interview with Guyon today,
12.15pm, 5mins max, on Mountbatten's arrest, and what the implications are for
New Zealand - does NZ have to legislate as a commonwealth nation to have
Mountbatten removed from the line of succession etc.
Thanks for considering,
Journalist 9(2)(a)
Journalist 9(2)(a)
rnz.co.nz/middayreport
Emails sent by Radio New Zealand Limited (RNZ) or any related entity, including any
attachments, may be confidential, protected by copyright and/or subject to privilege.
If you receive an email from RNZ in error, please inform the sender immediately,
delete it from your system and do not use, copy or disclose any of the information in
that email for any purpose. Emails to/from RNZ may undergo email filtering and virus
scanning, including by third party contractors. However, RNZ does not guarantee that
any email or any attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted
or unexpected inclusions. The views expressed in any non-business email are not
necessarily the views of RNZ. www.rnz.co.nz
From:
Grace Miles [DPMC]
To:
Caitlin Hicks [DPMC]
Cc:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC];
Nicola Purvis [DPMC];
David Williams [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: Antarctic names - royal family related
Date:
Friday, 19 December 2025 2:40:00 pm
Attachments:
image007.png
image008.png
image009.png
image010.png
image011.png
image012.png
image013.png
Hi Caitlin,
Thank you for directing this query our way – nicheness is our speciality! Could you please
pass out thoughts below back through to the committee?
Ngā manaakitanga
Grace
Grace Miles
Senior Advisor – Constitutional and Honours
Cabinet Office
9(2)(a)
Advice for committee
Proposals to use the name of member of the Royal Family require approval from the
Palace. The Cabinet Office manages this process and the best point of contact is Grace
Miles ([email address]) in the constitutional team. Out of scope
Out of scope
Swapping a different Royal in for the plateau would not be consistent with the surrounding
names of immediate family members, and may not meet with approval for that reason. If
the committee wishes to make the change because Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor no
longer holds the ‘Prince’ title, we wonder if they would consider other options, including
another name entirely, or reverting to the plateau being unnamed. 9(2)(g)(i)
We’re happy to provide further advice or information as required, including once the
Committee has discussed the proposal.
From: Caitlin Hicks [DPMC] <
[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 18 December 2025 10:19 am
To: David Williams [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: FW: Antarctic names - royal family related [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hey David,
In true end-of-year spirit, MFAT are getting all their weird and wacky questions off their
desks. I think the one below might be a Cab Office specialty? Please do let me know if your
team upstairs have views on how to take this forward (I’m stumped…).
Thanks heaps in advance,
Merry Christmas!
Caitlin
9(2)(a)
From: WILLANS, Tara (CAE) <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2025 9:23:43 AM
To: Caitlin Hicks [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: FW: Antarctic names - royal family related [SEC=IN CONFIDENCE]
[IN CONFIDENCE]
IN-CONFIDENCE
Kia ora Caitlin,
I am getting in touch on behalf of the Secretariat for the Antarctic Naming Committee,
which MFAT is a member of, with quite a niche enquiry.
There are two place names that have come to the attention of the Antarctic Naming
Committee as names that may require updates/changes. Both names received Royal
Ascent in 1970. The two names and proposal for updates are
Out of scope
Prince Andrew Plateau: proposal to alter to either 9(2)(g)(i)
Further details are outlined in the below email.
The Secretariat would like to confirm what the appropriate process for updating/changing
these names would be. For example, should the Antarctic Naming Committee consider the
proposals and confirm their views on whether changes should be made and then consult
the changes with the King/seek Royal Ascent for the changes, or should MFAT consult with
the King before the Antarctic Naming Committee considers any changes?
The Antarctic Naming Committee is next meeting on 27 January. Any response ahead of
that meeting would be greatly appreciated. (I will be on leave until 12 January).
Please feel free to share this email with your colleagues as necessary!
Thanks,
Tara
Tara Willans (she/her)
Policy Officer
Antarctica and Environment Unit
Climate, Antarctica, and Environment Division
Te Taukaea | Multilateral and Legal Affairs Group
Manatū Aorere | New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade
E [email address] 9(2)(a)
For anything urgent please call me on 9(2)(a)
IN-CONFIDENCE
From: Chris Stephens <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, 3 December 2025 1:27 pm
To: WILLANS, Tara (CAE) <[email address]>
Subject: Two more Antarctic proposals - royal family related
IN-CONFIDENCE
Kia ora Tara
Yesterday we received another two Antarctic proposals.
Out of scope
The second is to alter Prince Andrew Plateau to either 9(2)(g)(i)
Out of scope
But potentially doing
something with the second name has been on my mind given the circumstances and now someone has
come in proactively about it.
To do anything about either proposal at all there’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation as there are old
protocols regarding Royal Assent for these names. Ie, do we put the proposals to the ANC and if the ANC
wishes to proceed with one or both, then through MFAT consult with the King? Or do we do that in the first
instance?
This email is an early heads up as we got the proposals yesterday. But since the ANC hui will be happening
in Jan 2026 I will need to get onto these proposals as well shortly. So if you could start thinking about this
situation as well and rope in whomever might by relevant.
All the names for the Royal family went through a process of (eventually) receiving formal Royal Assent
from Queen Elizabath II through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (see attachments). Let me know if you
receive the attachments.
The Board initially sought Royal Assent in 1964/65 as the 1:250k topographic NZMS 166 SU56-60 15&16 was
ready for publication, but was advised otherwise by External Affairs. After Australia (through ANCA –
Antarctic Naming Committee of Australia) raised the issue again in 1970, MFA decided that Royal Assent
was needed.
I don’t think we have an actual copy of the Royal Assent or the direct communication, whatever that looks
like. Perhaps MFAT has it.
Name
Named
Approved by
Royal Assent Note
Board
Queen
By Trans-
1959-07-24
1970-12-09
Elizabeth
Antarctic
Range
Expedition 1956-
58
Prince Andrew
By NZ
1962-06-28
Plateau
Geological and
Survey
Expedition 1961-
62
Prince Edward
By NZ Antarctic
1964-07-16
Born during the drafting of
Glacier
Place Names
the map sheet with all the
Committee
royal names on it. Name
approved under urgency by
the APNC and added to the
map which was already at the
printers.
Prince of
By NZ
1962-06-28
Wales Glacier
Geological and
Survey
Expedition 1961-
62
Prince Philip
By NZ
1962-06-28
Glacier
Geological and
Survey
Expedition 1961-
62
Princess Anne
By NZ
1962-06-28
Glacier
Geological and
Survey
Expedition 1961-
62
For your interest, the Board had the National Publicity Studios once do some photography – here’s Arthur
Evans (left) (APNC Chair), Board/APNC member John Pascoe (centre) and Surveyor-General Robert Gough
(right) examining a map of Queen Elizabeth Range, Antarctica. The Queen's portrait looks on.
https://www.linz.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-08/C0020_NZGB_SG_Pascoe.jpg
Ngā mihi
Christopher Stephens
Mātanga Ture Kiritaki / Customer Regulatory Specialist
Secretariat, Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa
New Zealand Geographic Board
Office of the Surveyor-General
[email address] | DDI 9(2)(a)
Wellington Office, Level 7, 155 The Terrace
PO Box 5501, Wellington 6145, New Zealand
www.linz.govt.nz |
data.linz.govt.nz |
https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/
This message contains information, which may be in confidence and may be subject to
legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not peruse, use,
disseminate, distribute or copy this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately (Phone 0800 665 463 or
[email address])
and destroy the original message. LINZ accepts no responsibility for changes to this
email, or for any attachments, after its transmission from LINZ. Thank You.
IN-CONFIDENCE
The information contained in this email message is intended only for the addressee
and is not necessarily the official view or communication of the Ministry. It may be
legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose,
copy or distribute this message or the information in it as this may be unlawful. If you
have received this message in error, please email or telephone the sender
immediately ..
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
To:
David Williams [DPMC]
Subject:
FW: forfeiture
Date:
Tuesday, 16 December 2025 5:12:13 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
FYI, Rachel was happy and I’ve sent it to Finn and Cam. Can you check in with me on Friday
morning to see if they have responded? Thanks
From: Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
Sent: Tuesday, 16 December 2025 2:42 pm
To: ^Parliament: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>; Finn Stichbury
<[email address]>
Cc: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: forfeiture
Kia ora anō Cam and Finn
Further to Rachel’s email below, we propose to reply to the member of the public who
enquired about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s NZ honours as below. Can you please let us
know by Thursday if you have any concerns?
Original request
With King Charles III’s recent decision to strip Prince Andrew of all honours and titles, will
New Zealand follow suit by revoking any New Zealand-granted titles and honours —
particularly the New Zealand 1990 Commemoration Medal (Sesquicentennial Medal),
which he continues to wear on formal occasions?
By displaying New Zealand’s award, Prince Andrew maintains an apparent association with
this country’s recognition of his contribution to New Zealand’s betterment. Given the timing
of that award bestowal and his conduct during that period (1990–2000), it would seem
appropriate for the New Zealand Government to reaffirm its condemnation of all forms of
abuse by ordering the return of this honour.
Proposed response
Thank you for your email of 31 October 2025 regarding the New Zealand Royal honours
held by Mr Mountbatten-Windsor.
Following Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s public statement that he no longer intends to use the
honours that had been conferred on him, the award to him of the New Zealand 1990
Commemoration Medal was cancelled.
Ngā mihi
Nicola
administrative
From:
Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
To:
David Williams [DPMC]
Subject:
FW: forfeiture
Date:
Wednesday, 10 December 2025 9:55:37 am
Attachments:
image001.png
From: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2025 6:27 pm
To: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>; Finn Stichbury
<[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: forfeiture
OK fab thank you – appreciate that.
C
Cameron Burrows
Chief of Staff
Office of Rt Hon Chris Luxon
9(2)(a)
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2025 2:37 pm
To: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>; Finn Stichbury
<[email address]>
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: forfeiture
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora Cam and Finn
We’ve had advice from the Palace that the King has now approved the cancellation of
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s award of the 1990 Commemoration Medal. I will write to
Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to let him know, and we will take his name off the Register of the
Medal.
There is no requirement to Gazette the cancellation. However we have had
correspondence from a member of the public asking if cancellation was being considered,
which we held off replying to while this was being actioned. We now propose to reply to say
that following Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s public statement that he no longer intended to
use the honours that had been conferred on him, the award of the 1990 Medal was
cancelled. That response may lead to the fact of the cancellation becoming public. We
would let the Palace know before sending that reply.
Happy to share the draft response with you,
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
H O N O U R S I N C O N F I D E N C E
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
CHAMBERS
Memo
14 November 2025
To
Prime Minister
From
Rachel Hayward
Subject
Honours matter
Deadline
19 November 2025
Purpose
1
This note sets out the process for the cancellation of the award of the New Zealand 1990
Commemoration Medal held by Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, and asks you to sign formal
advice to the King.
Honours held
2
On 9 February 1990, the government awarded the New Zealand 1990 Commemoration
Medal (the 1990 Medal) to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor (then HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke
of York) along with other members of the Royal Family.
3
On 17 October 2025 Mr Mountbatten-Windsor made a public statement of his intention to
no longer use his Royal title or the honours which had been conferred upon him. In late
October the King cancelled Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s Royal titles and some of his senior
United Kingdom honours.
4
You consider that New Zealand’s honours position should be consistent with that of the
United Kingdom, and we proposed that the 17 October 2025 statement should be treated as
also applying to the 1990 Medal. 9(2)(f)(i)
Next steps
5
I will write to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to inform him that, following his statement and
consistent with the approach taken in the United Kingdom, you are recommending to the
King that the award of the 1990 Medal be cancelled and annulled.
6
Once you have signed the attached advice sheet and covering letter, we will forward the
documents to the Palace for the King’s approval.
350348v1
H O N O U R S : I N C O N F I D E N C E
1
H O N O U R S I N C O N F I D E N C E
7
Unlike other forfeiture matters, the cancellation of this Medal will not be published in the
New Zealand Gazette. You do not need to make any media comment on the cancellation of
the award, unless it is raised with you. I will write to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor again to
inform him once the cancellation is final.
Recommendations
8
I recommend that you:
8.1
agree to recommend to the King that he direct that the award of the New Zealand
1990 Commemoration Medal to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor be cancelled and
annulled, and that his name be erased from the Register of the said Medal;
AGREE / DISAGREE
8.2
agree that I write to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor, both before and after your
submission to the King;
AGREE / DISAGREE
8.3
sign the attached advice to the King, and the covering letter to his Private Secretary.
Rachel Hayward
Clerk of the Executive Council
___________________________________________
Rt Hon Christopher Luxon
Prime Minister
Date: / / 2025
Distribution:
Cameron Burrows, Chief of Staff
Alex Stevenson, Private Secretary
350348v1
H O N O U R S : I N C O N F I D E N C E
2
9(2)(f)(i)
9(2)(f)(i)
From:
Grace Miles [DPMC]
To:
Angus Stewart [DPMC]
Subject:
FW: Succession article
Date:
Wednesday, 5 November 2025 11:26:00 am
Attachments:
image001.png
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 3 November 2025 2:46 pm
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Cc: Grace Miles [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Succession article
Hi Finn
You understand the PM will be asked if he has taken any advice on Andrew and the line of
succession. He could say any change in the line of succession would be a matter for the
UK with the agreement of all the Realms – New Zealand would have a part to play, but he
hasn’t sought advice on that.
Let me know if you need anything more,
Rachel
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Sent: Friday, 31 October 2025 4:56 pm
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Cc: ^Parliament: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>; Grace Miles
[DPMC] <
[email address]>
Subject: Succession article
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora Finn
Another angle of the Prince Andrew story has popped up: How New Zealand could take
action following Andrew’s loss of royal titles - monarchy expert Cindy McCreery - NZ
Herald
If the PM is asked about succession, I recommend he says that it’s a matter on which he
would need to take advice, but not that it’s a question for the Palace – succession is a
matter that the NZ Parliament can and has legislated on, in coordination with the UK and
other Realms, most recently in 2013, when the Royal Succession Act was introduced
which changed the order of succession. (It came into effect in 2015, in coordination with
the UK and other Realms.)
Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you get any queries over the weekend.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
From:
PM
To:
^Parliament: Cameron Burrows;
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Cc:
Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: NZ Honour - 1990 Medal
Date:
Wednesday, 5 November 2025 10:33:10 am
Attachments:
image001.png
Yes – please progress option 3. Given UK honours have been cancelled – NZ ones should be too.
From: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2025 10:16 AM
To: Rachel Hayward <[email address]>; Prime Minister 9(2)(a)
Cc: Nicola Purvis [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: RE: NZ Honour - 1990 Medal
Thanks Rachel – your suggested approach (option three) seems sensible.
Cam
Cameron Burrows
Chief of Staff
Office of Rt Hon Chris Luxon
021937401
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC] <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2025 9:14 AM
To: Prime Minister 9(2)(a)
Cc: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>; Nicola Purvis [DPMC]
<[email address]>
Subject: NZ Honour - 1990 Medal
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora PM
We spoke briefly on Monday about the New Zealand 1990 Commemoration Medal held by
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, which is part of the New Zealand Royal Honours system. As
you know, the medal was instituted by the New Zealand Government to commemorate the
150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, and was awarded to more than
3,500 New Zealanders, and to 10 members of the Royal Family. The former Prince wears it
on his medal bar.
The King can cancel the award of this medal to members of the Royal Family on the advice
of the Prime Minister. The usual threshold for forfeiture applies - the Prime Minister may
consider advising the King to cancel the award where an individual’s actions are such that,
if they continue to hold that honour, the honours system would be brought into disrepute.
As you are aware, cases of forfeiture in New Zealand to date have almost always related to
a criminal conviction.
There are several options in relation to the former Prince’s 1990 Medal:
9(2)(g)(i)
The third option, and the one I recommend you consider here, is that we approach
the Palace proposing to treat the statement made by the former Prince on 17
October as an indication from him of his intention to relinquish the award. The
relevant part of that statement said:
In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have
concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His
Majesty and the Royal Family. I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my
family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from
public life.
With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore
no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me. As I have
said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.
That statement was not sufficient to quell the public concern in the UK, and the King
responded last week by moving to cancel the titles and UK honours (rather than his
voluntarily no longer “using” them). 9(2)(f)(iv) & 9(2)(g)(i)
9(2)(f)(iv) & 9(2)(g)(i)
Happy to discuss further.
In the meantime, if you are asked about the NZ honour, I recommend you say are seeking
advice.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
The information contained in this email message is for the attention of the intended recipient only and is not
necessarily the official view or communication of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have
received this message in error, please destroy the email and notify the sender immediately.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Finn Stichbury
Cc:
David Williams [DPMC]
Subject:
honours question
Date:
Monday, 3 November 2025 4:30:02 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hi Finn
At his post-Cabinet Press conference the PM was asked whether Prince Andrew held any
New Zealand honours – he said not as far as he was aware.
As we discussed last week, the former Prince Andrew holds the New Zealand 1990
Commemoration Medal, which is part of the New Zealand Royal Honours system. The
medal was instituted by the New Zealand Government to commemorate the 150th
anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, and was awarded to more than 3,500
New Zealanders, and to members of the Royal Family.
We had suggested that if asked about whether he would consider recommending forfeiture
of this award, the PM would say he will seek advice. We’ve had one query from a member
of the public so far as to whether the PM will consider cancelling the award of that honour –
we’ll provide advice to the PM later in the week.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
From:
Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
To:
Finn Stichbury
Cc:
Grace Miles [DPMC]
Subject:
RE: Succession article
Date:
Monday, 3 November 2025 2:46:10 pm
Attachments:
image001.png
Hi Finn
You understand the PM will be asked if he has taken any advice on Andrew and the line of
succession. He could say any change in the line of succession would be a matter for the
UK with the agreement of all the Realms – New Zealand would have a part to play, but he
hasn’t sought advice on that.
Let me know if you need anything more,
Rachel
From: Rachel Hayward [DPMC]
Sent: Friday, 31 October 2025 4:56 pm
To: Finn Stichbury <[email address]>
Cc: ^Parliament: Cameron Burrows <[email address]>; Grace Miles
[DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: Succession article
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Kia ora Finn
Another angle of the Prince Andrew story has popped up: How New Zealand could take
action following Andrew’s loss of royal titles - monarchy expert Cindy McCreery - NZ
Herald
If the PM is asked about succession, I recommend he says that it’s a matter on which he
would need to take advice, but not that it’s a question for the Palace – succession is a
matter that the NZ Parliament can and has legislated on, in coordination with the UK and
other Realms, most recently in 2013, when the Royal Succession Act was introduced
which changed the order of succession. (It came into effect in 2015, in coordination with
the UK and other Realms.)
Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you get any queries over the weekend.
Ngā mihi maioha,
Nāku, nā Rachel
Rachel Hayward (she/her)
Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council
Cabinet Office, Executive Wing,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
9(2)(a)
Email: [email address]
The Cabinet Office is a business unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet.
From:
Honours [DPMC]
To:
David Williams [DPMC]
Subject:
FW: DPMC Contact us - your submission details
Date:
Friday, 31 October 2025 10:22:22 am
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
From: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, 31 October 2025 10:19 am
To: Honours [DPMC] <[email address]>
Subject: DPMC Contact us - your submission details
Submitted on Fri 31 Oct 2025 10:19am
Submitted by: Anonymous
Submitted values are:
Your name
9(2)(a)
Your phone
9(2)(a)
Your email
9(2)(a)
Business unit
Honours Unit
Comments
Hi
With King Charles III’s recent decision to strip Prince Andrew of all honours and titles, will
New Zealand follow suit by revoking any New Zealand-granted titles and honours —
particularly the New Zealand 1990 Commemoration Medal (Sesquicentennial Medal),
which he continues to wear on formal occasions?
By displaying New Zealand’s award, Prince Andrew maintains an apparent association with
this country’s recognition of his contribution to New Zealand’s betterment. Given the timing
of that award bestowal and his conduct during that period (1990–2000), it would seem
appropriate for the New Zealand Government to reaffirm its condemnation of all forms of
abuse by ordering the return of this honour.
Kind regards,
9(2)(a)
User agent
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Chrome/141.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Document Outline
