OPINION:
For nearly every single week of the Queen's reign – 3538 weeks at current count – she has conducted a weekly audience with the British Prime Minister of the day (14 thus far).
Either in person or via the phone, the head of state clocked up 49 days of continuous conversation with a number of the last century's greatest political minds (Gordon Brown, notwithstanding).
Shame, then, that during all those tete-a-tetes she never picked up any pointers on how to keep the unruly rabble she is directly in charge of, i.e. her family, in line.
Yesterday, another royal grandchild (Princess Anne's son Peter Phillips) has found themselves embroiled in another embarrassing situation (being quizzed by the police) after a month in which a different royal grandchild (Prince Harry) and his wife (Meghan Duchess of Sussex) took aim at the palace and unleashed a global wave of condemnation directed at the monarchy.
While the Peter situation might keep Fleet Street busy in the coming days – tabloid editors must be positively foaming at the mouth at the prospect of a potential scandal involving a glamorous, married blonde and a Windsor – a certain, concerning pattern has emerged here which suggests a much bigger problem.
The Queen has failed – and is still failing – to instil any discipline in her family.
Over the past few years, the members of her family who have landed the palace in the most hot water are a troika of men who have long been reported to be some of her favourites, namely, Prince Andrew, Harry and Peter.
From dating a soft-porn star to dressing up as a Nazi to starring in an incredibly tacky Chinese milk ad, these men have over the decades created far, far more than their fair share of PR crises.
What these three Windsor blokes have in common is that they have repeatedly over the years behaved poorly and yet seemingly have never been forced to learn from their mistakes. Mistakes, that is, which have all, to varying degrees, tarnished the royal family's image.
And therein lies the real issue here: the Queen seems unwilling – or wholly unable – to keep her brood in line, only resorting to finally taking action when things get particularly egregious.
While Andrew has largely been hidden from public view since November 2019 when he denied having sex with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a teenage victim of Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking ring, in his BBC Newsnight interview, let's not forget the years and years of headline-grabbing behaviour that preceded it.
In 2010 WikiLeaks revealed the "rude" prince had, per the Guardian, "launched a scathing attack on British anti-corruption investigators, journalists and the French during … an official engagement that shocked a US diplomat."
There was the time in 2011 when he hosted a lunch for Sakher el-Materi, the son-in-law of then-Tunisian dictator Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, at Buckingham Palace. Later the same year, after Ben Ali was deposed, Materi was convicted of corruption in absentia.
In 2018, when his daughter Princess Eugenie wed, a convicted Libyan gun smuggler named Tarek Kaituni, according to the Daily Mail, was on the guest list.
Don't forget too, along the way Andrew managed to earn the nickname 'Airmiles Andy' for his penchant for expensive air travel, including taking a £2939 ($5812) helicopter trip to an official engagement when he could have easily taken the train.
The question of his finances, especially how he and ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York who has twice nearly gone bankrupt, managed to buy a £13 million ($25 million) Swiss ski chalet has never quite been answered. It's currently for sale, if you are looking for a European bolthole.
Then there's Harry, the palace's problem child. He and wife Meghan have managed to dominate royal news for the last several years, with the prince's former signature cheeky demeanour replaced by an increasingly sour disposition as relations between the royal house and the Sussexes fractured painfully and very publicly.
Earlier this month, they sat down with talk show supremo Oprah Winfrey and spent two hours briefing global audiences on their many, many grievances against the royal family, including allegations that the palace cruelly refused to help Meghan when her mental health deteriorated horrifyingly during her first pregnancy and that an unnamed member of the family had "concerns" over their unborn son's skin colour.
While Harry's "narrative" these days is defined by his self-appointed crusader status as he tackles hate on social media behemoths and clocks in as a billion-dollar coaching company's Chief Impact Officer (no, I have no idea what that really means either), his pre-married life was marred by his eyebrow-raising behaviour.
There was the time he was caught smoking pot, his decision to go to a dress-up party in 2005 wearing a swastika armband or in 2009 when footage, shot by the royal himself, hit the press in which he called a fellow army cadet a "Paki" and another a "raghead".
Meanwhile, his infamous 2012 Las Vegas trip saw him make history as the first member of the royal family to end up au natural, the crown jewels nearly on display, splashed across the front page.
Peter Phillips too has clocked up a number of palace fouls over the years, including selling his wedding photos to Hello! for £500,000 ($989.000) and cashing in on his royal connections last year in those absolutely tacky TV ads.
If ever there was a question of the 94-year-old having a blind spot when it came to certain family members, the events of the past decade or so have firmly answered that. Time and again Her Majesty seems to have overlooked these errant men's transgressions, both big and small, and while that might be par for the affectionate course for a grandmother, she unfortunately also holds the position of CEO of the family firm.
The sad fact is, decisive action only seems to be taken when things reach a critical level or when these situations have reached a damaging public crescendo.
As sovereign, Her Majesty's job is to safeguard the very institution of the monarchy, something which she has failed to do at times given these recalcitrant chaps keep reoffending, so to speak.
The house of Windsor is both a family in the most prosaic sense and a business and brand. One of these should be all about love and empathy; the other a hierarchical beast where image matters acutely. Balancing these two contradictory beasts is by no means easy but heavy is the head that both wears the Crown and runs the Windsor WhatsApp group.
Prince Philip was reportedly formerly the disciplinarian who kept the brood in line, however, given his frail health and the fact he is 99-years-old, he no longer occupies this role.
So who is going to step in?
The Queen has proven herself largely unable to fulfil this role, nor has Prince Charles stepped up to assume enforcer status. During this month's racism row, it was only William who publicly voiced any sort of concerted, vehement push back against the Sussexes' racism charges.
All of which leaves us with the very uncomfortable prospect of the monarchy careening out of control with no one's hand firmly on the wheel.
They say boys will be boys; well, in the royal family, that adage seems to be more "boys will be serious pains in the bottom unless someone takes charge and pulls them into line" – and fast.
You have your work cut out for Your Majesty.
• Daniela Elser is a royal expert and writer with more than 15 years experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles.
The new doco follows the Sussexes' Harry & Meghan, Live to Lead, and Heart of Invictus.