The details of Mountbatten-Windsor’s lease were published by the Public Accounts Committee on Tuesday, which had demanded answers from the Treasury and the Crown Estate about the way the royal family’s properties were managed.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the chairman of the committee, announced that MPs would launch an inquiry into the Crown Estate’s housing arrangements.

Mountbatten-Windsor could be summoned to give evidence before the committee, the Telegraph understands.

However, in practical terms, there is not much that they can do if he refuses to comply.

There was a public outcry in October when it emerged that Mountbatten-Windsor, who was forced to give up the lease on Royal Lodge, his Windsor home, had only paid a peppercorn rent for more than 20 years, after an initial outlay of £8.5m between 2003 and 2005.

The Public Accounts Committee also published details of leases held by the Prince and Princess of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh.

The Crown Estate said the Waleses, who moved into Forest Lodge in Windsor Great Park with their children in October, hold a “20-year non-assignable lease” with the Crown Estate that began on July 5 and have “open market rent”.

The agreement was made after Prince William made an initial approach, following discussions with the Royal Household.

The Crown Estate said: “Negotiations were conducted on an arm’s length basis, to ensure appropriate market terms were agreed”.

It said independent valuers from Hamptons and Savills estate agents were appointed to value the property, while the prince and princess received independent legal and property advice, as did the Crown Estate.

‘Beginnings of basis for inquiry’

Clifton-Brown said on Tuesday: “In publishing these responses, the Public Accounts Committee fulfils one of its primary purposes – to aid transparency in public interest information as part of its overall mission to secure value for money for the taxpayer.

“Having reflected on what we have received, the information provided clearly forms the beginnings of a basis for an inquiry. The National Audit Office (NAO) supports the scrutiny function of this committee.

“We now await the conclusions the NAO will draw from this information, and plan to hold an inquiry based on the resulting evidence base in the new year.”

After completing its inquiry, the committee is likely to produce a report on its findings, which may include recommendations to ministers.

While the MPs cannot force through any reforms themselves, suggestions made in such a high-profile case are likely to be taken seriously by the Government.

As part of the inquiry, the committee will have the power to “send for persons, papers and records”. This means they can compel witnesses to answer questions, with the exception of MPs, peers and the Crown.

Even if Mountbatten-Windsor was still covered by the Crown exemption, there is no barrier to MPs inviting, if not compelling, a member of the royal family to give evidence to a House of Commons committee.

Historically, a person held in contempt of the House of Commons could be imprisoned or fined, but that power has long been deemed “theoretical”.

The date of its first evidence session has not yet been announced, and the committee has not ruled out calling in members of the Royal family. It is unclear whether Mountbatten-Windsor could be asked to give evidence.

Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.