A CHARM OFFENSIVE. HUH?
Isn’t it time Charles and Camilla became a foreign curiosity rather than our future King and Queen?
The news today that they will visit five states in six days on their whirlwind tour of the colonies evokes visions of kids five-deep by the roadside, waving their little flags, wilting in the sun, as the monarch flashes by in a pastel blur.
Is there any chance of that happening for Charles and Camilla do you think?
“Royal sources” in the UK certainly hope so. According to the Daily Express today, Charles and Camilla are “to launch a charm offensive to try to win over a sceptical public Down Under.”
“The heir to the throne and his wife are to go on their first joint tour of Papua New Guinea, Australia and New Zealand – three overseas realms where Charles will one day be King.
They are the final group of around 30 countries visited by members of the Royal Family to mark the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee this year.
But Australia presents the biggest potential challenge.
Opinion polls show that while support for the monarchy has shot up since the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge married last year, Charles and Camilla remain unpopular.
In May, an Angus Reid poll of voters in the UK, Canada and Australia found that only 13 per cent of Australians wanted Charles to succeed the Queen.
Only one in three of Australians had a positive view of the Prince, while Camilla’s popularity rating stood at 16 per cent, the lowest of any senior Royal.
Senior royal aides hope that the Duchess’s down-to-earth manner will resonate with Australians and start to win them over during the two-week tour, which begins in Papua New Guinea on November 3.
One royal source said: “There are many, many people in Australia who are genuinely very excited that they’re coming.”
But Australian republicans hope the tour will help reignite a campaign to ditch the monarchy and install an Australian-born head of state.”
Australian children stopped singing God Save The Queen in schools in 1974. Singing about Elizabeth II every day of the school year, (“send her victorious, happy and glorious”) as we gazed up at her re-touched portrait in the school hall, gave a sense of connection to our gracious Queen so that at the very least there was some intrigue when we were forced out onto the streets to wave as she passed by.
Today, the only significant sense of connection we have with the British Royal Family is through the weekly glossies and stories about Kate’s topless bathing and Harry’s pants-down high-jinx in Las Vegas – they get the celebrity treatment, not the royal treatment.
It’s safe to say that here in the overseas realm we are no longer inculcated with their glory.
So does the imminent arrival of Charles and Camilla make you think it’s time for the Republican issue to be put back on the table?
Or perhaps the thought of Kate and William as our future King and Queen is more charming to you?
MORE ARTICLES BY LUCY CLARK
Mary Robinson. How to Change the World
*Lucy (Editor of The Hoopla) is a journalist and editor with almost thirty years experience in newspapers and magazines in Sydney, London, and New York. She has been published in The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian, The Daily and Sunday Telegraphs, Vogue Living, Australian Art Review, and Gourmet Traveller. Most recently the Books Editor of the Sunday Telegraph, she has also contributed to the non-fiction books, Australia Through Time, and What Women Want. You can follow her on Twitter: @lucykateclark.
21 Responses to this article
-
Jenny October 23, 2012
Do I care one way or the other? Not really. Monarchy or Republic won’t make much difference to us, just as long as we don’t go the same way as the US with their presidential campaigns. I feel a little sorry for Charles and Camilla, who probably should have married way back when; but he may not have turned out any more likable anyway. The whole Royal family is something of an anachronism in the modern age.
-
Carole/m October 23, 2012
” GROW UP AUSTRALIA ”
BRING ON THE REPUBLIC
-
sue bell October 23, 2012
The move to become a republic started in Australia during the 1800s. How much longer do we have to wait. Why on earth should we accept an hereditary monarchy. Worse still, it is always we, the people who have to pay for the travel, accommodation, security and fun for these rich tourists who don’t actually do anything. I’d rather our money was spent on health services or education. I gave up singing God Save the Queen when I was 8 way back in the 50s, even then I had no respect for the office or our grovelling, fawning love of royalty.
A problem with voting for a republic is, new citizens swear to be loyal to the Queen and her heirs , usually swearing on their bible, koran etc., thus promising their gods to be loyal. How can they break a vow to their gods and vote for a republic. I have tried to get an answer to this but to no avail. -
Janet G October 23, 2012
Why do these two look like something out of “Are You Being Served?”
-
Jan Dobson October 23, 2012
Unfortunately a Constitutional Monarchy is not benign. UK newspaper, The Guardian, has reported that Prince Charles actively lobbies politicians with his views on numerous politically sensitive issues and will continue to do when he becomes King. I understood from the article that the views expressed would not be made public to avoid embarrassing the Prince.
It has also been suggested that the Order of Merit, awarded to John Howard, a staunch monarchist, at the Queen’s discretion and only rarely, was reward for his actions during the Republic referendum when he as PM
One of the arguments for retaining the status quo is the impartiality of our current head of state. Not so much, it seems. -
William Marshall October 23, 2012
Hey just FYI Carmiaal will NOT be the queen! she will Merely be the King’s consort! As will Kate!!
-
Loz October 23, 2012
Noooo, you can’t get rid of the royals! What will New Idea and Woman’s Day fill up their magazine pages with???
Seriously though, they are redundant these days. -
Robyn October 24, 2012
It goes both ways. Apart from any other arguement, where is the evidence that the Royal Family are supportive of Australia in all but a vague nostalgic sense. When do the Royal Family get in and lobby for Australian trade with Europe? Did they stick by us in our bid to host the Olympics in 2000? We managed to do it without them! I remember clearly Harry jumping around in raptures when Johnny Wilkinson kicked that final ball that won the World Cup Rugby for England several years ago. Then the guy was knighted! For beating Australia! I don’t see a lot of loyalty to Australia. So for purely practical reasons I don’t see why we should stick with the monarcy.
The Queen has done her job well and for a long time so I don’t see the we need to push the point while she is alive. But the monarchy is an outdated instituation and legitimises privilage for some and by definition, exploitation of others. It has to go. Australia should feel no loyalty to Charles and Camilla. I must add I quite like the two of them and think Charles in particular has a wicked sense of humour! -
Ross H October 24, 2012
The Royals are a chronic anachromism and staggering waste of resources. More spent on them than any other surviving European royalty. And for what? I also object to Charles who shall be awarded the title of Defender of the Faith on taking the throne, assuming he is not just passed over for Wee Willie. The DotF is the leader of the Church of England. A blatant adulterer who even invited his old girlfriend (Camillia) to his wedding prior to resuming bumping uglies with her. Does he have any idea of the meaning of hypocrisy?
-
Margy October 24, 2012
I object to the taxpayers money being spent on them!!
I don’t like him but dislike her even more……both had no regard for their 1st marriage vows!!! -
Marnie October 24, 2012
I believe you to be incorrect @William Marshall. I agree that Camilla will remain Duchess or King’s consort because that was the agreement at the time of their marriage because of the circumstances (divorce, scandal etc). Kate will most definitely be Queen should they still be married when William is crowned King.
As far as a republic is concerned, Australian politicians do nothing more than squabble and name call like kids in a schoolground. They can’t agree to govern for the sake of the country so have no hope in Hades of getting my support until this country is adult enough to warrant it. -
Lucille October 24, 2012
I guess that although Charlie will be the head of the Church of England, he won’t be welcomed by the Sydney branch which has to deny his divorce. It’s all bullshit anyway when you look at history and the way the royals assumed their superiority, power, property and money. It was rape pillage and murder. Why do people bow to these criminals – particularly Australians?
-
ro.watson October 24, 2012
There is something still deeply significant about “the Crown”~ here~ namely “Crown” land~ cutting ties with this before there is a proper resolution of links between “Crown” and locals~specifically aboriginal peoples~ is premature eg what is going on potentially at James Price Point~ up from Broome….Controversially I wonder if Australia is ready to steer her own boat given how the current and previous governments have treated refugees~ on a lighter note my Mum who was English would say to me~ the Queen might be coming to lunch~ as in tow the line~ I really thought the Queeen might visit!!
-
Amy October 24, 2012
I have no respect for either of them and have no wish to see them parade around our State (or country). Not only an anachronism but an immoral, self-serving anachronism.
-
Sam W October 24, 2012
The Royals represent an archaic system which completely clashes with this country’s ideals. Today that system is mostly deemed by anyone under 50 as irrelevant, pompous, expensive fluff & stuff. Their priveliged lives are so far removed from the average Aussie, they may as well visit Outer Mongolia. We need the royals like a fish needs a bicycle.
-
Geoff October 24, 2012
One royal source said: “There are many, many people in Australia who are genuinely very excited that they’re coming.”
OH REALLY?
Even my 97 year old Mother thinks the royals are too distant, out of touch and irrelevant to Australia.
The Royal adulterer and his mistress/wife are so far down the table of popularity as to be almost missing in action.
Does anyone really want someone to be our head of State that requires his shoelaces to be ironed prior to use? I think my Mum might have an opinion about that! -
Rob October 24, 2012
Republicans are over bearing loud mouthed bores. All negativity (ironically like Tony Abbott) and never forthcoming about what sort of republic they want. They are well placed in the media but are hopelessly divided. Oldest democracies in the world? Vastly all monarchies, including Canada. If anyone has a chip on their shoulders, it’s Australain republicans. Get over it and enjoy Charles’ forward thinking on environmental and other contemporary issues.
-
Wendy Green October 25, 2012
I don’t mind the British monarchy (I have the greatest respect for the unique position the Queen holds in world affairs) but not really interested in a visit by Charles and Camilla.
-
Heather October 25, 2012
Don’t forget the principal benefits of staying part of the monarchy: Keeping the Queen’s Birthday long weekend in June and retaining provisions for Australians up to the age of 28 to work in the UK on a two-year visa! These things are precious!
