Writing's on the wall for Wills

BACK home I’m a constitutional monarchist, born and bred. But if I were Australian I’d be a Republican.
Monarchy, an outdated, undemocratic institution, is acceptable only on grounds of nostalgia and tradition and to provide a refuge of last resort should parliament fall to tyranny. But the very idea of swearing allegiance to the King or Queen of a country half a world away is illogical and indefensible.
Nonetheless, Australians remain unswervingly patriotic to their ‘Queen of Australia’: the last referendum, in 1999, returned a 72 per cent vote against republicanism and few Aussies, even the republicans amongst them, would countenance any constitutional change while the current Queen is on the throne.
But two fascinating events have coincided with our month-long trip Down Under. First, and by any means foremost, a brief, informal trip to New Zealand and Australia by Prince William has rather overwhelmed the public in Auckland, Sydney and Melbourne.
Second, even before William’s arrival a sizeable opinion poll showed 56 per cent support for the notion that the young man the media has - quite incorrectly - dubbed “Prince of New Zealand” and “Australia’s prince” should be the next King of Australia.
In other words “Tough luck, dad“, on two counts: Charles is not popular here, because of the Diana divorce and subsequent tragedy. And the ascendancy of Prince William to pin-up boy Down Under owes more to his mother than to his royal right of succession.
What Australia wants is a Di-nasty. “You’re as lovely as your mother,” sobbed one middle-aged Melbourne mum as he gave her a peck on the cheek during an unprecedented royal walkabout. It was the same in the predominantly poor, aboriginal suburb of Redfern in Sydney. William wowed them.
To understand how extraordinarily his brief, supposedly private visit has turned into a major state occasion overwhelming even coverage of the Haiti earthquake and the Australian Open tennis championship you have to understand that an awkward relationship exists between Australia and its monarch in the same way as it endures a love-hate affair with we Poms.
There is undoubtedly real regard for Her Majesty who, in 1954, was the first British monarch to set foot on this distant shore. Similarly, the memory of Diana is revered and the torch Aussies carried for her has passed to her eldest son.
Little wonder the media has begun to murmur about the possibility that William might be invited to become Australia’s Governor-General, representing his grandmother and giving the Antipodes something even America would envy: its own Royal Family. Another one in the eye for his father, of course, who coveted the same role thirty years ago until Labour Prime Minister Bob Hawke put a stop to his ambition.
William isn’t home and dry yet, though. Not by any means. The current Labour PM, Kevin Rudd also has strong views on a continued constitutional monarch. “There’s a place for the British monarchy,” he muttered recently, “and that’s in Britain.” And amid all the hoo-hah on TV screens and front pages one Melbourne paper stamped its front page: “Warning: not a single Prince William story in this paper!”
But the writing is beginning to appear on the wall. And it would indeed be ironic if the scion of a flawed and tragic union were to claim a crown his father was denied.

IN my endless quest for suitable bottles to fill The Byreman’s almost constantly emptied wine cellar I have come up with a couple of labels in this land of oaky whites and mellow reds that put even his current favourites, Fat Bastard and Flying Pig, in the shade.
First of all I came across a delightful cabernet sauvignon by the name of ‘Ten Miles By Tractor’, which would seem designed to give the bibulous old Byreman and his farmer buddies a good night out sometime soon.
And if that doesn’t put him out to grass a couple of scoops of ‘Old Blue Cow’ should do the trick.
Hic!
First published in The Journal, Newcastle on January 22, 2010