If we really liked the royals we‘d give them a break
THE Gold Coast this past seven days has been the happy home of many remarkable feats of strength and commitment.
Swimmer Clyde Lewis gave so much of himself in winning gold in the 400m individual medley that he could barely stand afterwards.
Tia-Clair Toomey pushed herself to honour both her country and her family to win gold in weightlifting despite carrying a burden of great personal grief.
Then there was the Malawi netball team’s extraordinary victory over New Zealand, which sparked scenes of celebration at the Convention Centre which were a real joy to behold.
But there was one feat of strength and commitment that gleaned far less praise than it deserved. An impressive performance, right at the start of the tournament, unremarked upon because it is something we have come to take for granted. In fact, if anything, it came in for inexplicable criticism.
It was the fortitude and endurance shown by Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall.
At a time when most people their age are settling into a comfortable retirement, the heir to the throne and his wife demonstrated once more an appetite for a punishing schedule.
From the moment the royal couple arrived in Brisbane it was showtime.
One engagement followed another and at each, they were required to be alert and enthusiastic, despite likely suffering from the residual effects of jet lag. From a 21-gun salute at Kangaroo Point (one wonders how Prince Charles has any hearing left if this is how he’s greeted everywhere he goes) to the late-night Commonwealth Games Opening Ceremony at Carrara, the first day of the royal visit was far from a restful one.
And the thanks they got? An avalanche of negative publicity because the unfortunate Camilla, her interest no doubt piqued by a publication that listed England as an African nation with a capital of Banjul, dared flick through the Opening Ceremony program during the three-hour show.
Critics eager to find the slightest fault carped that Camilla looked bored and uninterested. Ditto for everyone else in the stadium – the supposed lapse came during GOLDOC Chairman Peter Beattie’s speech.
But we do not allow our royals any semblance of humanity. As with team Australia, we expect a perfect performance at all times.
The criticism of Camilla was harsh, but reflective of the unfair burden we place on royals to be infallible.
It is an archaic mindset, as is much of our thinking about royals and the role they should play.
Just as the British Empire Games moved with the times and became the modern Commonwealth Games, the institution of royalty should be allowed to evolve too.
It is something even Charles himself has at times acknowledged.
Speaking on Australia Day in Sydney in 1994, Charles was relaxed about the possibility of a republic.
“It is ... perhaps not surprising that there are those who would wish to see such a rapidly changing world reflected by a change in Australia’s institutions,” he said. “And perhaps they are right ... Personally I happen to think that it is the sign of a mature and self-confident nation to debate those issues and to use the democratic process to re-examine the way in which you want to face the future.”
Our political system at present appears to lack the “maturity and self-confidence” Charles was referring to.
It seems entirely ridiculous that when citizens as indubitably Aussie as Barnaby Joyce can get turfed from parliament because of links to a neighbouring country, we retain as our head of state an English lady married to a Greek gentleman who lives on the other side of the globe.
The contradictions of our constitutional position were also on full show at last week’s opening ceremony, which went to agonising lengths to celebrate indigenous Australians as our first people – yet none could ever hope to be first man or first lady.
Some leadership on this issue might have been expected from Malcolm Turnbull, given his past advocacy of a republic. But shamefully, Mr Turnbull’s stock response when pressed is to say the issue of a republic should not be considered until the end of the Queen’s reign, inadvertently implying those favouring change should pine for her passing and that Prince Charles lacks the competence to fulfil the role.
JUST AS THE BRITISH EMPIRE GAMES MOVED WITH THE TIMES AND BECAME THE MODERN COMMONWEALTH GAMES, THE INSTITUTION OF ROYALTY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO EVOLVE TOO
The insult to Prince Charles is undeserved and unnecessary. His suitability for the role was perfectly clear during his visit to the Gold Coast last week. The question is, how much longer should we keep asking British royals to perform it?
We are at a point in history where it is clear Australia’s friendship with the royal family would not be diminished by having a local head of state. It is the situation pertaining to most nations of the Commonwealth – from a total of 53, the Queen is head of state in only 16. Royal visits would continue much as before, though perhaps minus the obligation to endure Mr Beattie’s speeches without flinching.
Charles and Camilla were popular visitors to the Gold Coast, with good reason. But if we truly hold affection for the royals we should do them a genuine favour and take a bit more responsibility for our own affairs.