Australian Republic Constitution
Australian Flag News Get Involved! Events Resources
Main Menu
ACM Home
About ACM
ACM News
Anthems
Afghan Court Martial
Book Reviews
The Commonwealth
Contact ACM
Convenor's Column
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Cost of Republicanism to the Taxpayer
Crowned Republic
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Event News
Federalism and the Mining Tax
Fiji
Flag: Keep The Flag
Governor of New South Wales
Head of State
Keating-Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
Knights & Dames
Latest News and Opinions
Links
Mate for a Head of State
Media and monarchy
Nile Inquiry
Opinion Polling
Orthodoxy and Monarchy
People's Republic?
Plebiscites
Prince Andrew
Prince Charles
Prince Harry
Prince Philip
Prince William & Catherine
Prince William In Australia
Prince William: The Early Years
Racist Republic?
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Resources
Return the Governor
Royal Commissions
Royal Finances
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
The Succession
2020 Summit
Join our Mailing List
See our selection of videos from across the world:-
ACM Videos
AussieCrownTV - ACM's own TV channel:
Aussie Crown TV
Follow ACM on Facebook:
Facebook
Self Funded Monarchy
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Finances
Royal Finances
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Head of State
Prince Philip
Prince Philip
Special Caribbean Report: Crown & Commonwealth

      Crown

The Commonwealth
The Commonwealth
Prince Harry
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Prince Andrew
Knights & Dames
Knights & Dames
The King's Speech: read the book, see the film.

The King's Speech

Watch the 2010 Neville Bonner Oration: Tony Abbott.
Tony Abbott
Nile Inquiry
Royal Commissions
Royal Commissions
Opinion Polls

 

Plebiscites
Plebiscites
2020 Summit
2020 Summit
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Afghan Court Martial
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Mate for a Head of State
Mate for a Head of State
Racist Republic?
Racist Republic
A People's Republic?
A People's republic?
Keating Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
The Keating Turnbull Republic
Crowned Republic
Crowned Republic
Polls
Republicans' Best Asset?
Is David Flint ( National Convenor since 1998) the republicans best asset, as some claim?
ACM Home arrow Prince Harry

Prince Harry
Prince Harry

Prince Harry (His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales) is the younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales and the late Diana, Princess of Wales, and grandson of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. He was born 15 September 1984 and is third in the line of succession to the thrones of 16 Realms including Australia Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

His mother died in 1997. Prince Harry, then 13 walked  with his brother, father and grandfather  behind the funeral cortège from Kensington Palace to Westminster Abbey .
After schools and a gap year in Australia and Lesotho, where he worked with orphaned children and produced the documentary film The Forgotten Kingdom, Prince Harry, enlisted in the Army . He was commissioned as a second lieutenant into the Blues and Royals of the Household Cavalry Regiment.

The British Ministry of Defence and Clarence House made a joint announcement on 22 February 2007 that Prince Harry would be deployed with his regiment to the front line in Iraq  and served for 77 days on the front line in the Afghan War.  

To protect his unit from excessive attention by the enemy, the Department of Defence withdrew him after his presence was revealed by an Australian magazine.
 He is to be best man at his older brother Prince William's  wedding to Kate Middleton to Kate Middleton on 29 April 2011.

In October 2008, to pass the tests to fly military helicopters and was presented with his wings by his father on 7 May 2010.

Having since passed his Apache flying test, it is reported that he may return to Afghanistan.



...sense of duty permeates...


Washington Post correspondent, Marie Cocco wrote in the ContraCostaTimes on 1 March 2007, under this telling headline: “U.S. upper class more stuck up than Britain's royalty, ” that that it takes no nostalgia for the Crown to hear the honour in Prince Harry’s vow -- and to wince at the contrast with the US much larger force in Iraq, from which, she declares, the sons and daughters of the American well-heeled and the well-known are largely absent. 

She says this sense of duty in the Royal Family is no new thing.  Older generations remember it in the Second World War, when The King and The Queen, as well as the Royal Family, stayed with the people.  Prince Harry’s grandfather and his father saw distinguished service.  More recently, in the Falklands war, Prince Harry’s uncle, Prince Andrew, also rode, or perhaps more correctly, flew into battle.

Prince Harry encapsulates a long standard in our Royal Family, a sense of service. This is complemented by a strong sense of charity, of helping those less fortunate than he.
 
 

 



Prince Harry and Iraq Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Thursday, 17 May 2007
ImageThe decision by the British military that Prince Harry is not to go to Iraq will be a great disappointment to the Prince. Coming on top of a series of what can only be described as errors of judgement by the authorities, including the later regretted decision to allow the sailors who were taken hostage by the Iranians to sell their stories, the circumstances in which they were taken, and the surprising comments to the media about the Iraq war made by the Chief of the General Staff, this suggests that all is not well. (We have received a letter from a reader, which we will shortly publish, putting a well argued case that the Chief of the General Staff’s media intervention was justified. Our point was not that it was made, but that it was made to the media, and in our view, in breach of established the constitutional conventions.)

 

As to the reversal of the decision to allow send Prince Harry to Iraq, surely if this is too dangerous, and  not only to the Prince but also to those in his command, this was always so.  The Prince’s uncle, Prince Andrew, was certainly in danger in the Falklands, and his presence was well known to the enemy and the subject of vicious campaign in some sections of the Buenos Aires media. Prince Harry’s grandfather, Prince Philip, was exposed to all the dangers of war, as was Lord Mountbatten who died at the hands of the most cowardly terrorists who showed no mercy for the children and the women and the elderly who were with him. Prince Harry’s determination to be with his men is noble, and was commented on favourably in the United States. There the nobility of the Royal Family was contrasted unfavourably, and some would say unfairly, with that of the republic’s patrician families.

 

The knowledge that Prince Harry, who is third in the line of succession, is not to go to Iraq, will come as a relief to many and as a great personal blow to the Prince. But like any soldier he is subject to orders, but it will probably make him wonder whether a military career is open to him.

 

He emerges from this sorry affair with no stain on his character, having acquitted himself well. 

 

 
Prince Harry Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Tuesday, 01 May 2007
 

ImageThe debate, now resolved by the confirmation by Sir Richard Dannatt that Prince Harry would go to Iraq, provoked this letter to the London Daily Telegraph of 21 April, 2007 which has been passed on to us by UK reader, Eric Brown. :

 

“Prince Harry's service:


Sir - Prince Harry, like his father, uncle, grandfather and great-grandfather, is a serving officer (report, April 20). They did not hide behind their royal status, so the media should stop implying that Prince Harry's correct decision to serve with his soldiers is something out of the ordinary.


Prince Andrew served in Invincible in the Falklands, a ship specifically targeted by the Argentine air force, not because he was aboard, but because it was one of the two most valuable ships in the task force.


The odds on Andrew becoming a casualty were higher than those his nephew will face. In more than four years since the invasion of Iraq, British dead total 144. In the Falklands, the British lost 255 dead in six weeks (94 at sea).


If you join the Armed Forces of this country, the contract includes laying your life on the line when required. There should be no exceptions, even for royalty. They don't wish it, neither should we.


Major General Julian Thompson, London SW6”


Major General Thompson states a time honoured truth which neither passing fashion nor the ramblings of the circulation driven commentariat can dissipate or dissolve. As we reported in an earlier column, Prince Harry’s wish to serve has struck a chord, particularly in the United States, where a comparison has been made between our Royal Family and the leading families of the republic. The Prince’s affirmation, indeed insistence that he must serve with his men reflects the innate sense of honour which the Royal Family have demonstrated constantly throughout the life of this Commonwealth of Australia. Major General Thompson deserves to be congratulated for pointing out the facts.

 
From London to Sydney - the media behaving badly Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Friday, 30 March 2007
   
 
 
The media recently breathlessly reported the extraordinary headline - making news that those young soldiers, Prince Harry, who is about to go to Iraq, and Prince William had gone out in the evening on separate occasions.  Apparently they had consumed some drinks, they had talked to girls, and they had danced.  In summary, they had enjoyed themselves.  And yes, Prince Harry, for very good reason, doesn’t think highly of the paparazzi and sometimes shows it.  At about the same time, the media also reported that Princess Eugenie had set up an internet diary where, they said, she chats about members of the Royal Family.  

 

This last story is not the first time that the media have made fools of themselves.  As D.D. McNicoll wrote in The Australian on 27 March, 2007, the lure of Princess Eugenie having her own uncensored blog proved too attractive to ignore for “normally cynical and cautious hacks.”  And this was not only in the UK, it was across the world.  The Mail on Sunday began it by breathlessly reporting that Princess Eugenie had referred to The Queen as "Super Gran" and that she loves hotdogs and doughnuts.  But just a few seconds perusing the blog should have had “the alarm bells ringing.”  Nevertheless UPI and media around the world, including Australia, ran with the story.

 

Well, at least this was just a case of merely careless and gullible reporting.  The media can do worse.  In this column on 13 August 2006 (“Republican media score own goal”),  we reported that it did not take long for some journalists to seek revenge for the arrest of a News of The World editor and journalist.  They were charged with and found guilty of the criminal offence of hacking a number of private message banks, including some belonging to members of the Royal Family.  Soon after the London tabloid The Sun, a sister newspaper of the News of the World, published some three year old photographs of Prince Harry and Prince William as if they were recently taken, and thus potentially compromising their current relationships. 

 

 

Although the story was almost immediately picked up around the world, few media outlets published with equal prominence, if at all, the news that the photographs were subsequently found to be old.  The Sun initially refused to apologise, saying the photos were” authentic” but not explaining its gross deceit in trying to pass them off as recent.  

 

Media outlets which should have known better fell into the trap set by The Sun. 

 

When it comes to the Royal Family, the rules aren’t applied – too many in the media take the view, sometimes unconsciously,that there is no need to check facts.  Journalists and the editors abandon their usual scepticism.  They should not to publish these stories without proper verification, but more importantly, they should be ashamed of the fact that when the truth has come out, many have not corrected them with equal prominence, or even at all.  After all, nearly every media ethics code says this is exactly what they promise to do.

 

And another thing.

 

 

 A reader writes to tell us that on the ABC TV comedy programme,

 

“The Chasers’ War on Everything” broadcast on 28 and 30 March, 2007, (with a repeat on ABC2 at 830PM on Sunday 1 April, 2007) there was a satirical piece on the NSW Leader of the Opposition, who had been photographed in his “ Speedo” swimming trunks in the recent election campaign.  An accompanying scene involved The Queen’s face being superimposed on an elderly female body wearing only men’sSpeedos.  We have not seen it, and, curiously, it is inaccessible on the ABC site, http://www.abc.net.au/tv/chaser/war/video/

 

 

This is not acceptable.  Our reader says this is an outrage and the programme director should be dismissed.  There is a difference between humour in such programmes, including programmes principally with a young audience,  and such a deviation from good taste as to merit a censure.  In other countries, including some republics, such behaviour can result in a criminal prosecution.  We are not suggesting that.  But there are limits in a civilized society, and going beyond these and causing distress to fellow citizens is not to be encouraged.  Those who think that the Royal Family is fair game should consider their reaction if their mother or grandmother were depicted this way.  Would that be amusing?

 

 

  The taxpayer - funded national broadcaster has a special responsibility in this regard, and will need to treat complaints about this without condescension.  The managing director and the ABC board must ensure that this sort of gratuitous offence is not repeated. 

 

 

 




 
Prince Harry: Honour,duty and service Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Saturday, 03 March 2007
ImageIt is ironical that it is in the United States of America, rather than in, say, the Commonwealth realms such as Australia, that there is an acknowledgement of the fact that there is something very special about Prince Harry.  Perhaps we are used to and rather blasé about a Royal Family which puts duty first.  Or perhaps the long campaign by many in the media against the Royal Family has had some effect.  Or is it that Americans still feel an inner  need for monarchy, and appreciate ours? 

Much criticized by journalists for a certain boisterous and youthful joie de vie not unknown among healthy young men, Prince Harry was even set up for a downfall by one London tabloid.  As we reported on 13 August 2006 (“Republican media score own goal”) The London Sun had used old photographs as if they were new to suggest that Prince Harry was deceiving his current girl friend.  The Australian media joined the rest of the world’s media in relaying that disgraceful and blatant lie, but hardly bothered to correct it when the truth came out.  One example of an American sense of fair play and of an ability to recognise quality is by the Washington Post correspondent, Marie Cocco.  Her piece in ContraCostaTimes on 1 March 2007 was published under this telling headline: “U.S. upper class more stuck up than Britain's royalty.”

She writes that a royal tale, even “more uplifting” than Dame Helen Mirren’s superb portrayal of The Queen in the film of the same name, had begun to unfold in London “just as the red carpets were being rolled out in preparation for the Academy Awards in Los Angeles.  This was that Prince Harry is marching off to war in Iraq”.   “Having graduated from the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, the equivalent of West Point, the son of Diana and Prince Charles is fulfilling, at his own insistence, a duty to serve on the battlefront with the troops he was trained to command. "There's no way I'm going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country", the young prince said in a 2005 interview that has been circulated widely.”

Ms.Cocco writes that it takes no nostalgia for the Crown to hear the honour in Prince Harry's vow -- and to wince at the contrast with the US much larger force in Iraq, from which, she declares, the sons and daughters of the American well-heeled and the well-known are largely absent.  “Like the United States, Britain has a volunteer military.  Unlike the United States, Britain has some vestige of an elite that believes in the notion of noblesse oblige.”  Writing in the official student newspaper of Wayne State University, The South End, on 21 February 2007,  a young contributing writer, Jason Caswell, felt obliged to respond to an earlier piece.  In this another student had written that she was "distraught" about Prince Henry going to Iraq.  Rather than being distraught, Mr Caswell says he is “humbled”.  Unlike Ms. Cocco, who compares the Prince with the US upper classes, Mr Caswell compares him with other young men.  “The Prince’s adolescent antics aside, he should be elevated as an example of selfless service.  He doesn’t need nor have to serve in the military, but decided to.  Whether it is family pressure or pure devotion that made him choose his route, it is nice to see a young, wealthy person decide to do something other than drink, vomit and rally for the fourteenth party of the night.”

 But let us return to Ms. Cocco, who is impressed by the fact that “England sends its prince into battle.”  This sense of duty in the Royal Family is no new thing.  Older generations remember it in the Second World War, when The King and The Queen, as well as the Royal Family, stayed with the people.  Prince Harry’s grandfather, and his father saw distinguished service.  More recently, in the Falklands war, Prince Harry’s uncle, Prince Andrew, also rode, or perhaps more correctly, flew into battle. The Argentinean media, once they were freed as a result of the United Kingdom’s refusal to accept the invasion of the Falklands, lamented that while conscripts were sent into battle, the officer class tended to stay in Buenos Aires.

Ms.Cocco also contrasts the way US veterans are treated with that offered by the UK authorities to theirs.  While they send their  princes to war,“…we are making paupers of our military families.”   “By what turn of history”, she demands, “did a nation founded in rebellion against absolute power wielded by a coddled elite become less concerned with equal treatment and shared sacrifice than the monarchy it overthrew?  If the American upper class were sent to battle -- or expected, by tradition, to serve -- would soldiers have shipped out to Iraq without proper body armour?  Would the Senate now be tied in a political straitjacket, with members agreeing that something must be done to change course in Iraq, but with lawmakers incapable of passing any measure to alter it?”   Comparing Iraq and Vietnam, she says one overriding truth separates the two conflicts: the draft.  As a consequence, only a tiny slice of American society today bears the republic’s military burden. “Because of this, our ruling class is proving itself to be more aloof than royalty”.   

The heroic sense of duty our Queen has shown all her life, just as her mother and father did in theirs, is also alive and well in the younger generation of the Royal Family.  Rather than an emphasis on rights and self esteem, this principle of putting service and duty first, a principle which remains a hallmark of the monarchy, was once central to the teaching and upbringing of successive generations of all Australians.  Every town, every suburb and all of our great cities have monuments on which the names of those who followed this principle and served the nation beyond our shores.  And with their names, we also find those words which capture that sense of national and personal duty: “For God, King and Country.”   It is this emphasis on the primacy of duty, this expectation that the Sovereign and the princes too will serve, which ensures that in the nation, the Crown alone can provide leadership beyond politics.

 

 

 

 

 

 
Prince Harry Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Friday, 18 August 2006

On 19 August, 2006, The Saturday Daily Telegraph published those parts of the following letter not in square brackets:

"[Dear Editor,] Your London reporter ( 16/8) pulled no punches in attacking Prince Harry, suggesting he was "cheating" on his girlfriend. This was based on a photograph on the front page of The Sun. Although passed off as recent, it was in fact three years old.

[ I have seen no prominent acknowledgement of this, nor of the most plausible explanation of The Sun’s behaviour - revenge for and a warning about the arrest of other journalists on criminal charges.]

David Flint

Australians for Constitutional Monarchy"

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 82 - 89 of 89
ROYAL VISIT 2014

Image

The Book Depository
Image
Image
Prince William: The Early Years
Prince Charles

Prince Charles

Constitutional Monarchies & Republics Compared

Image


Defend the Constitution and Flag
Australian Election Watch

10th Anniversary Neville Bonner Oration

11th Anniversary and Appeal

Crowned Republic 

   Keep The Australian Flag
Return the Governor to Government House
The Succession
The Succession
The Governor of New South Wales
Governor of New South Wales
Fiji
Fijian soldier
Media and Monarchy
Media and Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
Royal Yacht Britannia
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Events
November 2017 December 2017
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 44 1 2 3 4
Week 45 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Week 46 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Week 47 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Week 48 26 27 28 29 30