HRH Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden married Daniel Westling in Stockholm’s Storkyrkan Cathedral on Saturday afternoon (19/6) in what Olga Craig and Paul O'Mahony of the London Daily Telegraph described as a lavish spectacle of elegant style, royal pageantry and traditional ceremony. Her husband is now HRH Prince Daniel, Duke of Vastergotland.
HRH Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex, and his wife Sophie, the Countess, represented Queen Elizabeth II.
Other guests included HM Queen Margrethe and Prince Consort Henrik of Denmark; HM Queen Sofia of Spain; Thier Majesties King Harald and Queen Sonja of Norway;HM Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands; HRH Princess Martha Louise of Norway and her husband Ari Behn; TRH Princess Laurentien and Prince Constantijn of Holland; Crown Princess Mary and Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark.
The Greek Royal Family was very well represented by Their Majesties King Constantine and Queen Anne Marie ; HRH Princess Alexia of Greece and her husband Mr Carlos Morales; HRH Prince Nikolaos of Greece and his fiancée Miss Tatiana Blatnik, and TRH Princess Theodora and Prince Phillipos of Greece.
And, according to Telegraph, “the dazzlingly glamourous” Princess Madeleine of Sweden was there, wearing "a lavish, electric blue gown".
Church bells peeled and large crowds estimated at 200,000 watched on large screens in the streets, while almost five million viewers across Europe.
The celebrations include a private dinner at Drottningholm Palace, a lunch at the City Hall of Stockholm and a gala performance at the City's Concert hall.
...republican snobs....
According to the Telegraph, the decision of the Crown Princess, 32, to be escorted down the aisle by her father, the King was controversial. Most Swedish brides walk down the aisle with their husbands to be. The Telegraph says that this decision angered many, and that Archbishop Anders Wejryd, who conducted the service, had earlier rebuked the couple for adopting the British custom.
When the groom, her former personal trainer, first appeared in the media, the Telegraph reports that his casual appearance and his “thick, rural accent” horrified some Swedes.
We would not be surprised from our experience in Australia if this were not the usual republican elite, including some members of the commentariat. We are told endlessly by the media and republicans that the British are the most class conscious society in the world. This is clearly not so. All people of goodwill will join in wishing the Princess and her Prince every happiness.
We have long known and rejoiced in the fact that the Prime Minister of Canada, the RT Hon Stephen Harper PC MP makes no mental reservation when he swears the Oath of Allegiance. (The letters ‘PC’ refer to his membership of the Canadian Privy Council)
[ Rt Hon Stephen Harper, PC MP ]
Incidentally, just on honouring the Oath, which of our politicians could possibly be trusted as witnesses in court when they swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
They will say they have to swear the Oath of Allegiance to become politicians. But since when were honest citizens conscripted into becoming politicians?
The good news from Canada is this.
[ Rt Hon Michael Ignatieff, PC MP ]
Contrary to rumours, the Hon Michael Ignatieff PC MP, Leader of HM Loyal Canadian Opposition, is a constitutional monarchist. He made a point of explaining this to Robert Finch, the Dominion Chairman of the Monarchist League of Canada at a State Dinner for HRH The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall in Ottawa recently.
While the Leader of HM Australian Opposition, the first Executive Director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, is well and truly a constitutional monarchist, let us hope that at some stage soon the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth is also a constitutional monarchist .
They both were when this nation was led by those great statesmen of our past who led us in our most difficult days.
A reluctance to give Opposition Leader Tony Abbott credit for the plunge in the government's fortunes encourages potential challengers such as Joe Hockey and the failed opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, writes Miranda Devine in The Sydney Morning Herald (17/6).
“Their chutzpah is astonishing,” she says.
She writes of a” reinvigorated Turnbull” giving a speech containing “a carefully worded sideswipe at his leader,” while ostensibly criticizing Rudd over climate change.
''Our efforts to deal with climate change have been betrayed by a lack of leadership, a political cowardice, the likes of which I have never seen in my lifetime,'' he declared. Ms Devine says there wouldn't have been a “political junkie” in the country who didn't think he was talking as much about Abbott as Rudd.
She might have recalled that on losing the leadership, Mr. Turnbull redeclared his republicanism in the London and Sydney media just before the visit of Prince William.
Was this a declaration of product differentiation against Mr. Abbott, modelled on Mr. Peter Costello’s impotent campaign against John Howard?
...Joe Hockey....
Ms. Devine notices, as we did (“Joe Hockey: congratulations on the own goal, “16/6), the Shadow Treasurer’s curious decision to distract journalists’ interest in the government’s misfortunes.
“Equally unhelpful to his leader, the former head of Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy,” she writes “was news at the weekend that Hockey has rekindled the republic debate, for no apparent reason, by beginning talks with the Australian Republican Movement. That's called wedging yourself.”
“With the government bleeding on so many issues, on the eve of what was always going to be a crucial two weeks in Parliament, the weekend contributions of two of the opposition's most innocent-eyed politicians were self-defeating, to say the least.”
Liberals who raise republicanism surely know that this will show their party as divided with little support from the rank and file, Liberal voters and indeed Labor voters.
The National Party MP’s are sensible and principled enough to reflect their members and voters.
Prince Harry arrived in Botswana on 14 June ahead of a joint tour of southern Africa with his brother Prince William. On the next day the Princes came face to face with a massive snake and two cheetahs.
No politicians’ republic in the world provides leadership beyond politics. Not one. The French tried to do this in three constitutions, those of the Second, Third and Fourth of France's five republics. All ended in failure. Recent events in Germany show that their attempt to recreate the advantages of a constitutional monarchy in their Federal Republic has not been successful.
...crisis in the Federal Republic....
[ Schloss Bellevue: Presidential Palace ]
According to a report by Kate Connolly in The Guardian ( 14 June and republished in The New York Times and around the world), the German government has been weakened by a string of disagreements and intense infighting over austerity cuts, policy reform and the departure of senior conservatives.
In a recent poll, 53% of Germans said they expected the government to fall.
Criticised for her handling of the euro crisis, Chancellor Angela Merkel has put through a four-year €80bn (£67bn) austerity package in an attempt to reduce Germany's deficit. It seems to be most unpopular. Polling indicates almost 80% of Germans believe the cuts to be socially unfair, while 67% want an increase in the top rate of tax, which the Chancellor has strongly resisted.
Meanwhile the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has accused the Germans of creating an atmosphere that will stifle growth in Europe at a time when it should be stimulated. This is serious; France is Germany's closest EU partner and together they have dominated the Union.
In such a crisis a constitutional system needs a core institution which is above politics, one which provides stability and continuity. This is especially so in a country whose first republican constitution did not prevent, but actually allowed, the commissioning of one of the most evil regimes known to man. This was the appointment of Adolph Hitler as Reich Chancellor in January 1933.
...a federal Westminster republic....
Germany today is a federal Westminster style republic. But in the current crisis the presidency is unable to provide that leadership beyond politics to which we are so accustomed in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the other Commonwealth Realms. Indeed the presidency is part of the problem.
The Guardian refers to the President Horst Koehler’s resignation on 31 May 2010 after being re-elected last year as “unexplained”. He had claimed he was standing down because of criticism about a radio interview he gave after a brief visit to Afghanistan earlier this month. He had said that for an export-orientated country like Germany, it was sometimes necessary to deploy troops "to protect our interests... for example free trade routes".
The BBC's correspondent in Berlin, Oana Lungescu, said Mr Koehler’s shock resignation could hardly have come at a worse time for the government. “Polls,” she said “ show that the government's approval rating has plummeted to a four-year low, mainly due to its management of the eurozone crisis.”
...presidency a political prize ....
The new president is to be must be elected by a convention consisting of all members of the Federal Parliament and an equal number of representatives of the State Parliaments. So this is not the direct election which conservative proponents of an Australian presidency warn would politicise the institution.
As The Guardian’s Kate Connolly writes: “All eyes are now on June 30, when politicians will vote for Germany's new president – either the Merkel-backed candidate, Christian Wulff, state premier of Lower Saxony, or the opposition-backed, East German-born Protestant vicar and human rights activist Joachim Gauck."
" A growing number of FDP politicians are pledging to support the pastor, snubbing Merkel. If Merkel's candidate loses, the common consensus is that the chancellor's position would become untenable.”
“She would then be likely to face a vote of no confidence in parliament – an event that has happened three times since 1949 – which could ultimately lead to a switch in coalition partners, or more likely, new elections.”
The Presidency is no more than a prize in the political crisis, rather than being above politics.
No wonder Australia’s republicans consistently refuse to reveal anything about the politicians’ republic or the new flag they are trying to force on to an uninterested population.
Apart from their annual whinge this year on the public holiday for The Queen’s Birthday, their current leader kept such fundamental information to himself.
Jason Morrison, a very well known voice over the Macquarie Radio Network, will address a lunch for members of the NSW Branch of the English Speaking Union at the Sir Stamford Hotel, Sydney on Monday 5 July 2010 11.45 am for Noon.
The ESU has extended an invitation to supporters of ACM to join them. A booking form can be downloaded here.
Mr. Morrison is the popular host of the Drive show on 2GB presented each weekday between 3 & 6pm. He has worked at 2GB in a variety of roles over the last 20 years. He started at 2GB straight from school, as a 'trainee studio assistant', and was gradually promoted to become their youngest ever News and Current Affairs Director.
Delivering the largest adult radio audience in Sydney, the Macquarie Radio Network is home to the number one rating talk station, 2GB 873, and easy listening 2CH 1170. The Macquarie Radio Network has recently opened a station in Melbourne, MTR.
The presenters on the network play a significant role in reporting on and analysing political, sporting and general news in Australia.
Will the Victorian government attempt to make Victoria a republic if it is returned in the State election on 27 November? And in any event, can a State do this? I have been asked these questions by supporters who have referred to a story by Paul Austin in The Age on 29 May, ” Brumby's 'class war' manifesto.”
This story was about a draft platform to be discussed at the State Labor Conference on 19 June. It opens “A re-elected Brumby government will push for Australia to become a republic, try to rewrite Victoria's constitution...”
This was a surprise, given the courtesy and respect Premier John Brumby has shown The Queen and members of the Royal Family. Of course he must be committed to the Labor platform which supports change to a republic, just as for many years members had to be committed to the former socialist objective. While Mr. Brumby has been most correct in his relations with the Crown, the same cannot be said about the Attorney General Rob Hulls, who seems obsessively determined to remove all symbols of the Crown.
...a plan to create a Victorian republic...
But is there a plan to make Victoria a republic? You have to go to page 170 of the 175 page ALP’s Draft Platform for the 19 June conference to find any reference to a republic.
This is essentially just the standard reference, much the same as you would have found in ALP platforms for many years:
“ Labor believes that modernising Australia’s Constitution entails a transition to an Australian Republic, with an Australian head of state, who can fully represent our traditions, values and aspirations as a nation. Nationally, Labor is committed to consulting with the Australian people, other political parties, the states and the territories as to the form that the Republic should take.”
“ Labor will promote community debate about the advantages and disadvantages of the various republican models. Labor will conduct plebiscites to establish support for an Australian head of state and the preference for different forms of a Republic. When a preference has emerged Labor will initiate an appropriate referendum under section 128 of the Constitution.”
Incidentally ACM has been alone in opposing a plebiscite since it was first announced principally because we saw that it could introduce a period of substantial constitutional instability without resolving anything.
You have to conclude that if there is a Labor plan to make Victoria a republic by itself, it is being kept very secret.
....can a state become a republic?
In 1993 the Republic Advisory Committee concluded that the States could remain monarchies while the Commonwealth became a republic. The then Attorney General referred to this “heptarchy “ as a constitutional monstrosity, and then went on to campaign for it.
[ Princess Anne in Melbourne after the bushfires, 2009 ]
The advocates of the 1999 politicians’ republic thought it would be easier to introduce their republic in stages. In my view, and Sir Harry Gibbs was inclined to this position, a change of this moment requires the support of the people of all the states.
What is the position then if, say the Victorian government attempted to make Victoria a republic? The principal barrier is in the Australia Acts, 1986 which require that the Sovereign be represented in each State by a Governor. (The Australia Acts were enacted by the British and all Australian Parliaments, and terminated all legal links with the UK.)
...premature legislation rushed through in 1999....
This barrier was to be removed by a proposal by the Federal Attorney-General in 1999 that all States and the Commonwealth pass legislation, but conditional on the referendum passing. ACM strongly opposed this as premature, but apart from some strong monarchists, few MP’s in any of the thirteen houses voted against the Australia Acts (Request) Act 1999. It was indeed premature and is now of no effect.
In addition to the barrier in the Australia Acts, any legislation in Victoria would under the State Constitution require a three-fifths special majority in each House. The better view is that a referendum is also required.
Indeed it would seem that, expressly or by implication, a separate referendum would be required in each State, except Tasmania. It is politically inconceivable that any State would attempt such a major change without a referendum.
Lawyers of course are not unanimous on these matters. It is not settled, for example as to whether we have one Australian Crown, or seven. Certainly the Crown has seven separate manifestations e.g., the Crown in the right of Tasmania in contrast with the Crown in the right of the Commonwealth.
Incidentally, when it was last proposed to establish the Northern Territory as a state, it was suggested by some that a vice regal office of governor would not be appropriate. ACM’s detailed submission warned that such a proposal was divisive and explained that this would be unacceptable legally and politically.
