Australians for Constitutional Monarchy

Garth Clark of North Sydney, NSW answers Peter FitzSimons ( This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it )  in the Sun-Herald on 18 November, 2012 :

“I accept the fact that Peter FitzSimons is a socialist, republican (as opposed to royalist) atheist, and is free to air his views in the newspaper.

“I usually read these views over my breakfast cuppa tea, mutter to myself, and go on to the cryptic crossword."

...and the evidence?...

“However, I feel that I must respond to his article ("Birthright?  What about our rights?  November 11) regarding the visit of Prince Charles and his wife, and ask on what basis does he claim that members of the Royal Family are "dullards"?

“There are many synonyms for "dullard", including dimwit, dunce, fool, idiot, imbecile.

“If he has evidence that any of these words are applicable to a member of that family, then so be it, and I will take his comments as fact.

“I believe it is simply his abhorrence of anything regal that has come to the fore."




...libel...

It seems that Fairfax journalist and author  Peter FitzSimons ( This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) may not have a good memory.

In what he describes as his “brief republican rant last week”, he comes back to the same issue in his page in the Sun-Herald on 18 November 2012.

In response to what must have been several requests for him to specify what sort of republic he wants he writes:

"I propose the smallest possible change: the Prime Minister picks the Governor-General and then the Parliament gives its assent.  Nothing else needs change!  We don't even have to change the title ‘Governor-Ggeneral’, avoiding all the baggage that goes with the word president.”

Isn’t it interesting that Mr FitzSimons   is willing to abandon the title president because it has obviously bad connotations.  This reminds me of the move by Malcolm Turnbull and the a RM to suppress two words in the referendum question.  One was ‘ president’; the other was’republic’.



... At what cost?...

It seems that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation is not the only public broadcaster to have developed an aversion to doing its duty and not broadcasting matters of national importance just because they relate to the Royal Family. This emerges from a new book,  It's All Going Terribly Wrong: The Accidental Showman, by Major Sir Michael Parker, who produced events including the Queen’s Silver and Golden Jubilees.

 Readers will recall that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation was planning to show the  old  movie “Shampoo” with Warren Beatty instead of the central events in London of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, including the river procession which involved teams of Australian lifesavers.

As a result of pressure from constitutional monarchists, the ABC correctly decided to allow Australians to witness the river procession: “ABC buckles to monarchist pressure”

 Recent programming decisions of the ABC are leading us to the conclusion – tentative at this stage – that the ABC has turned over a new leaf.
 

...BBC infected too







In the meantime it seems that a similar malady had infected the mother of public broadcasters, the BBC.

The London Daily Telegraph's royal correspondent, Roya Nikkhah, reported on this phenomenon  in “BBC snubbed Queen Mother’s 100th birthday to 'avoid clash with Neighbours” 

 She reports that when the BBC declined to cover the parade for the Queen Mothers 100th birthday, it was a decision which mystified the nation, and brought heavy criticism from politicians and even the corporation’s own stars.

“Now after twelve years the reason has been disclosed: the celebrations would have clashed with Neighbours, the Australian soap opera.

“Details of the BBC’s controversial decision have emerged in a new book, It's All Going Terribly Wrong: The Accidental Showman, by Major Sir Michael Parker, who produced events including the Queen’s Silver and Golden Jubilees and the Royal Tournament. (This book may be purchased tax and postage free by clicking on the link, for the bargain price of $30.60. In addition you will ensure ACM receives a small commission.)




...denial... 


 

Although he is a republican, he thinks the media’s role was counterproductive.  I do not agree. The media argument that a politicians’ republic is inevitable was so persuasive that a large number of politicians and celebrities jumped onto the bandwagon.  

It became fashionable, especially for the more susceptible middle-aged in the inner-city electorates.  In my view this artificially increased the republican vote not only there, but across the country.  

At the same time the constitutional monarchist message was diluted or sometimes even suppressed.

Republican support in 1999 peaked at less than 45%, but it was flaccid. Although the prominent republicans often describe themselves as ‘passionate’, there is little passion in their support. The demonstration which ACM called in 1996, with over 20,000 people has never been even approached by the republicans. Their 'crowds' have been so small to be embarrassing even during the referendum.

Republicans know they would be slaughtered in a vote today.