In January next year it will be 50 years since Prince Charles first arrived in Australia as a shy, tentative adolescent schoolboy.
When he stepped off the plane to a throng of media, camera shutters clattering, and a vast crowd of local royal groupies he was almost overwhelmed. He took a deep breath and under sage tutelage from his aides, launched himself into the melee and – looking firmly into the eyes of each person he met – started to get to know Australia.
The heir to the throne’s modus operandi hasn’t changed, the only difference being back then he limited his exposure to the general public to a couple of highly structured scenarios, now every visit involves dozens of events each orchestrated to meet as many Australians as possible and build bridges between Australia and the UK.
As the Prince and the Duchess fly back home, the royal machine will no doubt be pondering on the success of this latest tour. The TV and newspaper coverage was schizophrenic, veering from calling for a republic, to warm affection and praise, even uproariously toasting the heir apparent on his 67th birthday.
There was the rather silly moment when Prince’s Charities Chief Executive Janine Kirk supposedly broke protocol to place her hand on the royal behind – something she not only vehemently denied but also felt exasperated by, since the incident overshadowed what was a very serious and pertinent roundtable discussion on post traumatic stress disorder.
.jpg?resize=380%2C285)
The tabloid press went into overdrive, but to suggest that this was a break in “royal protocol” is to misunderstand the modern House of Windsor. Prince Charles’ court is from a different era than his mother’s. There’s an openness and engagement – people who meet him really do get the opportunity to chat and exchange ideas, and yes, those who work for him can guide him through an event – hand on back – without breaching any non-existent exclusion zone.
Most who met the royal couple refrained from curtseying and few remembered the “your royal highness”. But there was no off with their head moment, in fact no issue at all.
Another potentially sticky media moment occurred when Charles and Camilla were photographed by a paparazzo in their swimwear, taking time out around the pool at Government House in Perth. As a clear invasion of privacy and therefore breaking the understanding the UK media has with the Palace not to run photos of the royals in private places, the pictures were not printed in Britain.
Here however editors largely still bolshily refuse to be ruled by such edicts, and the photos hit front pages across the nation. But there was no murmur of disapproval from Prince Charles’ office. In fact no comment at all.
The republican debate pushed heartily by Peter FitzSimons as Chairman of the Australian Republican Movement saw the visit as the perfect opportunity to pound some well-rehearsed and, to be fair, quite reasonable buttons. A suitably timed poll suggested Charles would not be our King, with 51 per cent – of those 1008 polled – wanting a republic after the Queen’s tenure ends.
Then, when previous ARM Chair Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull pressed flesh with Prince Charles at Yarralumla, home of the Governor-General, the Queen’s representative on our soil, he used the moment to remind the Australian public that Charles would indeed be our King, unless that is we choose to change the constitution.
It was an under the radar remark but clear in its intent. While Turnbull won’t put the issue front and centre so early in his prime ministership, he will use his position to keep the republican debate in sight, no doubt hoping the people will take over.
But following every step of the tour throughout Australia, I found the mood among Australians to be totally at odds with the poll. Admittedly these were mostly people who had turned out to meet the royal couple, but they were numerous – especially at Albany Agricultural Show, Tanunda in the Barossa Valley, Martin Place in Sydney, King’s Park in Perth – and diverse.
These people felt Prince Charles should be given a chance, they thought he was “a good bloke” who would make “a good King”; that his mother had schooled him well, that the Duchess was a great companion and support for the royal and most importantly, they felt Charles was genuinely interested in Australian life despite living in another country.
This was the royal’s 15th visit to Australia and much of the tour focused on areas he is working on through his relatively recently established Prince’s Charities Australia.
Should he become our King, there’s no question his reign will differ significantly from that of his mother The Queen. In the UK, Charles is criticised on a daily basis for “meddling” in matters that should be left to governments. Things like architecture, town planning, the politics behind organic farming and green sustainable living. These are all personal soap boxes for the royals and areas he’s starting to become involved with in Australia.
Here, however, I suspect we won’t chide Charles for his views but rather welcome the interest and the work. If anything Charles is strengthening the bond between the monarchy and Australia by pulling on his royal wellies and getting stuck in to local projects. While the Queen has been a revered figurehead, standing for steadfastness, duty and honour, her son will be a King prepared to get his hands dirty and play a part, if we want him to. Heavily influenced by those 50 years of visits it’s fair to say he has a handle on what’s going on and unquestionably feels a personal deep personal connection.
Whether he will get the chance to be our Head of State is indeed in the hands of the people, not the politicians, and the people I spoke to, however anachronistic it may seem, want to hang on to the heritage and the reliability of the monarchy and are not ready for change.
