King Charles & Queen Camilla - Visit to Australia and Samoa: October 2024

[Hallo girl]

Thank you for saying this Hans-Rickard. Like you I agree that Australians (or New Zealanders, Canadians, Jamaicans etc...) should be the ones to determine their future. I also believe that whomever is the monarch at that time will graciously step aside if a realm decides to become a republic.
That being said, the behavior of some of the State Premiers is disappointing to say the least IMO.

It says more about themselves than it does about the King.

 

[muriel]

I think the position of BP has been clear under QE2 and KC3. If the people of Australia (or any other realm) want a President and not a King, they are free to make that choice. It is for the elected government of the day to hold the necessary referenda, and replace the monarch, following due constitutional and legal processes.

The British monarchy does not gain any kudos nor does the King derive any benefit from being Head of State of Australia. It is a matter purely for the people of Australia.

 

[Mbruno]

Apologies if this is off topic, but please could someone explain to me why (in reference to the Daily Mail article) one of the state premiers has renamed Anzac Day? I've always been under the impression that Anzac Day (also marked here in Lancashire, as Gallipoli Day, as many members of the Lancashire Fusiliers sadly lost their lives that day, alongside many soldiers from Australia and New Zealand), was considered to be very important in Australia.

Although I would be sad to see Australia become a republic, I understand why people may feel that Australia needs its own Head of State, rather than someone who lives on the other side of the world. However, I really don't see the need to decapitate a statue of George V. But that seems to be the way that protesters carry on these days - don't get me started on people who block roads, or throw paint to spoil other people's enjoyment of sporting events!

Support for the republic is pretty much at a low right now according to the polls. I don’t see any realistic chance of the monarchy being replaced by a republic in the near future.

 

[Durham]

With a republic the questions are:

Elected or appointed ?

If appointed, by who?

If elected – direct or indirect election?

What powers would any president have?

How would the constitution have to change?

What would the relationship be between the states & a president?

In my opinion the ARM would be best served by conducting themselves in a reasoned & respectful manner. Snubbing their head of state is not a good look. After all, the last time the Australian people were asked, a clear majority said no to a republic so it’s not as if the present system does not have democratic legitimacy.

And Australians live in an increasingly dangerous corner of the world. That’s why they want nuclear subs. Being in a personal union with not just the UK but also Canada & NZ won’t go unnoticed in Beijing. Any conflict in the Pacific would involve the Royal Australian Navy & its vessals prefixed by HMAS – His Majesty’s Australian Ship. Intangible as this may seem symbols do matter in international relations.

 

[irish_royalist]

I do not believe that most people who would vote ‘Yes’ to an Australian republic in any future referendum are automatically members of the ARM. Just as Australians who would vote ‘No’ would be as a matter of course members of the ‘Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy’ association.

I do know however that Sky News and Ben Fordham are both of a conservative stamp, and the fact that a convenor of the Australians For a Constitutional Monarchy group was invited to comment live on the ad (which I haven’t seen and will take no notice of anyway) says plenty about the bias shown on that particular programme.

My views are my own. I don’t take my opinions from external forces (whoever they are) pushing their agendas.

I voted to retain the monarchy in the sole referendum on the subject held nearly a quarter of a century ago. I have changed my mind since. I feel Australia needs its own Head of State who is Australian, not a royal person who visits on average every couple of years or so, (not that I would welcome more frequent royal tours.) And so I will vote accordingly next time.

[.....]

The King has already said that he will support the will of the people of Australia regarding their Head of State in a referendum. If you can find someone better, he will accede to that.

In the meantime, he IS your Head of State.

 

[Alison H]

The new UK government's only been in power for five minutes and has already been involved in a list of scandals involving free concert tickets, free designer clothes, using party donors' flats for jollies, etc etc. As a president would presumably come from one of the current political parties, I'll take a hereditary constitutional monarchy over elected politicians any day. However, I'm not sure that I'd be very keen on having a head of state who lived on the other side of the world, so I take the Australian republican movement's point. But I think it's rather rude of the state premiers not to attend the reception.

The journey from the UK to Australia's gruelling even for someone in perfect health. But I'm sure that the King wouldn't be going if his medical team had advised against it.

 

[Nico]

My views are my own. I don’t take my opinions from external forces (whoever they are) pushing their agendas.

I voted to retain the monarchy in the sole referendum on the subject held nearly a quarter of a century ago. I have changed my mind since. I feel Australia needs its own Head of State who is Australian, not a royal person who visits on average every couple of years or so, (not that I would welcome more frequent royal tours.) And so I will vote accordingly next time.

Interesting.
A genuine question : did you change your mind because you felt at some point that Australia needed an elected Head of State or because you deeply dislike, by your own admission, Charles III and Queen Camilla as individuals?
It's one thing to see the Monarchy as a bygone system who doesn't quite fit Australia as a modern and independan country and another to hold a grudge to the actual sovereign and his wife for, obviously, their personnal lives and actions 40 years ago or so.
As such could your future and potential vote be a way for you to "punish" them and the "external forces" be, in fact, your very own feelings againts , not the institution itself, but the actual couple representing it ?

 

[tommy100]

Very good points because since I've been able to vote (okay only for a Head of Government) I've never thought by the next election that who I voted for last time was
a) a great Head of Government
b) someone I liked personally.

 

[Sun Lion]

The Sydney Opera House is going to have a four-minute montage played … repeating on loop … on it’s sails on Friday night.

Images will be shown of previous visits here to Australia by Charles.

Apparently we didn’t do it for the Coronation … which surprises me as it is not uncommon for the Opera House to be used in this way for various events … as a cost-cutting measure.

Good to see this has been announced so people know and may go into the city to see it, (those who don’t work around there).

Though being Friday night … the time the Couple arrive in Australia … there will be plenty of people about, especially if the weather is good.

After-work drinks are a big thing on Friday evenings all around the CBD, Circular Quay and Darling Harbour before everyone goes home to the suburbs for the weekend and family life, so if it is pleasant out this is the liveliest time of the week.

It’s a nice idea and shows me we’re ready for a festive time when Charles and Camilla are in town.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I can understand the QLD Premier not attending the reception as he is in the last days of an election campaign the polls are predicting him to loose in a big way - so he won't be premier within a week of this visit. Normally the royals steer clear of politicians in election mode so that one makes sense to me.

The NSW Premier I can also understand as he will have many engagements with Charles during the visit as most of the visit is to his state.

The others are just typical of Labor and left leaning Liberals.

As for a republic - after last year's defeat in the referendum on the Voice the government and others said that it will be a long time before another attempt is made to get a referendum through. We don't like change here as shown with only 8 successful referenda in 45 attempts since Federation (and I suspect one of those wouldn't pass the 'non-age discrimination test' to even make it to the vote these days - the maximum age a High Court Judge can be is 70 and that is in the constitution - but there is no upper age limit on any other job in the country),

 

[Asteria12]

Labor and the others are just embarrassing themselves, and us. Imagine a politician pretending to be "too busy" to meet the King and thinking people will fall for that!! I voted in the 1999 referendum to retain the monarchy and I'll do it again if we have another one, which @Iluvbertie has accurately suggested won't be anytime soon. My vote, like many here in Australia, does not actually have anything to do with who the Head of State is. We may be a young country, but we are growing up and looking at the bigger picture (economic, strategic etc). When we do become a republic it will only be when it is most advantageous to Australia and only after the difficult process to make that change has been thoroughly worked through.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

I’m sure HM The King understands if the Premiers cannot meet with him due to having busy schedules and wouldn’t consider it a snub. He out of anyone would understand that exact situation.

 

[Curryong]

Interesting.
A genuine question : did you change your mind because you felt at some point that Australia needed an elected Head of State or because you deeply dislike, by your own admission, Charles III and Queen Camilla as individuals?
It's one thing to see the Monarchy as a bygone system who doesn't quite fit Australia as a modern and independan country and another to hold a grudge to the actual sovereign and his wife for, obviously, their personnal lives and actions 40 years ago or so.
As such could your future and potential vote be a way for you to "punish" them and the "external forces" be, in fact, your very own feelings againts , not the institution itself, but the actual couple representing it ?

Twenty five years ago when the last and sole referendum was held on this question my youngest grandchildren were very small. They are now adults in their twenties and one of them will be marrying soon.
In discussions between them and their friends over the last ten years, as well as with younger friends and work colleagues in a community centre in which I worked before retirement, I grew to realise that the feelings towards the monarchy that I and the older generations had were not applicable really to anyone who grew up here in Australia who was under forty. The monarchy for the main part is just not relevant to their lives in any way, shape or form. That has been my main feeling for about the last decade or so.

I do not feel the same way about King Charles or his wife as I did about the late Queen. I was born and grew up in England and I liked and admired Diana. Revenge of any sort however does not come into my thoughts on the question of the future of my country Australia and its Head of State.

I am very well aware of the constitutional difficulties regarding a change of this sort just as I was in 1999. However a great deal of water has gone under the bridge since then. I do not expect that PM Albanese will be holding any referenda in his next term if he gets in as ‘the Voice’ referenda result was such a blow. However, I do expect one in the next decade.

And as for polls, results on the republic question have gone up and down over the last twenty years. I do not regard this last one, commissioned by the Australian version of a British newspaper, to be the be all and end all of this issue. And I do believe that there will be an Australian republic in the future. It is inevitable.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The premiers have known for months when this tour was to happen and could easily have scheduled their cabinet meetings for a different day.

The QLD Premier knew that the visit would be in the middle of his election campaign as QLD has a set date for the election - fourth Saturday in October every four years.

 

[Curryong]

[.....]

The King has already said that he will support the will of the people of Australia regarding their Head of State in a referendum. If you can find someone better, he will accede to that.

In the meantime, he IS your Head of State.

Yes, I know that, I’ve lived in Australia since 1970. Both he and the late Queen said so. And, incidentally if they or rather any Governor General did try to disrupt the process it would become known and certainly wouldn’t go down well to say the least.

In the meantime King Charles is my unelected Head of State, who represents a foreign power abroad and lives halfway across the world.

And btw at the last Olympic Games in Paris, members of the BRF visited British teams there. Did any visit any of the realms’ teams, including Australia (which did extremely well in the Medals Count?) Well, No, and they don’t during any other sporting contests where England/UK comes up against any of the realms either.

 

[Hallo girl]

There is the British Media again, it always raises its head. Has the Governor General attempted to disrupt any process.? This discussion is in relation to the Politicians making excuses not to meet the King that you do not like. Not a single poster on here has said that the King must be head of state or that Australia should not make its own decision, the King himself has said the same. It is a different world that it was 70 years ago, so things and opinions will change.
As for who visited whom, during the Olympic Games or any other event, well I am not going down that road.
The King and Queen are guests in Australia, and it is not a good look to be rude to your guests, not at all what Australians are known for.