NewsBite

Rita Panahi: How King Charles could be monarchists’ undoing

MONARCHISTS have reason to feel confident — despite the bleating of politicians an Australian Republic remains a distant, unattainable dream. But that could all change when a kooky activist and hypocrite is the head of state.

TWO words will put the fear of god into Australia’s cocky monarchists: King Charles.

AUSTRALIA MUST DEBATE BECOMING ONE IN 2018

CABINET PAPERS SHOW FEARS OVER HEAD OF STATE DERAILED YES VOTE FOR AUSTRALIAN REPUBLIC

Monarchists have reason to feel confident; despite the bleating of politicians, the Australian Republic remains a distant, unattainable dream. But that could all change when Charles accedes to the throne. The affection that many have for the Queen and the younger royals, including future monarchs William and the absurdly adorable George, does not extend to Charles.

The climate change enthusiast is a polarising figure who lacks warmth, charisma and common sense. Most have forgiven Charles for his dreadful treatment of Diana and the infamous episode where the future king was caught on tape expressing a desire to be reincarnated as a sanitary product. However, Australians may not be so forgiving when a kooky activist and hypocrite is the head of state.

Prince Charles is a polarising figure who lacks warmth, charisma and common sense. Picture: Getty Images
Prince Charles is a polarising figure who lacks warmth, charisma and common sense. Picture: Getty Images
The Queen on Christmas Day. Picture: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
The Queen on Christmas Day. Picture: Chris Jackson/Getty Images

Charles has warned the world that “mankind must go green or die” and accused global leaders of “catastrophically underestimating” the effects of global warming.

“If the unprecedented abundance of recent catastrophic hurricanes is not the supreme wakeup call that it needs to be in order to address the vast and accumulating threat of climate change and ocean warming, than we … can surely no longer consider ourselves as part of a rational sensible civilisation,” he said last year.

Worse still Charles linked climate change to the Syrian civil war in 2015: “Some of us were saying 20 years ago that if we didn’t tackle these issues, you would see ever greater conflict over scarce resources and ever greater difficulties over drought … There’s very good evidence that one of the major reasons for this horror in Syria was a drought that lasted for five or six years, which meant that huge numbers of people in the end had to leave the land.”

Republicans should wait for Charles to be king before wasting any more public money trying to change the Constitution. Picture: AFP
Republicans should wait for Charles to be king before wasting any more public money trying to change the Constitution. Picture: AFP

Climate scientists have dismissed the prince’s “overblown claims”. A 2017 study by King’s College London and the University of Sussex debunked the absurd theory entirely. Worse than Charles’s penchant for propagating hysteria is his hypocrisy. While the prince lectures the world about the imminent threat posed by our evil excesses, he takes private jets across the globe even when on “environmental tours”. He even uses private aircraft, adding to his already substantial carbon footprint, for trips that could be made by car, including the 110 km distance from his Gloucestershire home to a polo club.

On one weekend in 2015, shortly before his infamous Syria comments, Charles took four short helicopter flights that, according to media reports, burned about 750 litres of aviation fuel, compared with only 15 litres of petrol if he’d made the trips by car.

The prince’s bizarre comments are not confined to the environment. He has written or said:

“It is the influx of foreign, European Jews (especially from Poland, they say) which has helped to cause the great problems (in the region) … Surely some US president has to have the courage to stand up and take on the Jewish lobby in the US?”

“Islam can teach us today a way of understanding and living in the world which Christianity itself is poorer for having lost.”

The affection many have for the Queen and the younger royals, including the adorable George, does not extend to Charles. Picture: AFP
The affection many have for the Queen and the younger royals, including the adorable George, does not extend to Charles. Picture: AFP

The prince also gave a lengthy speech in 2010 titled “Islam and the Environment” in which he urged adherence to Islamic principles to save the environment. This is the sort of commentary you’d expect to hear from a soy-powered first-year arts student, not a man destined to be the head of the Church of England. Can you imagine the Queen making such ill-advised comments? Part of the reason she is beloved is her devotion to duty.

As it stands, about half of the country supports Australia becoming a republic. Polling conducted in August shows that 51 per cent are in favour while 38 per cent are against and 11 per cent remain undecided. The gender divide continues to widen with 59 per cent of men in favour compared with only 44 per cent of women. Many of us may like the idea of a republic in principle but the movement falls apart when it comes to detail, chiefly how the head of state will be elected. That was ultimately what defeated the 1999 Republican Referendum.

Paul Keating’s sneering commentary this week did not help the republican cause. Picture: AAP
Paul Keating’s sneering commentary this week did not help the republican cause. Picture: AAP

Back then there was great enthusiasm for change and polls showed that between 54 and 66 per cent wanted to dump the monarchy. The masses wanted a popularly elected head of state but the model put forward was parliamentary appointment by a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting of parliament. There’s good reason to avoid direct elections; voters selecting the president would politicise a role meant to be ceremonial and create a new centre of influence.

You do not abandon the status quo and a system that has served us well to appease a few blowhards who think becoming a republic will change the character of the nation.

Paul Keating’s sneering commentary this week did not help the republican cause.

“No great state has ever had the monarch of another country as its head of state. Australia is a diminished country, diminished by its own hand,” he said. What nonsense.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, the former head of the Australian Republican Movement, on Monday flagged a postal vote on the issue. That seems foolhardy given it is doomed to fail unless there is a palatable model put to the public. Republicans should wait for King Charles’s reign before wasting any more public money trying to change the Constitution.

Rita Panahi is a Herald Sun columnist

rita.panahi@news.com.au

@ritapanahi

Rita Panahi
Rita PanahiColumnist and Sky News host

Rita is a senior columnist at Herald Sun, and Sky News Australia anchor of The Rita Panahi Show and co-anchor of top-rating Sunday morning discussion program Outsiders.Born in America, Rita spent much of her childhood in Iran before her family moved to Australia as refugees. She holds a Master of Business, with a career spanning more than two decades, first within the banking sector and the past ten years as a journalist and columnist.

Add your comment to this story

To join the conversation, please Don't have an account? Register

Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout

Original URL: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/rita-panahi/rita-panahi-threat-of-prince-charles-the-best-hope-for-an-australian-republic/news-story/e5ebdf365070bf91d30e7e44a52a634f