ARM dithers as royals implode

If we were monarchists we would be elated about the inability of the nation’s leading republicans to agree on basic steps towards an Australian head of state. At a dinner on Tuesday to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1999 referendum, Malcolm Turnbull, the main architect of what turned out to be a failure, tried to refire the debate. Mr Turnbull, who was silent on the subject during his prime ministership, has proposed a two-tiered republican vote. That would include a plebiscite on whether a president should be elected by voters or the parliament. That plan has put him at odds with the Australian Republic Movement’s incumbent chairman, Peter FitzSimons. Division among republicans was at the heart of the referendum fail.

These fundamental differences between the original champion of the republic and the man who unconvincingly leads the movement today does not augur well. And sadly so given the current state of Royal affairs. between the red bandana man from After the war of the Waleses and the brief Fergie fiasco, the Queen, 93, had steadied the ship, celebrating her 65th anniversary of coronation with her customary dignity and grace. Plenty of 20-something Australians had warmed to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their brood. But things at the top of the Mall are unravelling. Prince Andrew’s banishment from royal life will not contain serious allegations, which he denied in an unconvincing interview, of underage sex arising from his friendship with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The sulking Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their taste for private jets, at odds with their ecowarrior personas, are not helping. If the Prince of Wales, 71, can pipe down about time running out for the planet he may prove a worthy king. Of England. This newspaper has long supported an Australian head of state. And as the second Elizabethan era draws nearer to a close, republicans should be able to agree — at the very least — on an acceptable path forward.