Voice referendum fatigue puts our republic on ice

Our Mary is one of the few Australians who can say they gave up one king but got another new one. The rest of us are stuck with the same old model for what seems an indefinite time.

This weekend the former Mary Donaldson of Hobart will become queen consort of Denmark. Our Mary is one of the few Australians who can say they gave up one king but got another new one.

However, the rest of us are stuck with the same old model for what seems an indefinite time into the future – possibly the term of my natural life.

One thing we all agree on, republican, monarchist or couldn’t care less – which is, I suspect, most of us – no one wants another referendum about anything, let alone something that requires as much thought and study as a constitutional change to the head of state.

Strangely, this is the opposite of what we thought might happen when Queen Elizabeth II died. Remember what everyone thought, even in casual conversation? People assumed (wrongly) that after the death of the longest reigning monarch in British history we would all just say farewell to old England forever and we would easily become a republic.

However, the Labor government, which promised a republic referendum and even has an Assistant Minister for the Republic, has caved in to the general ennui about the question and junked the promised referendum – and apparently any serious discussion of a republic with it.

Even tone-deaf politicians rightly have acknowledged that most of us have more pressing issues to worry about, such as mum having to go back to full-time work to help pay the mortgage.

And even the Australian Republic Movement, while archly pointing to King Charles’s huge fortune and assets, has agreed that cost-of-living issues must take priority. But ARM is backed by the Labor Party so although it readily admits to the priority of cost of living over the republic, it is not so ready to point out that the government shying away from a republic referendum isn’t just because of the economic climate – it is referendum fatigue.

The public’s lack of interest in a republic referendum is the fault of the government itself because of another referendum, one apparently unaffected by the rising cost of living. It was a referendum we didn’t really need to have if the Indigenous voice were legislated, a referendum that cost $450m of taxpayers’ money, a referendum without bipartisan support, a referendum mired in confusion and acrimony.

So, the promised republic referendum, an important and nation-defining issue for all of us, has to be shelved because of a big miscalculation over another referendum. Does one call that political irony or just plain stupidity?

But the stupidity doesn’t stop there. Despite lack of interest and pressing economic issues, fairly soon we can expect a visit from the King and probably his Queen. The King has been invited by his new-found royal fan, Anthony Albanese, who attended the coronation with partner in tow.

Such a visit might start a few conversations. The first question of that conversation that ARM could and probably will initiate is the question of the cost of this visit. This often has been raised in the past, rightly, because many people don’t realise that the expense of these visits is largely borne by us, not them.

But it won’t be the only topic of conversation people will have when the King arrives.

The big problem that monarchists have with their loyalty to the Crown is that loyalty is focused on a particular person. So the character and personality of the monarch matter. No matter how many series of The Crown Netflix churns out, no one really knows these people as well as we think we know them.

When Queen Elizabeth arrived in Australia it was usually a feel- good moment, even when she was quite old, and whatever her personal flaws she was genuinely popular. Although after the death of Diana there were noticeable rumblings against members of the royal family, especially about the then Prince Charles, even republicans admired the queen’s stoicism and good character in the face of some pretty awful public scandals.

More to the point, they admired the way she fulfilled her duties as head of state. She just seemed to put her hat on her head, put one foot in front of the other and keep going, despite the tawdry tumult surrounding her awful family. That is something a lot of women especially can identify with.

However, although placing himself in the forefront of the monarchical fan club, the Prime Minister should not be surprised if the King does not generate the kind of public feel-good moments his mother did.

One positive thing the salacious tabloids (and perhaps even Netflix) have done by turning them all into real flawed people is to shine a probing light on the so-called magic of the monarchy, that ethereal sense of royal otherness, that requires us to curtsy when we meet the monarch. Many people now have reservations about that sort of deference.

It remains to be seen how the King’s visit will turn out. It might be a great success; after all, he has said he liked attending school here. No doubt there will be a contrast with the style of Queen Elizabeth. The King’s style as our head of state is still unknown. However, in Britain, as prince of Wales, Charles had a reputation for interference. There might possibly be a temptation for him to take his prerogative to warn a bit too seriously.

We all hope that doesn’t happen but I suspect if a poll were to be taken here the monarchy would not be as popular as it was when Queen Elizabeth lived, nor would people want it to continue, despite the lack of a referendum.