Charles risked ‘impartiality’ of monarchy with dismissal letter to Kerr: Queen’s aide
Queen Elizabeth’s private secretary reveals the monarch ‘took quite a liking’ to Gough Whitlam and says King Charles’ letter of support to John Kerr risked the monarchy's standing in Australia.
Queen Elizabeth II’s private secretary, William Heseltine, believes King Charles’s letter of support for John Kerr after his dismissal of Gough Whitlam risked the “impartial standing” of the monarchy in Australia and would have advised against sending it.
The Charles letter, discovered by this writer and revealed in The Australian in October 2020, was sent to the governor-general in March 1976, encouraging him not to “lose heart” because “what you did last year was right and the courageous thing to do”.
Sir William, interviewed for a new biography of Gough Whitlam, was assistant private secretary during the Whitlam government and later private secretary to the Queen (1986-90).
He confirmed the letter was sent without her knowledge or that of her staff.
“Given the uproar the dismissal had caused in Australia, it seemed unwise to say the least for the heir to have commended the governor-general, even privately,” Sir William, 95, said.
“In my experience, such private letters always found their way into the public arena.
“It speaks well of the prince’s loyalty that he felt he should write to Kerr in these terms, but those more concerned for the impartial standing of the monarchy would have been bound to advise against it.”
Sir William also disclosed that the Queen “set out quite deliberately to charm the Whitlams” on their visit to Windsor in April 1973 and was “rather pleased to let it be thought she had exercised her feminine wiles to such effect”.
The Queen supported Whitlam’s modernisation agenda, including altering her style and title, introducing Australian honours and changing the national anthem. There had been “little or no difficulty” in resolving several of these matters, Sir William wrote in his diary.
“Gough was always very polite, and more than polite, in public references to her – admiring,” Sir William recalled. “The Queen took quite a liking for Gough.”
He referred to the “horseplay” and “holiday spirit” during the Easter visit in his diary.
The Queen persuaded Whitlam to maintain “by the Grace of God” in her title and to be known as “Elizabeth the Second” rather than “Elizabeth”. A cabinet decision to omit references to the Queen in the oath of allegiance for citizens was dropped because of her opposition.
A February 1973 letter from the Queen’s private secretary, Martin Charteris, to governor-general Paul Hasluck referring to the oath has been redacted by the National Archives of Australia but the letter is fully disclosed in the new biography. The Queen felt she had “a right to be informed” before the decision was made.
Whitlam apologised.
Sir William was the first person in the royal household to hear of Whitlam’s dismissal, when he received a 2.30am phone call from Government House. “I remember being absolutely gobsmacked,” he recalled, “and wondering if somehow or other it could not have been avoided.”
Charteris and Sir William informed the Queen about 8am. “Her Majesty, as always, took the news quite calmly, without any outward show of emotion,” Sir William remembered. “Fair to say, we all thought it a pity that it had to happen this way.”
In a letter a week before the dismissal, on November 4, Charteris warned Kerr that the reserve powers should “only” be used for “constitutional, not for political, reasons,” only “in the last resort” and “when there is demonstrably no other course”.
There was no encouragement or knowledge of a dismissal.
It can also be revealed that UK Labour prime minister Harold Wilson was “shocked” by the dismissal, thought the reserve powers of the crown were redundant and sent a note of support to Whitlam.
“He was quite outraged,” said Bernard Donoughue, head of the No 10 Downing Street Policy Unit. “He disapproved, and (foreign secretary) Jim Callaghan disapproved, of what had happened.”
Joe Haines, press secretary to Wilson, said he thought the dismissal was wrong. He added that the Queen would never have “interfered” in Australian politics.
“She was very fond of Australia and Canada, and very careful not to appear to be throwing her weight about,” he said.
Tom McNally, adviser to Callaghan, said there was no evidence of “conspiracy” involving Buckingham Palace, No 10 or the Foreign Office. “The general feeling was shock and concern for the long-term implications that the governor-general displaced a democratically elected government,” he recalled.
“This was bringing the monarchy into the very heart of politics.”
Sir William confirmed that Buckingham Palace was “extremely relieved” by Kerr’s early departure from the vice-regal role in December 1977.
“His drunken appearances in public alone suggested that it was time for him to go,” he said.
Troy Bramston’s Gough Whitlam: The Vista of the New is published by HarperCollins on October 28. Anthony Albanese will launch the book on Friday.
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout