Australians aren’t focused on a republic. The British press are
By Calum Jaspan
The British media travelling with King Charles, sometimes known as the “royal rat pack”, are descending on Australia with one question on their lips: should Australia be a republic?
More than the sensationalism of the Harry and Meghan saga or the hardship of royal cancer diagnoses, the royal correspondents reflecting the King’s tour to 67 million people in the UK view the republic question as the key issue facing Australia’s ties to the Crown.
“The royal story can be trivialised,” says Robert Jobson, The Evening Standard’s royal editor. “No doubt about that ... but that’s not what this is about. This is about a visiting head of state and the state of play with what’s going on with Australia and monarchy.”
Jobson, who has written several books about the royal family, is just one of the pack that includes reporters representing outlets from the staid BBC to the conservative Telegraph and tabloid Sun. Many have travelled to Australia for the King, though the palace declined to provide a full list.
Jobson does not predict the country will leave the Commonwealth tomorrow, “but it’s up to the Australian people, and that’s why there is interest, and there’s always been interest from the British side of things”.
Australian interest is another matter.
A Resolve Political Monitor poll conducted for this masthead in September found 28 per cent of Australians were firmly against the nation becoming a republic, while 41 per cent were in favour. But with a failed Voice referendum in the rearview mirror, a cost-of-living crisis in the present and a federal election due by May next year, interest in either position is low. The Albanese government has made clear it will not hold another referendum on the republic.
The King’s visit is the first by Australia’s head of state since Queen Elizabeth II travelled here in 2011, and a lot has changed, both in the UK (six prime ministers in that time) and Australia (the same number of PMs), and for the press pack. The King’s brief trip is a fraction of the length of some of his mother’s and comes at a straitened time for media budgets.
The travelling “circus” isn’t what it once was, though the royal correspondents reject the term. “There’s always interest, but it’s not a circus,” says Jobson. “There are no gymnasts or performing clowns.”
His colleague Chris Ship, royal editor for television station ITV, says reporters on the royal round are impartial. “If there is bad news to report – dare I say it about the King’s brother, Prince Andrew – we will report it,” Ship says. “And that goes for any member of the royal family.
“They have no say who the royal editor of any particular publication is going to be ... some people think, ‘Oh, how can you cover the royal family and not support them?’ Well, it’s like saying you can only be a political correspondent if you vote Labor or Liberal.”
On this trip, Charles reportedly flew commercially to Singapore. He will fly to Sydney on an official military jet, to be welcomed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Friday evening at 8.30pm, while reporters will make their own way to Australia.
“Normally when you travel with [royals], you get a little bit more access,” says Ship.
Interviews are mostly out of the question now. Charles’ predecessor didn’t do any during her entire reign. “One-on-one time happens very rarely, but you sometimes get a chat with the King or Queen, if the opportunity allows, but never interviews,” Ship says. “They’re just sort of conversations about the events of the day or the particular tour that you’re on.”
With those unavailable, it is the big republic question that will reign.
Sign up for our What in the world newsletter to get a special US election wrap-up every Tuesday plus a note from our foreign correspondents around the globe each Thursday.