Sarah Gall is a political data scientist and membership secretary for the UK’s Conservative Friends of Australia. She previously headed up political and policy research for the Prime Minister of Australia.
As tens of millions of people tuned in to watch the Coronation coverage on Saturday, Australia’s public broadcaster, the ABC, thought it an appropriate time to air a two-hour special on “how relevant the monarchy is to the lives of Australians and within the broader Commonwealth in 2023”.
While all other Australian broadcasters were able to provide informative coverage which matched the tone of the celebratory and historic occasion, the ABC stacked their panel with anti-monarchists who sapped the joy out of their viewers, causing them to change channels.
Despite His Majesty making the Coronation inclusive of all races and faiths across the Commonwealth, the biased panel described the Crown as a symbol of continuing oppression for Indigenous peoples. They also explained that the Coronation isn’t something to celebrate given it has a “malignant past”, and that we should abolish things like prisons because they too are out of date and reflective of colonial history.
Whether you agree that the discussion should have taken place or not, the panellists failed to address the question at hand and gave a highly myopic and one-sided view (which is unsurprising for those familiar with the ABC, and their dominant republican rhetoric and left-wing biases). As such, here are some counterarguments to the debate.
Firstly, Australia’s system of government contains elements from both Washington – a federation of states – and, unfortunately for republicans, Westminster – a constitutional monarchy: a so-called ‘Washminster’ system. This places the monarch as one cog in the wheel that is integral to the functioning of Australia’s democracy.
While the role is largely symbolic, it does provide stability from one impartial head of state over decades rather than just a lifespan of a political term. This is particularly useful during times of political upheaval as there scope for intervention from an apolitical figure, should it be required as a last resort.
In the Australian context, such an intervention did occur in 1975 when Gough Whitlam, the Labor Prime Minister, was dismissed from office for failing to obtain supply (the bills which are required to pass both houses for the government to function).
This is an event which the republican movement likes to rewrite by laying the blame on the monarchy. In reality however, the Governor-General – who, in practice, is Australia’s Head of State and is an Australian chosen by the Australian Prime Minister – was the one to dismiss Whitlam, to the surprise of the Crown. A former Labor Minister remarked on the issue:
“This was about a Governor-General pushing the boundaries too far. I don’t think the monarchy’s popularity suffered, because people couldn’t relate this to them [the monarchy]. In fact, there would have been a latent view that the Queen would not have done anything that rash or politically biased.”
Despite the Governor-General being legally permitted to dismiss Whitlam for his failure, it did alienate some on the left of politics.
But also highlighted the comfort and stability of the monarch outside of Australia’s political sphere. According to Professor Marcia Langton, a highly-regarded Indigenous academic, it is the Indigenous Australians who have developed some of the closest bonds with the monarchy. Professor Langton said,
“There’s a lot of history in between and I think people are inclined to forget that Aboriginal people have met the royal family going way back. They have made petitions to the royal family…Back in the 1930s, Aboriginal people petitioned the royal family for equal rights and better treatment.
“The Queen can’t interfere in politics, but what she can do is to give an impression of where she stands on a matter without being political.”
It is this ability to give an impression without being political that has served the modern monarchy well in the UK, Australia, and the rest of the Commonwealth today. This gives the royal family the ability to highlight important issues, without politicising them, such as on climate change, mental health, or early childhood learning.
In Australia, it has also meant the highlighting of various charitable organisations or fundraising appeals. For example, the royal family has raised awareness of the devastation caused by bushfires and floods in Australia, and have led by example in making private donations to aid in recovery and relief efforts.
In addition, new legacies have been forged in Australia through the work of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards and the Prince’s Trust; the latter organisation has a number of initiatives which promote sustainable urban development, support Indigenous peoples, advocate for rural communities, aid in preparing young people from disadvantaged backgrounds into employment, and assist in the transition of military personnel into civilian life.
In fact, it was this charity that gave the opportunity to Tayla Green-Aldridge, an 18-year-old Indigenous woman, to attend the Coronation on Saturday. This was in recognition of Tayla’s hard work, having completed and benefited from one the Prince’s Trust programs.
Tayla described her excitement and nervousness prior to attending the event:
“I can’t compare going to the Coronation to anything I’ve experienced before. Obviously, I think I’ll be nervous, but it will be an honour to just be there in the presence of something that’s been going on for centuries.”
There is magic in the monarchy, an almost fairy tale existence that many Australians still admire. Criticisms that the royal family are out of touch or unrelatable tend to be from the same people who believe that equality is achieved by bringing people down rather than up.
And these same critics tend to not to give due consideration to the monarchy’s appeal. Australians currently have the best of both worlds: an Australian Head of State and a connection with the monarchy.
The ABC and their republican friends would do well to remember this as it is what keeps our democracy healthy and stable.