It’s that time of the year again – April has become the crazy royal month in the media and this year is no exception.

Eugenie and Beatrice want out. Picture: AP

Early the other morning, Kerri- Anne Kennelly’s producer called me to say the London media was buzzing with two stories; one was the ongoing speculation about William and Kate, the other about Andrew’s and Fergie’s daughters, Beatrice and Eugenie.

So I rushed into Channel Nine’s studio and shared my thoughts on both matters with Kerri-Anne’s huge audience.

Let’s start with Wills and Kate. I go along with the speculation that an announcement he will make an honest woman of his live-in lover in June.

The Palace wants all this formalized and put to bed before the Poms go starkers in the lead up to the Queen’s 60th anniversary in 2012. It will be interesting to see if there’s any local interest in this mammoth anniversary – as far as the pure theatre of a royal event of such magnitude goes there will more than likely be more than just a passing interest in it.

The wedding of William and Kate will be headline grabber - for no other reason that they are a very attractive pair of international celebrities. Even the most rabid of the monarchists would surely agree with me that the members of the royal family who dress up and ride in carriages have forgotten how to behave like royalty.

The princesses, Eugenie and Beatrice have, as they say, a gutful of the lives they are expected to live as royal highnesses and would love to ease themselves away from it all.

The big problem is that they are in line to the throne – if there was some kind of crazy terrorist attack and the handful of those in line before them bought it – one of them might be queen!

This means they are under 24 hour surveillance by the cops of the royal protection unit – and their lives are not their own.  For a couple of young sisters this would be appalling and their only way out would be to tell Granny they want out, renounce their titles and go their own normal ways.

Don’t hold your breath but hey, you never know…they are after all Fergies’s daughters.

Most commented

25 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • T.Chong says:

      08:10am | 12/04/10

      Great work Bazza. I know everyone needs a job but…,
      Other than the family these people are born or marry into, what makes any single one of them special?
      Why are any of theses people considered natural born reference points for all things wise and virtuos?
      Why do some people feel the need to believe that any of these people are better or “more worthy” than anyone else?
      Two very good histories of GB ,by Simon Scharma and David Starkey show that British royalty (and all others too) is largely about one particular family having the ability to out manoevure, out plot and even kill their rivals . Devine inspiration, and annoitment it never was.
      Sorry to David Flint, Tony Abbott, Bronny Bishop,  and other grovellors, but “royalty ” represent nothing more than vested interests holding tight to the cash cow of lands and institutions that the present lot did nothing to earn.

    • Brad Coward says:

      01:30pm | 12/04/10

      Once again….T. Chong comes along and proves that nobody, but nobody, hates better than the Left !

      I may not adore the Royal Family, but I certainly respect them.  Who do you respect T. Chong ?  Respect is not generally part of the Leftie DNA, so I’m waiting, hands shaking in expection of your sermon.

    • James D says:

      08:13am | 12/04/10

      Royalty suffers from too much inbreeding. I personally have no interest in them at all. I would not be surprised to hear that others find them boring also.  I feel no loyalty to these over rated British Royals and I would quite happily vote for a Republic

    • Daniel says:

      09:50am | 12/04/10

      Smart girls.

    • Anjuli says:

      10:05am | 12/04/10

      :I am English born and bred raised to stand for the King (then) later the Queen ,but I think it is time they went ,it is a totally out dated adoration of people who have become celebrities who the Americans got rid of and now can’t get enough of .They wouldn’t know what the ordinary folk have to put up with ,Eugine and Beatrice like all the money it brings with the titles they have but put them in the real world one wonders what they would become without all the connections that comes with royalty.

    • John A Neve says:

      10:36am | 12/04/10

      One wonders why “the Royals” take up so much media time?  Possible because they require so little work on the part of the journo, thay are a great fill in.

      What people do on the other side of the world and who have little if any impact on my way of life, concerns me not at all.

      Royalty and religion go hand in hand, they are a salve for the masses. Rather like a cigarette or a good pooh.

    • Seano says:

      11:50am | 12/04/10

      I think the royals have fading relevance in the UK. Ok the charity work is good and they’re a great tourist attraction. But they have no relevance to us and it’s time we cut the strings.

    • Captain Col says:

      01:10pm | 12/04/10

      If the royals are of no relevance why are you all talking about them?  Most of the commanters here would come in their pants to get a chance to have a chat to a film star or a Tiger Woods or a some other fleeting celebrity. 

      For Anjuli, the reason you stand (for anyone) is out of courtesy, not adoration.  Perhaps the word ‘respect’ would be useful.  I think you’ll find the royals see quite a lot of the ‘ordinary folk’ and have a deeper understanding of how everything works than most of the chattering classes because they actively involve themselves in charities and good works, visit communities all over their realms and actually meet and talk to them.

      I think they are a civilising influence on the world of politics and, In Australia, excellent value for money because we don’t pay for them.

    • Roy McKeen says:

      01:18pm | 12/04/10

      A few days ago I received an email with photographs of the queen with every US president from Barack Obama going back to Harry Truman. The punchline was comment on (i) how old the queen is and (ii) how old I must be if I remembered Harry Truman. 
      However, the message that I got from the photographs was the huge difference between the manner in which the queen and the presidents became head of state of their respective countries. The queen was born in the right bed, into a Church of England family and did not have a brother. No hard work, no study required. By contrast, the US presidents achieved high office through the democratic process.
      Australia is a democratic country. Any Australian can aspire to become whatever he or she pleases. With on exception. No Australian can aspire to become head of state of Australia. That’s why constitutional monarchy stinks!

    • Captain Col says:

      01:58pm | 12/04/10

      The Governor General is Australia’s Head of State, Roy.  She holds the same position in Australia’s parliament to the Queen in the UK’s. 

      Such a minor issue and you then think the whole system stinks?  Not a single redeeming feature?  Chuck the lot overboard and start with a fresh sheet.  Lots of republican models to choose from.  Make your pick and get everyone to agree.  Give yourself some time though.

    • Wallaby says:

      02:47pm | 12/04/10

      Wrong!. The GG is the queen’s representative. She is not our head our state.

    • Wombat says:

      07:35pm | 12/04/10

      That myth about the Governor General being our head of state has been killed so many times but it just keeps coming back.

    • Captain Col says:

      09:26pm | 12/04/10

      Well, Wombat, you should actually read some high court decisions to the efect that the GG is the head of the commonwealth and the governors are the heads of their states.  So it’s no myth.  Yes I know it has been argued about and will be for some time yet.  Here’s one test.  When the GG travels overseas our governments of all political colour have insisted that the GG is received as Australia’s head of state.  The final test.  What would a new president (presumably head of state) do that the GG doesn’t do now?

    • Wombat says:

      09:32am | 13/04/10

      Captain Col

      If the Queen isn’t our Head of State then somebody needs to tell our government.

      From the Dept of Foreign Affairs and Trade website at http://www.dfat.gov.au/protocol/protocol_guidelines/15.html
      “Australia’s Head of State is the Queen of Australia, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.”

      And if the Queen isn’t Australia’s Head of State then somebody needs to tell her.

      From her website:
      “The Queen is Head of State of 15 Commonwealth realms in addition to the UK.”
      That’s us that she’s referring to.

      Liz 2 is a brilliant diplomat. In recent years she has diplomatically refrained from directly describing herself as Australia’s Head of State (except for one recent incident at the UN).
      I think that a very simple test here is to ask this question:

      Has our Queen ever stated that she is not Australia’s Head of State?

    • jg says:

      03:34pm | 12/04/10

      Even the royals are sick of themselves

      Wow, another Everingham anti royal rant. What a surprise. Anything new to add Barry? You really have become tiresome.

    • Roy McKeen says:

      03:42pm | 12/04/10

      Yes, Captain Col. Our constitutional monarchy stinks!  It stinks of the sectarian bigotry which prevents a member of the Catholic faith from becoming monarch and which is enshrined in the laws of succession to the throne. To their credit the South Africans got rid of apartheid which was racial bigotry enshrined in law. But after more than 300 years we still have legislation which describes Catholicism as “this damnable doctrine” - Bill of Rights 1688. And which states that” it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this protestant kingdom to be governed by a papist.”  Old fashioned language with an outdated, antiquated hatred soaking through every word. And the only instance in the civilised world where prejudice is
      enforced through legislation.

      Constitutional monarchy stinks with the anti-female gender prejudice which states that in the line of succession to the throne males take preference before females. Thus, if King George VI and Queen Elizabeth had had a son born, say, after Margaret he would have become king. That stinks, Col!

      I know people like you, Col. They are ashamed to be Australian. They cheer for England during the Ashes series. They sing ‘God save the queen’  at their monarchist meetings, not ‘Advance Australia Fair.’ They look at Australia’s flag and see only the Union Jack. They still call England home. They believe that monarchy brings stability but in their constitutional amnesia they forget that during the last 40 years of the queen’s reign more than 3,000 of Her Majesty’s subjects have been murdered and more than 40,000 injured in a bitter civil war. At the very heart of that civil war is the sectarian hatred at the pinnacle of which sits a monarchy based on anti-Catholic prejudice. People like you, Col, say that the monarchy brings political stability to Australia. The truth of the matter is that it is the good common sense of the people of Australia that brings political stability to Australia. It is not because of the monarchy. It is in spite of it!


      Australia is the land of the fair go. We deserve far, far better than this Ruritanian pantomime to which monarchists love to grovel, curtsey

    • Captain Col says:

      06:21pm | 12/04/10

      Well, Roy, I’m not going to convince you.  I think you’ve made your mind up.  If you are of Irish catholic descent as it sounds, your mind was made up for you centuries ago.  Don’t bring your hatreds to Australia.

      Pity you can’t see that there is a good side to the way we are governed and that we, of all nations, enjoy a stable and democratic system which has the support of the people.  Far better to be here than in any of the world’s republics I think. 

      Australian’s chose their monarch convincingly, or don’t you remember the referendum ten years ago?

    • John A Neve says:

      06:39pm | 12/04/10

      Captain Col,

      Just what has “the royals” got to do with the way we are governed?
      I don’t remember Australians choseing “their monarch”, rather I thought we rejected a republic?
      Sorry Captain, but if you were a girl I am sure you’d have wanted to be a princess.

    • stephen says:

      04:39pm | 12/04/10

      I’m poor, ugly and from the ‘dark side’, and i reckon if those two want a sea-change, well…. i’ll swap places.

    • Liz says:

      04:35pm | 12/04/10

      Problem is they would have to give up their handsome allowances courtesy of the British taxpayer..think not.

    • loz says:

      08:37pm | 12/04/10

      The members of the Royal Family have a deep affection for this nation. Yet, they have had to show so much grace under fire and endure the countless insults, and insidious attacks over the years.  Most of the media talk comes from the left. It is the ‘wanted’ attention on the Royal Family that makes mega bucks for the media people, not the other way round. No cost to us, and only 60p annually to the British.  But of course they are relevant and that’s why
      they ‘re a stumbling block for the guttermost to the uppermost. Remember, it was back in the 1920’s the forces of Communism in the Stalin years said they couldn’t take over the world until they were rid of the Royal Family. Osama Bin Laden said several years ago, that the Queen was one of Islam’s severest enemies.  Australia is for a fair go and deserves something better?. Have we become spoilt for choice?

    • John A Neve says:

      07:30am | 13/04/10

      Loz,

      Perhaps you could explain your comment “the Royal Family have a deep affection for this nation”?

      As to Stalin in the 1920’s, the royal then were a far ry from the royals today, even Stalin would have seen that.

      Regarding Osama Bin Laden, I findit starnge that a royalist would quote a terrorist to support their point of view!!

    • Sean says:

      10:16am | 13/04/10

      Those who do not know their history or prefer to live in a world of make believe, or those who have recently immigrated from Britain are the only ones forcing us to maintain a link with the royals. A monarchy has no place in a truly egalitarian society.

      Australia egalitarian? Of course we are. Why do you think the poms hate us and make quick and broad statements about our nation so often - because they cannot easily identify class structure and that confuses them.

      Australians who support the monarchy are simply self loathing. They are yet to learn the lessons of freedom in the new world and hang onto a past drenched in force-fed shame. Let go of mummy’s hand now, it will be oooook.

    • John A Neve says:

      02:03pm | 13/04/10

      Sean,
      While I agree with most of your post. Please, no class structure!!! I’d say this county is more class conscious than Britain.

      Early Australians did not even have a vote until 1967. Women could not even get a drink in a public bar in the 60’s.

      The way migrants were treated not to long ago, I won’t mention the names they were called.

      Come on Sean, put your glasses back on and unblock your ears.

    • loz says:

      10:55pm | 13/04/10

      John,

      Members of the Royal Family have enjoyed their time in Australia. So it would stand to reason to have an infinity with the people. Prince Charles attended Timbertop, Geelong in 1966 and went back there in 2005 for the school reunion. The Victorian Bushfires, an example of the generous donations and concern by the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Princess Anne and Prince’s WIlliam and Harry. That it is only a snippet.

      The Royal Family are different people today, but then, are not all those that are living. The people are different but the Throne is the same.

      The two examples used (there are more) were to show that some things don’t change (past and present). Al-qaida was foiled of a murder plot on the Queen. The quote stated was in the papers and on the news.  But no leader stood up to defend the Queen. Not one word. Why weren’t there questions on why would a gracious Queen be are threat to them. The point of view taken, is that this trivial debate we have within our country doesn’t address the bigger picture.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

David Penberthy

That was pretty much the best thing I have ever seen #crowwwwwwwwws

Anthony Sharwood

MT @RaidersCanberra "Congrats to Blake Ferguson on his selection for NSW. LIKE to show your support!" Um guys, you can't "like" a Tweet

Paul Colgan

@stilgherrian said Australia

Paul Colgan

RT @TheEconomist: Google is coming under intense scrutiny from regulators http://t.co/4bfvNp5oyEhttp://t.co/NLV9yRSIKr

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter