2006-2007 Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window



Related issue outlines:
No related issue outlines
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
prince
william
governor

Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
Search for listed newspaper items online - see end of this page

2007/18: Should Prince William be Australia's next Governor General?<BR>

2007/18: Should Prince William be Australia's next Governor General?


What they said ...
'I think it's great that Prince William wants to be involved with Australia'
Federal Health Minister, Tony Abbott

'I do think the practice of having a person who is Australian in every way and a long-term and permanent resident of this country is a practice I would not like to see altered'
Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard

The issue at a glance
According to a biographer of Princess Diana, Prince William would like to become Australia's next governor-general.
In her biography of Princess Diana, 'The Diana Chronicles', former Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown has noted that in the 1980s Prince Charles had wanted to become Australia's Governor General. Tina Brown later told The Australian Women's Weekly, 'You might like to know ... it has been thought up in regard to William, too. Yes, they would very much like that and he would like that very much.'
The response within Australia was immediate. The Prime Minister, Mr Howard, indicated that despite his ongoing support for Australia as a constitutional monarchy, he believed we should continue the tradition of appointing an Australian citizen as Governor General. The Opposition leader, Mr Rudd, was concerned that Prince William was too young to assume the role. Mr Rudd also suggested that the position was better occupied by an Australian.
Lobby groups such as Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy have supported the possibility. A number of newspaper polls have shown more than fifty percent of Australians would support Prince William as Australia's Governor General.

Background
The role of Australia's Governor General
The Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia is the representative in Australia of Australia's head of state, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia, who lives in the United Kingdom. The functions and roles of the Governor-General include appointing ministers and judges, dissolving Parliament, giving Royal Assent to legislation, issuing writs for elections and bestowing honours. The Governor-General is President of the Executive Council and Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Defence Forces. All these things are done and all these posts are held under the authority of the Australian Constitution and carried out in the name of the Queen. Further, the Governor-General acts as vice-regal representative to the Australian Capital Territory.
The Constitution provides that a 'Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty's representative in the Commonwealth . . .' The Constitution grants the Governor-General a wide range of powers, but in practice he or she follows the conventions of the Westminster system and (with occasional and rare exceptions) acts only on the advice of the Prime Minister of Australia or other ministers. Even in the appointment of the Prime Minister, the Governor-General rarely exercises any discretion, usually appointing the leader of the largest party or coalition of parties in the House of Representatives.
Beyond constitutional functions, the Governor-General has an important ceremonial role. He or she travels widely throughout Australia to open conferences, attend services and commemorations and generally 'provide encouragement to individuals and groups who are contributing to their communities.' When travelling abroad, the Governor-General is seen as the representative of Australia, and of the Queen of Australia, and is treated as a head of state in most ways.
(This information has been drawn from the Wikipedia entry for Governor-General of Australia. The full text of this entry can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor-General_of_Australia)

Internet information
Wikipedia's entry on Prince William, giving a range of information about him can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_William_of_Wales

On June 28, 2007, Professor David Flint, the convener of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, published an article expressing his support for the appointment of Prince William as Australia's Governor General and explaining those political factors which he believes have prevented this. The full text of this article can be found at http://www.norepublic.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=924&Itemid=4

On June 30, 2007, The TimesOnline published an article titled, 'Australia rejects top role for party prince'. The article details the reasons given for rejecting Prince William as an Australian Governor General and gives background information on the role of Governor General. The full text of this article can be found at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2007660.ece

On July 10, 2007, the British Online Forum published an article titled, 'Prince William: finding a role fit for a Prince'. It outlines the difficulties facing Prince William as he seeks a career. The full text of this article can be found at http://theinternetforum.co.uk/node/2638

Arguments in favour of Prince William becoming Australia's next Governor General
1. Appointing Prince William as Australia's next Governor General would be a popular move
There has been a number of newspaper polls conducted since the possibility that Prince William might become Australia's next Governor General was broached in the media. Most of these polls have put the popular approval for such a move at over fifty percent. Prince William's high profile and general popular appeal has been argued as one factor which would make him an appropriate Governor General.
Professor David Flint, writing for Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, has stated, 'According to the News Limited poll on 29 June, 2007 of those who want to retain the position, 82% say he [Prince William] would be great in the role. I was asked my views about it on the Virginia Trioli programme on ABC Local Radio 702, which is Sydney's second rating programme. The first caller was vehemently opposed but said she was in such an apoplectic state she could not give coherent reasons against the appointment. All other callers were strongly in favour, including one who said she was not a royalist. So it would be very popular ...'
Prince William is particularly popular with younger people and this is a group that pro monarchists would like to see become more attached to the institution of monarchy. Larissa Dubecki, reporting in The Age on May 26, 2007, noted, 'Wills is now the most popular single male on the online networking site Facebook - think MySpace for the university crowd - where his freshly minted listing as "William Wales" [later revealed to be a hoax] drew the kind of attention normally reserved for rock stars and trouble-prone American heiresses. Hence the poking, which in Facebook parlance means to send a virtual greeting.'
Professor David Flint has further stated, 'I suppose the young tend to ignite magic and I have no doubt that when Prince William comes ... he too will reignite the magic.'
It has further been argued that William's popularity and his international recognition would make him a figure that could attract significant tourism to Australia. One of the practical benefits that the Royal Family offers Britain is that it is a major tourist attraction. It has been argued that were Prince William appointed Australia's Governor General he would have a similar effect in this country.
A number of readers posting to Internet media sites have made this point. One reader, posting to the news.com.au site on June 29, 2007, noted, 'The effect of this [William as Australia's Governor General] would be more British investment, tourism and migration so ... it would be a positive move.'
Similarly, one of those who posted a comment on 2GB's Internet site on June 29, 2007, noted in favour of a Prince William appointment, 'I think it is an inspired idea. Think of the world-wide publicity and focus on Australia. Fabulous for tourism and business opportunities.'

2. It would provide the potential monarch with an occupation and valuable experience
It has been argued that serving as Australia's Governor General would be valuable experience for the future monarch. As Queen Elizabeth's titular representative in Australia, William would perform a range of ceremonial functions not dissimilar to those he would ultimately perform should he become king.
The Windsors are generally very long-lived. William's maternal great grandmother lived to be 101 and his grandmother, the current Queen, Elizabeth II, though eighty-one, still performs her royal duties. William's father, Prince Charles, is 58 and is expected to succeed his mother to the throne. William is therefore likely to have to wait many years before he becomes king. The question of how the future monarch might be gainfully employed in the meantime has been discussed with reasonable frequency in the media. There are those who argue that becoming Governor General of Australia would have been a significant and relevant role for William to have undertaken.
In a report published I TimesOnline it was stated, 'Like his father, the Prince of Wales, William faces the prospect of waiting for decades before becoming king and is said to feel unsettled as contemporaries pursue careers. Courtiers say he is eager to take a highly structured approach to his preparations for his future role as monarch.'
It was in this context that the position of Governor General of Australia is rumoured to have been discussed.
On July 10, 2007, on The Internet Forum the following observation was posted, 'With courtiers saying William will not be taking on a large amount of Royal Duties until the Queen's Diamond Jubilee in 2012 William has some years to fill ... as he chooses. It remains to be seen wether he will suffer the same pit falls of the many heirs to the throne before him who were accused of laziness (and worse) while waiting to become King. Prince Charles is one of the few heirs who have largely escaped this accusation given his widespread involvement in numerous charities and programs many of which he created himself.'
Given the apparent attractiveness to the British Monarchy of a governor general's position in a suitable Commonwealth nation, it has also been suggested by Professor David Flint of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, that if Prince William does not become Australia's Governor General, he may be appointed Governor General of Canada. Professor Flint has stated, 'An appointment as Governor-General of Canada would ... seem technically possible. A bi-partisan appointment is feasible, but not guaranteed. Canada does not seem to harbour so many opportunist republican politicians. And the Canadian Senate is nominated and therefore a less powerful house.'

3. It would ensure Australia's future monarch had a clear understanding of this country
It has further been suggested that it would be to Australia's advantage to have its future monarch know this country well. It has been suggested that in terms of being able to promote valuable cultural and economic exchanges between Britain and Australia, it would be beneficial to Australia to have had Prince W as its Governor General. William is likely to follow his father as King of England. It has been suggested that having Australia's future monarch have lived for a number of years within this country would be to our advantage.
Federal Health Minister, Tony Abbott, has stated, 'I think it's great that Prince William wants to be involved with Australia, I think that the monarchy has been very important to this country. I think it's very good that we've got a connection with the Crown and I'm pleased that Prince William seems to take the Australian connection seriously.'
Mr Abbott also said Australia was 'very lucky to have a continuing connection with such an ancient and marvellous institution. The Crown and the Papacy are the two oldest institutions in western civilisation and it can only be to Australia's advantage to have the second in line to the throne living for a time within this country.'

4. Prince William's age should be no impediment
It has been pointed out that Prince William's age should be no automatic impediment to his assuming a responsible position. He has had a tertiary education and also received military training. His family upbringing has been one that is likely to have made him more aware of the demands of protocol than many who have successfully taken on the role of governor general. As a member of the Royal Family he can reasonably be assumed to have the best interests of the Commonwealth and the continuance of the Monarchy among his primary concerns. It is also probable that his background would mean he would have no local political affiliations within Australia, a quality which is seen as desirable for a Governor General and one which has not always been met in the past. Finally, it has also been noted that his grandmother was the same age William is now when she became Queen, surely a more demanding role than that of Governor General of Australia.
One of those posting a comment on Iserve.com.au observed, 'I believe that Prince William would make an excellent choice for Governor General and a handful of desperados who believe he is too young for the job are forgetting how old Queen Elizabeth was when she was crowned. According to the Royal Website she was 25 at the time of the death of King George VI. Is 25 old enough for someone to be the Queen of Australia but too young to be Australia's Governor General?'

5. Prince William's appointment would heighten public awareness of the role of the Governor General
It has also been noted that Prince William's fame and popularity would have been likely to increase the level of attention paid to the role of Governor General within Australia.
There appears to be a general impression among many of those whose comments on this issue have been published in newspapers or online that the current Governor General has not done sufficient to draw popular attention to his role. There are even those who suggest that many of the more public functions of the Governor General have been taken over by the current Prime Minister, John Howard.
Bernie Whitworth of Safety Bay Western Australia posted on The Australian's Internet site on July 4, 2007, the following comment, 'Our present G.G. "The invisible man" is sitting in his Palace twiddling his thumbs whilst John Howard takes over what few duties he has left.'
Similarly, Jennie Pollard posted on The Sydney Morning Herald's Internet site, on June 30, 2007, the following comment, 'It would be the first time in many, many years that all Australians would know who the Governor General was!!!'
On of those who posted a comment on 2GB's Internet site on June 29, 2007, noted in favour of a Prince William appointment, 'It would give the GG's position a high profile and why not have a young and handsome head of State!! At least everybody would know his name!! Let's do it'.

Arguments against Prince William becoming Australia's next Governor General
1. Prince William is too young for the role
A major objection raised about the possibility of Prince William becoming Australia's Governor General. One of the concerns related to this is that the Prince is likely to lack the experience necessary for the post. Another issue is that he would lack the maturity. According to this line of argument, as an unmarried man in his mid twenties, the Prince is likely to have a more carefree attitude toward life than is compatible with being Australia's Governor General. This point was made by Australia's Opposition leader, Mr Kevin Rudd, when he remarked, 'When it comes to Prince William, he's 25 years old. I think it would be party, party, party out at Yarralumla. I probably don't think it's the right way to go.'
It has repeatedly been pointed out that a Governor General of Prince William's youth could not reasonably be expected to meet some of the challenges the job could provide. Though usually a tokenistic position, requiring the incumbent to perform a range of essentially ceremonial duties, the reserve powers of the Governor General are actually greater than those held by the Monarch in Britain.
As was demonstrated in 1975, when the then Governor General, Sir John Kerr, dismissed an elected government because it was not able to secure the passage of money bills through both houses of parliament, the potential powers of the Governor General and the decision to employ them can be extremely controversial.
It is in circumstances such as those that arose in 1975 that it becomes apparent that maturity and sound judgement are vital attributes for anyone who would be Australia's Governor General. Prince William's youth raises some doubts that he as yet has the qualities required to meet all the demands of the position.

2. Prince William lacks the relevant experience
One of the major concerns expressed regarding the possibility of Prince William becoming Australia's Governor General is that he does not have the appropriate experience. Most of the previous appointments to this position had had years of relevant service within public life in Australia and had made significant contributions within their field and outside it. Critics of Prince William as a potential Governor General have claimed that he does not have this experience.
It has been suggested that at this point in his life William is a wealthy and reasonably well-educated young man, but not one with a set of experiences that necessarily indicate he would make a good Governor General for Australia.
On of those who posted an observation on this issue on 2GB's Internet site on June 29, 2007, noted, 'If you really want an young inexperienced person to do it go right ahead, he may be a prince but there are most likely more experienced candidates to do it!'

3. Prince William is not an Australian citizen
One of the major objections raised against having Prince William as Australia's Governor General is that the young royal is not an Australian citizen and has not direct, extended experience of Australia. Since the appointment of the first Australian-born Governor General, Sir Isaac Isaacs, in 1931, a tradition has been established of having the Governor General of this country an Australian citizen. There are many who would not be prepared to move away from this norm.
Australia's Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, noted on the question of Prince William as a possible Australian Governor General, 'Although I remain a supporter of our current constitutional arrangements, I do think the practice of having a person who is Australian in every way and a long-term and permanent resident of this country is a practice I would not like to see altered.'
A similar position has been taken by the Opposition leader, Kevin Rudd. Mr Rudd has stated that there were many Australians who had contributed to the life of the nation who would be more suitable for the role. Mr Rudd mentioned former defence chief Peter Cosgrove.
This position has even been supported by the pro-monarchist Internet site, The Monarchist, which on June 29, 2007, posted the view, 'It is not unreasonable to expect that a young prince should live in the country he wants to represent for some reasonable period of time first.'
One of the reasons for having an Australian in the role of Governor General is that it makes the position more acceptable to those Australians who would prefer their country a republic and are uncomfortable with what they see as an inappropriate foreign connection. This attitude was clearly expressed in on of the comments posted by an Australian on The TimesOnline Internet site on June 390, 2007. The comment read, 'As long as we retain the monarchy (I pray that won't be much longer) then the Governor General must be an Australian. Imagine putting a Pom in charge of our armed forces!'
It has further been suggested that Prince William's lack of regular or ongoing contact with Australia makes him unsuitable to be our Governor General. William, it has been implied, simply does not know sufficient about this country to perform the role of Governor General. Evan Maloney in a comment posted on News.com.au on June 29, 2007, stated, 'Do Australians really want a head of state who lives 24 hours flight away and only visits every ten years or so?'
The sort of hostility that could be generated by a Governor General who was not obviously Australian has been apparent throughout the debate surrounding the suitability of Prince William. One reader of The Australian who posted a comment on the newspaper's Internet site on June 30, 2007, argued, 'Keep Prince William out of Australia, there are literally thousands of native born Australians who can fill this position, far better than a royalist from a Great Britain collapsing under a failed multi-culturism policy.'
Similarly, Emma Tom, in an opinion piece published in The Australian on July 5, 2007, noted, 'Clearly our safest bet is an Australia led by an actual Australian rather than some palace-hopping blue blood whose sole credential is a nine-month stint in a velvet-trimmed royal womb. We might continue dipping out on the hotted-up headlines but at least the label on the inside seam of our highest leader wouldn't read Made Elsewhere.'
Barry Everingham, a regular commentator on royalty and the Royal Family, has stated, 'No Australian government, even a government whose leanings are as monarchist as John Howard's, would ever have anybody but an Australian as governor-general.'

4. Prince William would bring controversy to the role
It has been suggested that Prince William's high media profile may be a disadvantage as it would attract undue media attention to the role and may well detract from the dignity of the office.
One of those who posted an observation on this issue on 2GB's Internet site on June 29, 2007, noted, 'This young man may or may not do a good job, but the media attention on him, I feel, would hinder him in the ability to do the job. We don't need another media circus every time he'd set foot outside his dwelling. It would take away the dignity of the position.'
A similar point was made in an Age editorial dated July 1, though here the main concern was that sustained media attention on the Governor General would highlight the essential irrelevance of the role. The editorial stated, 'The problem with William - apart from youth, inexperience and a fondness for $240 cocktails - is that he would bring far too much attention to the post. Under constant media focus, the governor-generalship would be clearly seen for what it has become: redundant; the sickly appendix of Australian politics. In ruling out the Prince as GG, the PM has - in a single stroke - saved the monarchy much embarrassment and kept the limelight for himself.
The sort of contention that appointing a member of the British Royal Family to the role of Governor General could generate has already been demonstrated. When the first Australian-born governor-general, former High Court Chief Justice Isaac Isaacs, was named in 1931, the move was opposed by King George V and created considerable tension between Canberra and Buckingham Palace.
In 1945, the late king's third son, Prince Henry William Frederick Albert, Duke of Gloucester, Earl of Ulster and Baron Culloden, became Australia's first post war governor-general.
When he left in 1947, Prime Minister Ben Chifley, who used to drive trains for a living, declared he wanted a governor-general 'without pomp and plumes and social glitter'. Chifley appointed an ex-boilermaker and leftist Labor politician, William McKell, to replace the duke.
It would appear that clearly non-controversial, obviously neutral appointees are necessary if the stability that is meant to be part of the role of Governor General is to be maintained.

5. Prince William's appointment would not gain the bipartisan support of the Australian federal parliament
The tradition is that the Prime Minister passes on a recommendation to the Monarch who then confers the position of Governor General upon the person recommended. Also part of the tradition is that the person recommended has to be acceptable to both of the major political parties. This is referred to as having bipartisan support.
The reason why bipartisan support is required is that the position of Governor General is meant to be above politics. It is important that the Governor General not be seen as favouring one political position or party over another. One way of ensuring this neutrality is to have an appointee that both sides of Parliament agree is suitable.
Professor David Flint of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy has suggested that this lack of bipartisan support is the fault of the Labor Opposition. He has stated, 'Unfortunately, the disgraceful, appalling behaviour of some of our leading politicians - all republican - has ensured that it won't happen. Imagine how they would behave if they controlled the presidency.' This claim lacks substance. Although it is true that the leader of the Labor Opposition, Kevin Rudd, has opposed the appointment of Prince William as Australia's Governor General, it is also true that the Prime Minister, John Howard, has opposed the appoint. Currently there is not bipartisan support for the appointment, there is bipartisan opposition.

Further implications
It is highly unlikely that any member of the British Royal family will ever be appointed as Australia's Governor General. What this would seem to reflect is an increase in national sentiment within Australia, interesting given that Australia in the 1999 referendum, a majority of Australians rejected the opportunity to make their country a republic. This puts us in the rather paradoxical situation of wishing to retain the Queen as our Monarch, but rejecting her grandson as the Queen's representative in Australia.
Perhaps this paradox is more apparent than real. What having an Australian as our Governor General allows is the maintenance of a sense of national pride and identity at the same time as the country retains a connection with the British Crown. It would appear that having Prince William as our Governor General would make the connection with Britain seem stronger than many Australians are prepared to accept.
Perhaps former Prime Minister Bob Hawke got it right when he rejected Prince Charles as an Australian Governor General and later explained the action by stating, 'It came up at some stage. I made it quite clear it wasn't on ...The idea of doubling the dose ... held no appeal.'

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Australian, July 3, page 12, comment by Barry Everingham, `Diana's forlorn plea'.
The Age, July 1, page 14, editorial, `Howard says GG no post for a prince. Smart move'.
Herald-Sun, June 30, page 3, news item by Gerard McManus, `Rudd in royal blue'.
The Australian, June 30, page 3, news item by Brad Norington, `Prince William's G-G dream gets two thumbs down'.
The Australian, June 29, page 3, news item by Samantha Maiden, `William wants to be next governor-general'.
The Australian, June 29, page 1, news item, `Prince William wants to be governor-general'.

Using google to find newspaper items still available on the Web
Use your mouse to copy a newspaper headline (just the headline, not the entire entry as it appears in the sources) and paste it into the google search box below. Click search to see if the item is still accessible.

Google