Queen's Birthday Stamps issued

Her Majesty’s actual birthday is on 21st April, but this year's Queen's Birthday stamp was issued today.


The Queen's stay in Australia in March 2006 coincided with Commonwealth Day, which is held annually on the second Monday of March.

Traditionally, the Queen, as Head of the Commonwealth, attends the multi-faith Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey, from where her message is broadcast across the globe.

In 2006 she delivered her address from St. Andrew’s Cathedral in Sydney, where she is shown in the stamp image following the observance.

At St. Andrew’s she spoke about the pressing need to address issues of health and vitality for all within communities across the Commonwealth and beyond.

Issue date: 6th April 2010

FDI withdrawal date: 4th May 2010

A product which should be bought by everyone


Customizable Liberal Neo Monarchist t-shirts from Zazzle.com - Choose your favorite Liberal Neo Monarchist t-shirt from Zazzle.

HRH Prince Charles visits Australian and New Zealand troops in Afghanistan

The website of the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) reported on the visit HRH The Prince of Wales paid to Afghanistan on 24th March 2010.

Prince Charles met with senior ISAF officers as well as Australian, New Zealand and British troops in Kabul before travelling to Helmand in a show of support to the British forces in the southern province.

HRH is the most senior member of the Royal Family to visit Afghanistan.

Australian and New Zealand troops at the ISAF HQ in Kabul with His Royal Highness Prince Charles during a surprise visit by the Prince of Wales to Afghanistan in late March.
L-R: SGT Mike Havill (RNZAF), CPL Chris Crooks, CPL Trish Reynolds (RAAF), SGT Wayne Morley, COL John Mackenzie, SQNLDR Tony Peck (not very clear on HRH right shoulder) HRH Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales, WO2 Bruce Hillary, MAJGEN Ash Power, CAPT Sarah Hawke, MAJ Les D'Monte, LTCOL Mike Duncan (NZ Army), MAJ Peter Mortimer (NZ Army).

Explaining the reason for his visit, Prince Charles said:

"The main reason is that I admire deeply the Armed Forces and support what they are doing wherever I possibly can.

"The other thing also is that I have quite a large number of regiments of which I am colonel-in-chief; there are all sorts of other units in the force in which I try to take an interest. So while my people are out here I wanted to come and see them and sadly it has been difficult up until this time.

"So I am thrilled to have got here at last because I just wanted to see the kind of conditions they were in and also to try to generally take an interest and encourage."

Speaking about the difficulties faced by the families of those on operations Prince Charles added:

"It's a very, very worrying time for all the families when their loved ones are out here. As we know, particularly The Rifles have been having a bloody awful time in Sangin, which is obviously a particularly difficult area, and my heart goes out to them and their families.

"We're standing here with a memorial in the background to all those people who have given their lives for this country.

"And interestingly the elders I met today, all of them have been expressing immense appreciation for the fact that they have died, they were saying we'll never forget them.

"For the families, I know when my youngest son was out here, as a parent you worry the whole time. If you're out here, perhaps you're getting on with everything so it's not the same. But for everybody left behind it's ghastly.

"But having said that, the families are the most wonderful support for their loved ones. That's what they do so magnificently, and we're very lucky indeed to have so many families who have, for instance, two or three sons in the Armed Forces and go on for several generations. It makes me incredibly proud of what they do out here."

Royalist Rolf Harris, CBE, AM turns 80

One of the best known Australians living in Europe can celebrate his 80th birthday today: Rolf Harris, CBE, AM. He is an outspoken admirer of the Queen of Australia, Queen Elizabeth II, and never wavered in his loyalty to the Monarchy.

Rolf Harris, artist, musician, singer, TV presenter and one of Britain’s best-loved entertainers was born in Perth, Western Australia, on 30th March 1930. He has been awarded the CBE, is a member of the Order of Australia and has won many honours for his work in the entertainment industry.

He has been a champion swimmer, has had chart topping hits, written best selling books and has been voted the best entertainer ever, at Glastonbury. His paintings have been exhibited in London’s National Gallery and he is an honorary member of the Royal Society of British Artists. His Animal Hospital series was five times winner of the National Television Awards and he presented BBC TV shows Rolf Harris’s Star Portraits and Rolf on Art, which made TV history when it gained the highest ever ratings for an art programme.

Portraying The Queen
In 2005 Rolf Harris spent two months producing the official portrait of The Queen to mark her 80th birthday, which she celebrated on 26th April 2006. For the painting, The Queen wore a pearl necklace and brooch made for her to mark Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother's 100th birthday. The portrait took two months to complete and became an obsession, Harris waking up in the middle of the night to be drawn back to the canvas:

"I wanted to avoid that state portrait thing with the jewels and the pomp and splendour," he said. "I wanted to capture the lady as she is, with her humanity and reality." In this endeavour, he tried to make her smile.
In his painting of the portrait of The Queen, Rolf Harris was following a family tradition — Harris' grandfather painted a portrait of The Queen's grandfather, King George V (in which King George V was inspecting the troops). The portrait was exhibited in the Australian National Portrait Gallery in Canberra for six months, after Harris gave the prestigious annual lecture there in 2008.

His portrait of Queen Elizabeth II, which was unveiled by Rolf Harris on 19 December 2005 at Buckingham Palace, was the subject of a programme The Queen, by Rolf, which was screened to a record breaking viewing audience on BBC One in 2006 in the UK. The ABC’s first transmission of the documentary The Queen, by Rolf on 23rd April 2006 attracted the high Australian wide TV audience of 1.28 million. This was the largest audience for this slot this year, and larger than any ABC audience for any programme in that week. But that programme was not broadcast as the same time as a major live football programme.

In June 2006 Rolf Harris figured on the Queen's Birthday Honours list and was made a Commander of the British Empire.

Rolf Harris is the first artist to be commissioned by the Royal Australian Mint to design the new commemorative one dollar silver kangaroo coin. When it was launched, special editions of the coin sold out immediately. In July 2008 he was inducted into the Australian Recording Industry Awards (ARIA) Hall of Fame and in December 2008 he presented the Annual Lecture on Portraiture at the official opening of the new National Portrait Gallery in Canberra. In the same month, he starred in a sell-out season at the Sydney Opera House Playhouse Theatre.

At 80 he is still a very active, creative and lively artist. And on his birthday the RadicalRoyalist wishes the Royalist across the seas a happy birthday and many returns of this day. We need men like him.

Planning Destruction Minister Madden

While cities in Europe were destroyed in wars, especially in bombing raids during World War II, Melbourne is under major threat in peaceful times.

For once The Age found the right words:

“It took barely the blink of an eye for Justin Madden to change the face of Melbourne. On Wednesday, the Planning Minister received a 57-page advisory panel report recommending in favour of the dramatic redevelopment of one of this city's most beloved landmarks, the Hotel Windsor.

Overnight, he read and ruminated on the report and his department's accompanying advice - also in favour of the revamp. Yesterday morning, he resolved to accept the advice. By 1pm he made his announcement. Done.”

Melbourne has lost so many historic buildings in the past couple of years, now this $260 million “overhaul” (aka vandalism) will destroy a major landmark, just opposite the Victorian Parliament building.

The RadicalRoyalist has already opposed the plans, when they were made public in August 2009. The strongest objections will not change anything, because the power of money is behind the decisions. Neither the public nor those responsible to preserve the Victorian heritage will change anything. Justin Madden, who considers himself a potential Premier has all it needs to get the top job in Victoria: he does not listen to people, just to mates and “political advisers”. The way to destruction lies open to him.

And what about the destruction of Westerfield Park, an environmentally unique area on Melbourne's south eastern edge... and for what ? A NEW FREEWAY!!

SBS censorship - Part II

Australia’s SBS – Special Broadcasting System – is a unique and very laudable information TV and radio channel, providing news services in 64 languages.

But it seems, the editors have problems with royal news. As was evident last November, when SBS censored a French news programme and cut out a news item on the French pretender to the throne, Prince Jean, today SBS eliminated a report on Prince Charles in Poland. In the Polish News broadcast this morning on SBS the mid-broadcast summary announced Australia's future King meeting people in Poland (one obviously a Polish Muslim leader). However, this report was never shown on SBS.

Since this isn’t the first incident of this kind, one really has to wonder, why SBS thinks, royal news reports are inappropriate for the Australian audience. One case of this kind could be accidental, but twice within four months makes you wonder.
Pictures not to be shown in Australia: Prince Charles visiting a park for endangered animals in Bialowieza/East Poland.

"The proposition by Mr Hulls is an affront in itself"

Two months ago the Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls snuck in immediately before Christmas a major change in Victoria’s legal system - without any public discussion. From 1st January 2010, criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the Director of Public Prosecutions, rather than The Queen. Even a republican lawyer raised concerns about the changes.

But what is the Victorian Parliament saying? Labor MP Ann Barker, who represents the constituency where the RadicalRoyalist lives and works, echoes Rob Hulls’ claims:

“This change more accurately reflects the way in which criminal proceedings are currently conducted in Victoria, as the Director of Public Prosecutions is responsible for instituting, preparing and conducting indictable criminal proceedings on behalf of the Crown.

“Removing the reference to “The Queen” is consistent with the spirit and purpose of the Act and the Government’s commitment to modernising the criminal justice system.”

Ted Baillieu, the Leader of the Opposition in the Victorian Parliament, answered the RadicalRoyalist’s letter, but only to inform him, that he has no opinion of his own on this matter.

“I appreciate your concerns about this decision and its potential effects on the legal process in Victoria.

“I have passed a copy of your letter to Robert Clark MLA, Shadow Attorney-General, for his information and consideration of your comment.”

A very different response came from Peter Ryan MLA, Leader of The Nationals:

“The Attorney-General Rob Hulls is to be condemned for his proposal to replace reference to The Queen with that of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Clark, our Shadow Attorney-General, has already made comment to that effect.

“I practised law for about 17 years before coming to politics. The proposition by Mr Hulls is an affront in itself. The more so, since he should busy himself about the multitude of issue which face Victorians in matters of law and order and the operations of the justice system at large.”

Shadow Attorney-General Robert Clark may have made comments about Rob Hulls’ dictated changes, but he has – so far – not made them known to the RadicalRoyalist. Two months after the announcement, the major political opposition party's point of view on this matter is still not known. There is nothing on his website either.

May be the Liberal Party in Victoria should adopt a perception of the federal Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott, that an opposition should oppose the government. Especially when the government's measure work against the judicial traditions of this country.

The Queen's special Australian Anniversary

When in Australia, The Queen is able to undertake some of the ceremonial roles of the Sovereign. On 16th February 1954, for example, The Queen opened the third session of the 20th National Parliament in Canberra, wearing the gown she had worn for Her Coronation the previous year.

The National Museum of Australia describes this event with enthusiasm:

"One of the most eagerly anticipated events was the opening of Parliament in Canberra. For this The Queen wore her white satin coronation gown which was flown from London at a cost of 75 pounds. Even though the gown was specially packed for the journey, it still took three days to iron the wrinkles out!

"The Queen looked magnificent in her sunray fringe tiara and heavily embroidered gown in the solemn setting of the Senate Chamber."

On 15th February 1954 Queen Elizabeth II, The Queen of Australia, became the first reigning Australian Monarch to visit and open the Federal Parliament. As well as opening Parliament she unveiled the Australian-American Memorial at Russell. Her visit highlighted the ceremonial role of Canberra as the national capital.

The National Museum of Australia summed the Royal visit up by putting it into the historic perspective:

"In political terms, the particular relevance of The Queen's first visit was set by the Statute of Westminster, issued in 1931. Prompted by the governments of Canada and South Africa, the Statute gave the Dominions of the British Empire the chance to establish themselves as independent nations of equal status to Britain. This formal independence changed the role of the Crown, which now became the foremost symbol of unity among the independent peoples of the British Commonwealth. However, successive Australian governments did not see fit to ratify the Statute until 1942, when British power east of Suez had collapsed at Singapore and the fear of Japanese invasion gripped the Australian nation.

"Official war artist [Sir] Ivor Hele was given the opportunity of a lifetime when he was commissioned to paint The Queen opening the third session of the twentieth Parliament on 15 February 1954. [Sir Ivor], an artist with a strong sense of history and a talent for portraiture, was ideally suited for the commission.

"The 1954 visit gave Australians the chance to the reconnect with Britain and for Britain to witness scenes of loyalty from Australia."

The Diamond Jubilee provides the perfect opportunity for The Queen to open the Parliament of Australia again.

Surprise, surprise

John Warhurst, senior deputy chairman of the Australian Republican Movement, came to the rescue of the Murdoch media’s failed attempt to cause a stir.

The Australian was his familiar platform to accuse “opponents and Buckingham Palace of ‘muddying the waters’. ‘The position is inherently complicated, and Australians will find it hard to believe that we don't actually have an Australian as head of state,’ Warhurst said.”

Well, as explained here, The Queen of Australia is of course Australian, just as she is Canadian, Barbadian or Jamaican.

We do need to remind republicans that the Queen is a symbol of multiculturalism and multi-nationalism. As it seems, republicans have great difficulties with that concept.

Murdoch media create a storm in a tea cup

The united media power of News Corporation tried to create what they may consider “a scandal” (which would, of course, result in higher sales of the Murdoch papers).

The Australian, the HeraldSun and Sky News and probably some other papers came out this Friday with headlines like: Aussies Ask: Is The Queen Still In Charge?

Well, do they really ask? How bizarre that nobody else but Murdoch’s media noticed it. Sky News:

Australians are wondering exactly who is head of state in the latest twist to the debate over whether the country should ditch the monarchy and become a republic.

The trigger, that brought these headlines was a press release of Buckingham Palace of 22nd January 2010. Yes, it took the Murdoch press three weeks to find their scoop.

22 January 2010
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ISSUED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY TO THE QUEEN
The Queen to address the United Nations Her Majesty The Queen, accompanied by HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, will visit the United Nations in New York where The Queen will address the UN General Assembly on the 6th July, 2010.

The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh will arrive that day from Canada, where Her Majesty will have undertaken a Royal Visit as Queen of Canada from the 28th June – 6th July.
The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh will depart for London on the evening of the 6th July.

Background:
The Queen addressed the United Nations General Assembly in 1957.

The Queen will address the UN as the Head of State of the United Kingdom and 15 other United Nations member states. As well as the United Kingdom, The Queen is the Head of State of Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.

The Queen is Head of the Commonwealth, an association of 54 nations, all of which are also United Nations member states.

The Australian newspaper concluded: Following the triumphant tour of Australia by its potential future king, Prince William, the Queen has reasserted her claim on the title "head of state" of Australia by using it in the announcement of her address to the UN in July.

"The trigger for the confusion is the announcement by Buckingham Palace that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will be addressing the UN General Assembly in July as Australia's "head of state", a statement that has taken Canberra's diplomats, officials and constitutional combatants by surprise.

"Asked by The Australian yesterday to answer questions about her forthcoming UN address and Australia's input, a spokesman for Mr Rudd said: 'Australia's head of state is HM Queen Elizabeth II, represented by the Governor-General HE Ms Quentin Bryce AC. The government is aware of the plan for the Queen to address the United Nations.

"'The Queen's speech is a matter for the Queen, but Australia will ensure the Queen is aware of Australia's views in advance of the speech.'"

These information come hardly as a surprise, which is why no other media except those of Murdoch’s empire have taken up the story.

Bad luck, Mr. Murdoch, your spin doctors have failed to trigger a new debate about Australia’s Constitutional Monarchy.

Certainly, he will set them at work again and try to push his republican agenda in the hope of improving the sale figures for his papers or the hit numbers on their websites.

Islamic republican justice system

The Los Angeles Times managed to interview the solicitor of Arash Rahmanipour. The young man was executed on 28th January 2010 along with fellow Monarchist Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani (37).

“Lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh (46) is filled with rage over the treatment of her client, 20-year-old Arash Rahmanipour, who was not defended in court and then was quietly put to death.”

"The defendant met with his lawyer once for 15 minutes before he was sentenced to death and hanged.

"When the lawyer complained to authorities, they ignored her. When she tried to enter the courtroom where he was being tried, they threatened her with arrest. And when she spoke out publicly at what she described as a gross miscarriage of justice, they shut off her cellphone.

"Rahmanipour was arrested in April, weeks before the disputed June presidential election and the mass protests that erupted afterward. Nonetheless, he was tried during the mass court proceedings against opposition supporters last fall and sentenced to death on charges of being a mohareb, someone who takes up arms against God.

"After the sentence was read out in court, Rahmanipour pulled himself together, Sotoudeh said. He wrote a letter to his father, Davoud, describing himself as Arash the Archer, a character from Persian legend, who stretched the string of his bow to send an arrow to the farthest distance, sacrificing himself for his nation.

"Immediately after an appeals court upheld the conviction three months later, he was executed.

"At noon, Rahmanipour's father called Sotoudeh. To her surprise, he spoke hopefully about visiting his son that day. They had spoken Monday, and Rahmanipour had told him he'd be allowed to see his parents on Thursday.

"He had no idea that his son had been executed hours earlier."

Exemplary Republics

A very republican speciality in a run off between two candidates for the presidential palace: The loser is arrested by the winner.

This is no tale out of the history books, but that has happened this week in Sri Lanka.

The office holder Mahinda Rajapakse had the rival presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka arrested. It sounds like a fabricated story that the Sri Lankan government has told the public: “He was detained on suspicion of committing 'military offences' and will face a military court.” Fonseka has previously been accused of plotting both a coup and to assassinate President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his family. Mano Ganesan, a Tamil-speaking MP meeting Fonseka at the time, said the retired general was dragged away "like a dog" and assaulted.

It is difficult to judge the accusations from Australia, but they sound as if revenge was taken by a president who could not accept the fact that he was challenged and perhaps even beaten in an election.

A Sri Lankan blogger called the situation of his country Zimbabwefication. Nothing could describe the situation better than this term.

On the other side of the planet, in Ukraine, a similar situation occurred. Russia's preferred candidate in the Ukrainian presidential race, Viktor Yanukovich, seems to have won last Sunday’s elections with 48 percent of the votes cast. Defeated rival, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, trailed behind him by three percentage points. However, she refused to concede defeat, despite appeals for her to do so by Mr Yanukovich and European election monitors. Weeks of demonstrations lie ahead of Ukraine. Will Ms Tymoskeno end up in prison?

Republican regimes provide no higher authority to which people can turn to in case of doubtful elections. In Constitutional Monarchies there’s always the impartial umpire who is above party politics who guarantees fair play.

Shirin Ebadi: "Arash's crime was being a member of a monarchist group"

Shirin Ebadi, 62, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003 for her long career as a human rights lawyer in Iran. She spoke to The Sunday Telegraph during a stay in London. She answered Angus McDowall's questions concerning the execution of Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani (37) and Arash Rahmanipour (19) on 28th January 2010 (as reported here).

The Sunday Telegraph: Did the protesters who were sentenced to death in Iran receive fair trials?

Shirin Ebadi: The recent executions in Iran were not justified and I'm totally against it.

One of those executed was Arash, who was only 19 years old. In court he said he had taken part in the demonstrations after the elections. And he mentioned that he was part of a royalist group. The lawyer of Arash is a member of one of the legal non-governmental organisations in Iran. His lawyer has said several times that Arash was arrested two months before the election.

His interrogators promised that if he agreed to everything in court, he would be freed. In fact he wrongly confessed to taking part in the demonstrations, but it wasn't true.

On his trial day his solicitor wasn't allowed to appear in court. Another lawyer was then chosen by the court instead. They even threatened his solicitor outside the court, saying that if he tried to take part in the trial he would be arrested. Then they issued a death sentence to the young man.

In the appeal court, the lawyer only got permission to visit Arash for 15 minutes. It was at that meeting that Arash told the lawyer why he confessed. Considering that the date of his arrest was two months prior to the elections, his lawyer objected formally to the death penalty. But unfortunately the appeal court did not accept her objections and quickly issued a death penalty.

Without any legal procedures or informing the family, the young man was executed.

In fact, his real crime was being a member of a monarchist group - he did not take part in the demonstrations.

But the government wants to create an atmosphere of fear, to stop people taking part in any more demonstrations. I'm so sad and sorry that they issued the death penalty. I also think the same about the others. Their only crime is that they said they did not accept the election.
The Sunday Telegraph: Are you in any danger from the regime?

Shirin Ebadi: I've never been contacted by the regime directly. But they contacted my family and friends and said 'wherever she is, we can get rid of her'.

I don't take the threat seriously. If people want to do something they don't talk about it beforehand. Their main aim is to scare me off doing my work properly.

Obviously, I don't want to make my enemies happy, so I continue with my work inside the law.

They threatened my husband and my sister that if I continue with my work they will arrest both of them. My sister was detained for three weeks. They were not tortured physically, but to arrest people because of something someone else has done is a form of emotional torture.

The Queen may attend the 150th Melbourne Cup

Last week the Vice-Regal Notes on the website of Her Majesty’s Representative in the State of Victoria, the Governor of Victoria, had an interesting note.

On Saturday 30th January 2010 it registered: The Right Honourable Christopher Geidt, CVO, OBE, Private Secretary to Her Majesty The Queen, arrived to stay at Government House.

This is not unusual, but considering Premier John Brumby’s meeting with his Queen at Balmoral Castle in October 2009 and his declaration after the audience, that he had invited The Queen to attend to 150th Melbourne Cup in November 2010, a visit of Her Majesty’s Private Secretary cannot be considered a coincidence.

On 2nd February Victorian Racing Minister Rob Hulls, who with his other hat as the state’s Attorney-General had decreed a month ago that The Queen will be replaced by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in Victoria’s legal system, refused to reveal to The Age whether or not The Queen had been invited to attend Australia's premier horse race.

"I know that the Queen is a great racing fan, and I honestly don't know whether or not she has any plans to come here," he told reporters. It was “up to her” if she wanted to attend the 150th Melbourne Cup he stumbled into the TV cameras.

As if she would fly to Melbourne just because she wanted to see a good horse race. But who would expect a nice and friendly invitation by someone with the freezing charms of Rob Hulls?
">The Queen received Her Victorian Premier on 5th October 2009.

The Portuguese have to celebrate the republic - if they can afford or want it or not

The European TV channel euronews reported from Lisbon: "Portugal has begun huge celebrations marking 100 years since the collapse of the country’s monarchy".

The beginning of the ominous festivities collides with the 102nd anniversary of the Assassination of the Portuguese King and Crown Prince.

On 1st February 1908 King Carlos I. and Crown Prince Luis Filipe were murdered in Lisbon.

The impoverished EU member is forced to waste more money on state exhibitions; theatre plays and concerts that are among the myriad of cultural events the country will be hosted to commemorate the republic’s implementation, euronews said.

According to euronews Portugal’s President Anibal Cavaco Silva said he hoped the events would act as a catalyst for change and inspire people with the values held dear by the revolutionists 100 years ago.

What "values"? The assassination of the King and Crown Prince was followed by the loss of the Monarchy and decades of civil unrest, anarchy and dictatorship.

">

Tribute to the Martyrs Arash Rahmanipour and Mohammadreza Alizamani

Iran, 28th January 2010

Two Iranian Monarchists hanged

Arash Rahmanipour (19) and Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani (37) were hanged on 28th January 2010

The execution of two men charged with crimes in connection with alleged membership in "illegal anti-government organizations", and the announcement of death sentences for nine other persons arrested for protest activities, are part of a growing wave of political executions in the Islamic Republic, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said today.

Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani (37) and Arash Rahmanipour (19) were executed on 28th January 2010. According to his indictment, Zamani´s conviction for the capital crime of Mohareb, or "taking up arms against God," was based on his membership in the pro-Royalist group, Anjoman-e Padeshahi-e Iran, and on allegedly meeting in Iraq with United States operatives and receiving money from a source based in the US, all for the purpose of instigating unrest in Iran. According to his lawyer, the other defendant, Arash Rahmanipour, had been forced to confess to membership in the same group.

"Given the high number of political prisoners and the spike in capital punishment since protests began, the threat of a great number of political executions is acute," according to Aaron Rhodes, a spokesperson for the Campaign.

Leading Iranian clerics and politicians have repeatedly called for harsh punishments, including the death penalty, for protesters, and for legal measures to expedite executions.

Iranian authorities executed two Kurdish men, Ehsan Fattahian and Fasih Yasamani on 11th November 2009 and 6th January 2010, respectively, after trials that did not meet international standards and a failure to present evidence that linked them to capital crimes. Fattahian´s sentence was imposed by an appeals court. Shirin Alam Holi, a female Kurdish activist, was sentenced to death earlier in January. Around 20 other Kurdish political activists have received death sentences.

Neither of the men executed today were involved in the political protests following the disputed June 2009 presidential elections, and the Campaign believes their cases were opportunistically mixed into mass trials of protesters because of their association with highly unpopular insurgent groups.

"It may be assumed that these executions were choreographed both to intimidate Iranian citizens from participating in further demonstrations, and to create a mental opening for the execution of demonstrators," Rhodes said.

The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, while opposing the death penalty in all cases, deplores the excessive use of the punishment in the Islamic Republic, particularly since the June 2009 protests began. The Campaign calls upon the Iranian Judiciary to institute an immediate moratorium on executions, in line with the United Nations General Assembly moratorium approved in 2007.

The BBC also reported on the executions.

The Crown vs. The DPP

Without any public discussion Attorney-General and then Acting Premier Rob Hulls on 16th December 2009 announced a major change in Victoria’s legal system: "From New Year's Day, criminal prosecutions will be brought in the name of the Director of Public Prosecutions, rather than the Queen." RadicalRoyalist commented on this act of "creeping republicanism" here and here.

While the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition in the Victorian Parliament, Ted Baillieu, and Peter Ryan, Leader of The Nationals keep refusing to explain their position on the replacement of The Crown in Victorian Prosecutions by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DDP), the RadicalRoyalist obtained a statement from a - as it happened - republican lawyer.

For fear of professional drawback he asked not to be named. His quest for anonymity is certainly honoured.

No one seems to care all that much - but I do believe words mean something and "DPP vs." means something I do not believe. Better, if you want to give [The Queen] the shove without appearing to do so (which is gutless), off the top, for Criminal P's would be perhaps: The State of Victoria vs." or perhaps "The People of the State of Victoria vs.".

As an Australian republic supporter (and having in fact sworn loyalty to the Constitution for the State of New York & the United States of America), I can not say I am at all pleased to see "Regina" replaced by the Victorian DPP in criminal prosecutions.

[Queen] Elizabeth II is still the Head of State of Victoria, isn't she? Australia and Victoria are still Monarchies, aren't they, though we seem to ignore the fact?

Criminal actions are appropriately brought in the name of and by the highest authority in the State (figurehead not) - and that's not some mate of Rob Hulls.

Criminal prosecution in New York are "(The) People vs. ..." and Victoria should remain "Queen/Regina vs. ..." until the Crown is replaced by The People as the supreme authority in the jurisdiction.

It will be interesting to see, if the Opposition in Victoria will be able to formulate an opinion on Rob Hulls' outrageous act of removing The Queen from Victoria's legal system.

The Age’s associate editor: "Forget about a republic or new flag"

It is only on a rare occasion, that I have to agree with an Age article concerning their propagating “a” republic. But today it happened. Shaun Carney, The Age’s associate editor, has written a very honest opinion piece, one that should be widely read by his fellow followers of republicanism:

Australia should become a republic. But it won't for a very long time, if ever. There's a better than even chance that the change won't come during the lifetime of any Australian alive today.

The political system, and Australians' deteriorating attitudes to politics and politicians, will see to that. The republican question is now what used to be called in the newspaper game a "hardy annual": a predictable, intrinsically inconsequential story that can be trotted out at the same time every year to little lasting effect.

This Australia Day weekend the hardy annual sprouted a little extra foliage with Ray Martin's revival of the suggestion that the nation should change its flag and ditch the Union Jack. That idea used to get around with the republican argument back in the 1990s, until republicans, excited by the prospect of a referendum aimed at ditching the monarchy, judged it to be too toxic and dumped it.

It is probably the case that a majority of Australian voters favour the idea of a republican Australia, as the polls suggest. But the numbers are not overwhelming. And there is often a big gap between what people tell pollsters and what they do. They say they want governments to provide greater services but they bitch about every extra tax dollar, for example. And Australians have not liked voting 'yes' at referendums since Federation.

In any case, what sort of republic are we talking about? There is no single view: the republican position is in a pre-adolescent state. There are minimalists and there are direct-electionists, with few real signs of an accord.

Since the 1999 referendum, when the minimalist proposal attracted 45 per cent of the vote and failed to carry one state, the direct-electionists have argued that every non-monarchist is obliged to fall in behind the idea of an elected ceremonial head of state. Speaking for myself, they are dreaming. The last thing this country needs is more elections and more politics, which is what this model would bring, no matter what they say. Certainly some minimalist republicans will shift but I would never back it.

Does this mean, The Age will stop it’s “hardy annual” on ANZAC Day or, more symbolically: Queen’s Birthday? I am afraid, that would be too much to expect. After all, all those republican writers need their payment. No articles – no money. Being an Australian republican means, you are in the business as long as the Monarchy prevails. They cannot wish “a” republic or do they really think opinion pieces praising the fabulous new order would be read by anyone?

The RadicalRoyalist remains cautious and on alert. After all he has to be, because he is using what Shaun Carney denounced as “the hit-and-run style of the blogosphere … that alone would probably be enough to sink any referendum”.

Nothing ensures a republic would pass in a referendum

Disgraced former Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition, Malcolm Turnbull, seems to be pessimistic about the chances of "a" republic being approved by Australians in a referendum.

In an opinion a piece in The Sunday Telegraph, he re-affirmed his preference for the 1999 republic model that was presented to and rejected by the people. He still strongly believes the best model would be to have the president chosen by Parliament, but acknowledges the compelling "allure" of the direct-elect model.

But it should not be assumed a direct-elect model would ensure the republic would pass, he writes: "Our experience in the the lead-up to the 1999 referendum was that whenever we discussed the issue in a focus group, large or small, support for directly electing the president plummeted as soon as people realised that a successful candidate would likely be a political partisan chosen by what would be, no doubt, a fierce political contest."

Why waste all the time, energy and - not to forget: MONEY that is invested in this republic thing? The existing constitutional arrangements give everybody room to work within the monarchical form of state, some even call this "a crowned republic".

Meanwhile, a Galaxy poll, conducted for Rupert Murdoch's News Ltd. during Prince William's visit, revealed that support for "an" Australian republic has dropped to 44 per cent from last November, when the ARM according to the ABC claimed "support for an Australian republic now stands at 59 per cent". The fall from grace is even greater, when one remembers that ARM's leader Michael Keating told spectators in a TV interview before Prince William's arrival, "80 percent of the Australians" wanted "a" republic. Wishful thinking at its best.

Costs of a presidency

We can be assured that before long will we get the bill for Prince William's unofficial visit in Australia. Republicans will triumphantly present the figures and claim that these costs would never have occurred under a republican regime, no matter how minimal they are.

Well, friends, don't be sure, because unless Australia closes its borders for visitors, there will always be costs which a host has to cover, not matter if the visitor fit to one's own ideology or not. A Chinese president does not come cheap, nor will an Irish president expect to pay her all her own expenses. It is rather impolite if a guest is presented the bill after he or she left the country.

But that is just what republicans do with royal guests in Australia.

Nothing new. So, let's look what expenses a president can cause in his own country. The figures come from the French website Observatoire des subventions.

Last week French president Nicolas Sarkozy paid a visit to the overseas departement of La Réunion to wish his subjects a Happy New Year. His 24-hour stay in the island east of Madagascar cost the French taxpayer 1.6 million Euros (=2.511 AUS $).

The president spent this sum for:

815 000 Euros on transport
Not less than four aeroplanes were used for this trip: one A319 for the president himself, another A319 for journalists and his delegation, a Falcon 50 flew empty to La Réunion, just in case, and an A310 also brought journalists and another part of the delegation to the island.

To these 815 000 Euros more costs have to be added, detailed figures are unknown, for fours helicopters that transported the president and his entourage between Saint-Pierre and Saint-Denis, the capital.

50 000 Euros for airconditioning
The Élysée Palace insisted on the installation of a new airconditioning system under the podium. It was out of the question that the president would appear with sweat marks under his arms when being seen by the public. On the other hand, the public had nothing other than the invitation card to fan fresh air into their faces.

23 000 Euros for meals
This sum does not include drinks.

17 000 Euros for the invitations
10 000 personal invitations on cardboard were sent to functionaries, party members, CEOs and other business men of La Réunion.

17 000 Euros rent for the hall
The rent for the “salle des expositions”, where Sarkozy expressed his New Year's wishes did not include lights, sound, staff costs and cleaning.

13 000 Euros for accomodation
An abnormally high price. The président de la république had chosen “l’un des plus luxueux mais aussi plus onéreux hôtel de la Réunion” (one of the most luxurious, but also most expensive hotels of La Réunion): Le Palm hôtel & Spa de Petite-Île. 55 rooms for 55 people (ministers, councillors, security staff, CEOs …).

Just as a footnote: In 2009 Nicolas Sarkozy's spent more money on garden parties than the Queen of the United Kingdom - but entertained less guests.

Echoes

The republican media had a hard week. They were obliged to report on Prince William’s unofficial visit to Australia – and its obvious success -, but then they had to find means to degrade and minimize it.

Today’s editorial of The Age is a good example. Under the headline Goodbye, sweet prince. Hello, republic debate it repeated its well-known phrases. “He left these shores yesterday morning, having earned a good amount of respect and, indeed, affection - qualities he obviously feels in return about Australia. … The Age has long believed that a crucial defining point in Australia's nationhood is the inevitable severing of vestigial ties with the British monarchy.”

The Age even dug up old Turnbull from his retirement mansion, from where he wrote an article for Murdoch’s London newspaper The Times, stating 'that Prince William, for all his charms, will make as much difference to the republic debate as a rapturous welcome in the United States 'would indicate that the Americans are having second thoughts about 1776'".

Well, I don’t want to disappoint the editorialist, but would he do some research s/he would find quite a lot of US Monarchists who do have second thoughts about 1776. After all, nearly a third of those who read the RadicalRoyalist's blog are based in the USA. Need some help in getting in contact with them, dear Age?

The Age's arch-republican writer Michelle Grattan also read Murdoch’s London Times and was obviously delighted to find recycled Malcolm Turnbull phrases, Prince 'no obstacle to republic': "Prince William might be as charming a King as he was a Prince but could never represent Australia in the way he would represent his own country, Malcolm Turnbull has told a British audience. … Mr Turnbull, who headed the Australian Republican Movement when the [from the republican point of view, RR] unsuccessful referendum was held in 1999, maintains his opposition to a directly elected president, favouring a president being chosen by a bipartisan parliamentary vote.”

The Age’s editorial on Prince William's departure day came across as a very grumpy piece of work. Well, could we really expect any graciousness? The Age admitted: “In personal and public relations terms, and in the eyes of many Australians whose lives he briefly touched, Prince William's whirlwind visit to Sydney and Melbourne this week has been a huge success. … He showed himself to be equally comfortable in a pub or on a military firing range as when talking with victims of disastrous bushfires. In another era, not so long ago, he would have generally been hailed by Australians as a Prince for all seasons, a thoroughly satisfactory future King.”

But this editorial points the finger at the republican kerfuffle: “More serious recent setbacks to republicanism have been the byproducts of federal politics. The latest was the overthrow of Malcolm Turnbull, former leader of the republican movement, as leader of the Opposition. His replacement, Tony Abbott, has been a monarchist.” So, it was an overthrow of a failed Leader of Her Majesty’s Australian Opposition. Did he not fall by his own mistakes? He was replaced in a democratic election and not in an overthrow.

And getting rather nostalgic, The Age states in the same editorial: “For a bloke who keeps talking about the need for 'revolutions', Rudd is remarkably coy about upsetting the status quo. But all is not lost. … A massed chorus of government spinners immediately sought to howl down such a possibility. We hope that [federal Attorney-General, Robert] McClelland, the point minister, is right and that a republic referendum is still very much a live option - and not too far down the track. It certainly should be.”

However, The Age, like all republicans, never admit, what they will do, should the Monarchists win the referendum again. They never contemplate defeat. That's not in their Weltanschauung. But if it should happen again, will they finally accept a democratic decision and live within the framework of a Constitutional Monarchy? Or will they continue to work on the overthrow of the Monarchy - no matter, what the people decided?

The Age’s other renowned arch-republican writer Michael Shmith searched the British media for their reaction of Prince William’s tour down under. “For all the efforts of myriad royal reporters, whose life's work is to serve as humble scribes to those with kind hearts and coronets, the fate of the William roadshow came down to the words on top of their peerless prose.” He was not impressed by The Daily Telegraph’s headline:

“'Prince William thanks Australians for their show of affection’. How nice and precise. The Sun: 'Wills has made Oz love Royals again'. This was accompanied by a short appreciation by that well-known constitutional authority, star of soap and pantomime, Jason Donovan, who says, 'What Prince William does bring is a clean slate … [he] can reinvigorate and re-invent the royal family for Australians.'” Certainly, Michael Shmith is a far greater well-known constitutional authority than Jason Donovan. But who is better known outside the republican circles? And this silly me thought everybody should have a say in the Monarchy vs. republic discussion. It seems, only republican artists are welcome to express their opinion.

Where are the letters to the editor?
In the letters to the editor section there was still no great rush to push the republican agenda. Today's Age has two meager two-sentence-statements that don't even appear online. The pro-Monarchy one was written by someone who lives in Victoria -, the other one opposing Prince William was - once again - sent in by a NSW resident, like the one and only letter on Prince William's visit that was published two days ago. Where are all the Victorian republicans?

The RadicalRoyalist is getting ready for The Sunday Age. Considering the paper's pushy republicanism, the poor subscribers will face the opinion of a well-known constitutional authority like, well, let's say, Guy Rundle, who can always be expected to promote "a" republic for Australia. How good of him. Since he has been living in the United Kingdom for some time, he really knows exactly, what is going on in Australia and what is good for us.
So, nobody is interested, huh?

Patronizing republican

To the RadicalRoyalist's surprise, The Age has so far published very few letters to the editor concerning Prince William's unofficial visit to Australia. Here's the only one, I could find. Please note, that someone from NSW got his letter published in the Melbourne newspaper.

Why welcome him?
THE traditional Aboriginal welcome given to Prince William at Redfern (The Age, 20/1) is an embarrassment. Aborigines rightly point to their poor treatment from "the white establishment", yet tip their forelock to royalty and hand over compliments, thus tacitly and complicitly conspiring to continue their downtrodden status. Meanwhile, William is seen as a hero.

Ask yourself this: after 221 years of apartheid, what has the royal family done for Aborigines, apart from continuing the status quo? Pemulwuy, Aboriginal warrior and activist, would be rolling in his grave.
Andrew Woodhouse, Potts Point, NSW

Probably Andrew Woodhouse considers himself very progressive to advocate his republicanism. Did it cross his mind, how patronizing it is to tell the Aboriginal people whom they should welcome and in which manner?

These republicans never get it.

Prince William's Australia Day speech at Government House in Melbourne

On 21st January 2010 Prince William spoke at Government House in Melbourne to address the people at the state of Victoria's Australia Day celebrations .

I would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land, the Kulin Nation, and pay my respects to their elders, both past and present. Being in Australia is the realisation of a dream.

As far back as I can remember, I have heard from my family about the wonders of Australia and the hospitality and friendship of the Australian people.

My father had such a great time here at school - and is still misty-eyed about an immortal moment on Bondi, when an Australian beauty planted a smacker on his cheek. It's good to see this tradition is continuing!

I also remember my mother coming back from her time here in 1996, telling me what a profound impression this country had made on her and how much she loved Australia. Three days here and now I know why. And of course, there's that other guy with the ginger hair, who just never ever stops banging on about you and how I haven't lived because I haven't been to Australia - blah, blah, blah.

Because of this, and because of the respect the world has for your unique way of life, your vibrancy, your straightforward ways, your classic sense of humour, I have been longing to return.

The last time I was here I was nine months old and seeing the world from a very low level; certainly not one from which to appreciate this awesome place.

What has struck me during this visit to the southern hemisphere is what "shared heritage" actually means.

It really is about core values and our way of life. It really is about humour and decency.

And it is also about courage and an ability to face down adversity. Today, on the outskirts of Melbourne, I was privileged to see the spirit of Australia in its purest, most magnificent form.

My family, along with millions around the world, followed the events of last February with a sense of horror which slowly, as the days passed, turned to one of deep, deep admiration for the steadfastness of the Australian people.

The stories of suffering I have heard today inevitably made me think about the ongoing tragedy of Haiti. Our thoughts and prayers remain with everyone there.

What an exciting place Australia is, though! This truly is a country for the 21st century. I only wish I had a little longer to see a bit more of Melbourne, this legendary city of sport and culture.

But if I may, I'll be back!

So, coming to Australia is the realisation of this long-held dream.

To be standing here, in beautiful Melbourne, on a glorious summer's afternoon, is one thing. But to be asked to address you at the state of Victoria's Australia Day celebrations is a great honour for me.

Thank you for asking me to be here and making me feel so very welcome.

Happy Australia Day.

More reports on the Prince of Wales' website.

The Prince and Uncle Scrooge

Murdoch’s empire is so blatant in its efforts to secure the biggest profit.

On the one hand, Murdoch's Melbourne based free tabloid mx proudly said on the cover: WARNING This newspaper contains no stories on Prince William.
But on the other hand, Murdoch’s other Melbourne newspaper, HeraldSun, is full of stories and photos of the Prince’s whirlwind tour through the Victorian countryside and the city.

Why put photos and reports in a throw-away newspaper, when the public is so interested in Prince William's visit? Murdoch knows how to make money and the HeraldSun is to use Prince William’s popularity and impressive presence in the country.

Murdoch wants you to buy the Royal Tour Souvenir edition ($1.10) of the HeraldSun. Murdoch may hate our Royal Family, but he still acknowledges that there is money to make buy publishing stories on them.

Michael Wolff said in his biography on THE MAN WHO OWNS THE NEWS: “A decade earlier, the vehemently anti-monarchist [Murdoch] drank himself silly on hearing of Princess Diana's death, fearful of what it would do to his Diana-dependent UK newspaper sales.”

However, on the HeraldSun’s website the photos of Prince William in Victoria can be accessed free of charge. The RadicalRoyalist highly recommends to have a look for yourself how the Victorians enthusiastically welcomed their future King.

Prince William, the charmer of Oz

On 21st January, his third day in Australia, HRH Prince William came down from Sydney to visit the Whittlesea bushfire recovery centre, in Melbourne’s north, where he quizzed Premier John Brumby on the Black Saturday (6th February 2009) blazes.

The Prince shook hands with the waiting crowd in Whittlesea, mixing with locals before the briefing. Whittlesea is about 45 kilometres north of central Melbourne and is near the bushfire-devastated town of Kinglake, where 42 people died on Black Saturday. The towns of Strathewen, Flowerdale, Arthurs Creek and St Andrews which were hit by the fires are also nearby.

Hundreds of people gathered to welcome the second in line to the Australian throne to Whittlesea.

Later in the afternoon came to Melbourne, where he gave a speech at an Australia Day reception at Government House.

But before he went inside and changed into formal dress, he got out of his car and received a cheering welcome from, well, how many were we? Certainly more than a thousand people.

The Radical Royalist came very close to the future King of Australia and took some photos.
His Royal Highness was an immensely impressive person who spent more time with his loyal Australian subjects than protocol had foreseen.

He was certainly the most stunning visitor Melbourne has had in recent years.

And it must be said again: This was an unofficial visit. Neither the Australian nor the Victorian government invited Prince William. When you look at his success during the past three days, you know why: They envy his attraction. Jealousy is a strong force. It was so obvious in Prince William's case: Politicians trundled behind and they were not in the centre of the media's attention.

That must hurt their ego.

Prince William met with officers and soldiers of the Royal Australian Regiment

On 20th January 2010, the second day of his unofficial visit to Australia, HRH Prince William, second in line to the Australian throne, met with officers and soldiers of Alpha Company, 3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR) at the Holsworthy Army Base in Sydney.


His Royal Highness Prince William receiving a gift of an Australian slouch hat from Lieutenant Colonel Trent Scott the Commanding Officer of 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment.

His Royal Highness Prince William, chatting with soldiers from Alpha Company 3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR).
His Royal Highness Prince William, chatting with Corporal Jeremy Kiely and soldiers from Alpha Company 3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR).
His Royal Highness Prince William, receiving instructions on the AUSTYER F88c by Corporal Kyle Balfoort prior to joining a range practice at the Marksmanship Training Range, with soldiers from Alpha company 3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR).

The visit of Prince William to Australia

January 19th to 21st 2010

Below is the information to date.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 19th, 2010:

Prince William arrives at Sydney Airport

Noon: Kirribilli - Admiralty House. Lunch with the Governor-General. Guests will include prominent young Australians.

Afternoon: Sydney. Visit to the Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Centre.

The Centre runs day classes, after-school classes and activities and many other drop-in services for all ages.

Afternoon: Sydney City - Prince William will call on the Governor of New South Wales, Dr Marie Bashir at Government House.

Evening: Private

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20th, 2010:

Morning: Holsworthy. Tour of Army Barracks. Join 3rd Battalion - the Royal Australian Regiment. Participate in live fire training at the marksmanship training range at the Barracks. Meet privately with Special Operations Command soldiers.

Morning: Sydney Harbour - Visit the CSIRO environmental research ship Southern Surveyor. Meet with scientists and view marine science technology oceans.

Noon: Sydney City Barbeque lunch in the Royal Botanic Gardens hosted by Kristina Keneally, Premier of New South Wales. Emphasis will be on young people.

Afternoon : Private

THURSDAY, JANUARY 21st, 2010

Morning: Visit to Bushfire affected areas. Meet with emergency services.

Community event. Meet with people who lost their homes in the tragedy.
Plant a tree as a symbol of new growth.
Attend barbeque and local sports match.

Afternoon: Visit rebuilt educational centre.

Afternoon: Melbourne City - Call on the Governor of Victoria, Prof. David de Kretser, at Government House, Melbourne. Attend Governor's Australia Day reception with Hon. John Brumby, Premier of Victoria. Plant tree in grounds of Government House.

Evening: private

Being created a Knight “greater than receiving an Oscar”

Prime Minister John Key may not be well known outside New Zealand, but his announcement that the titles of Knight and Dame are to return to the New Zealand honours system has excited not only his electorate.

The 2010 New Year’s honours list features former NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark, film-maker Peter Jackson, businessman Douglas Myers and US philanthropist Julian Robertson. It is an irony that Helen Clark, the administrator of the UN Development Programme and who in 2000 abolished titular honours list, joins a raft of new Dames and Knights.

The National Business Review:

“Ms Clark joins the elite Order of New Zealand, which is restricted to 20 living New Zealanders and at the moment has only 17 members.

Sir Douglas Myers, 71, has long been thought to have been a knight, judging by the many descriptions over the years in the media.

He becomes a knight companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit along with Sir Peter Jackson, health professor Sir Mason Durie, senior judge Sir Bruce Robertson and educationalist Dame Lesley Max. American citizen Julian Robertson becomes an honorary knight and cannot call himself ’Sir.’

Sir Peter’s honour comes as film career recovers from a hiatus since he collected a raft of Oscars for The Lord of the Rings trilogy in 2004. His latest film, The Lovely Bones, started its New Zealand season on Boxing Day while earlier this year his production of science fiction thriller District 9 was a critical and box office hit.

His company Weta is responsible for the special effects in the blockbuster Avatar and he is deeply involved in several new films, including a Tintin series, a remake of The Dam Busters and a new version of Tolkien’s The Hobbit.

Sir Peter did not give an interview but issued a statement saying the knighthood was an "incredible moment" that was greater than receiving an Oscar.

The 85 New Zealanders who were given honours between 2000 and 2009 which used to come with a title had the opportunity to accept the title of Knight or Dame.

"The Queen has given approval for the reinstatement of titles. The changes will be finalised and come into effect in time for the Queen's Birthday Honours list in June," Prime Minister Key said in March 2009.

Recipients of the titleless honours system were poised to take titles, according to reports. Miki, the wife of Peter Snell, a three-times Olympic gold medallist, said her husband would "go with the change".

Professor Peter Gluckman, one of New Zealand's most eminent scientists, who was also be eligible, said a title was of great value in terms of gaining recognition overseas.

What have the opponents to say? Well, here’s Idiot/Savant from “No Right Turn”:

Against knighthoods
So, out of the blue, the National government has decided to restore the archaic institution of knighthoods. Talk about turning back the clock. So instead of having our own honours system which reflects our modern society and values, we'll be aping thousand-year-old institutions of oppression and aristocratic privilege. Which is the sort of thing that happens when you retain a monarchy.

Make no mistake: this is about aristocracy, it is about hierarchy, and it is about deference. None have any place in New Zealand, a country where "Jack is as good as his master". This move is deeply at odds with egalitarian kiwi values, and it exposes National's true nature as the promoters and protectors of privilege. It also exposes their cultural cringe, their sense of insecurity and crawling sycophancy to our former imperial masters. New Zealand honours aren't good enough for them. New Zealand isn't good enough for them. I humbly suggest that if they feel that way, they should piss off somewhere else. The UK still has titles. If they want one, they could always buy one there.

Still, there is a plus side: firstly, we'll be able to find out who all National's secret donors are - there's no hiding a payback knighthood behind an anonymising trust. And secondly, we can have great fun speculating on which other "worthy" New Zealanders they'll reward. "Sir" Roger Kerr, anyone? Or maybe "Dame" Diane Foreman? What about "Sir" Richard Prebble or "Sir" Don Brash? Or will we finally see "Dame" Ruth Richardson...?
Posted by Idiot/Savant at 3/9/2009

Is it really about aristocracy?
The 2010 New Year’s honours list does not create an new aristocracy, but gives visible credit to people who served their country. A money aristocracy does not need titles. Business empires are handed down to the next generation in monarchies as well as in republics, even if the latter one deem themselves “egalitarian”. Children cannot inherit a knighthood, but receive wealth from relatives, it has always been possible. The Murdochs come to mind. Or the Packers.

The equality fetishists get upset because someone receives an honorary title, but only the fiercest Marxists would address the issue of the inherited wealth. And these Marxists certainly don’t look to China for help. Even the most Stalinist country on earth, North Korea cannot offer help, because a Communist dynasty has been established and wealth, power and titles will be handed down to the next generation of the Kim family.

People are strange. They get upset by the most insignificant things. Take this example from Germany. The country’s defence minister has ten Christian names: Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jakob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester. And he even has an inherited title. He could call himself Reichsfreiherr von und zu Guttenberg, however, for practical reasons, he is addressed as Herr zu Guttenberg.

Does this make him a better politician? I don’t think so, but it also does not make him a bad politician. In September 2009 he was re-elected to the Bundestag with 68.1 percent of his electorate - a German record. His political action should be judged by his deeds, not by his name. However, reading leftist German blogs or newspaper comments one could think, this man could do nothing right, because his parents gave him ten Christian names. Should they have called him Kevin? There are already jokes about a Chancellor called Kevin (see this video).

We are all bearers of names given to us by our parents. Should an egalitarian society have any influence on this? Restrict the number of first names? Everybody would call this ridiculous. So, why do people get upset, that a country honours its scientists, its successful artists and, yes, even business leaders or sports people with three or four additional letters in front of their names? That’s beyond me.

New Zealander J Williamson of Napier said: "There is a bit of envy becoming apparent in some of these replies. By necessity this type of system is going to be based on tradition, and our history is tied up with Britain and the Queen (who is our Queen as much as their Queen!). And what is wrong with that?"

Predictable, populist – and rather stupid

John Williams of Bendigo in Victoria wrote a letter I had expected, when I read yesterday's Age article on Prince William's schedules for the coming years. It came as no surprise that Williams’ remarks were picked by the editor of The Age and published today:

Our disloyal 'head'
PRINCE William will campaign for Britain to host the 2018 World Cup (The Age, 4/1). His Aunty Anne did the same when Melbourne last tried for the Olympic Games. Why do we still have this family as Australia's head of state when it actively works against our interests?
John Williams, Bendigo

The article referred to stated that

“Prince William … is determined to spend the next few years developing his military career and working for the many charities and bodies of which he is patron.
“One of those roles, as president of England's Football Association, will bring him into direct competition with Australia, as Prince William has made it clear he wants to lobby for Britain to host the 2018 World Cup.”

So Williams and probably some other misguided minds who can’t think of anything else than sport, sport, and again sport see Prince William – and other members of our Royal Family – as actively working “against our interests”.

Have they ever spared a thought on using the prestige of the Australian Royal Family to lobby for our interests? Nobody denies Australia the right to ask for a royal patron. And which Australian football club has offered, let’s say, Prince Harry, a chairmanship?

Complaining about other people’s activities comes back as lack of one’s own activities. Am I right, John Williams?

I am sure members of our Royal Family would be only too happy to become spokespersons for Australian causes. When was the last time the Australian government asked Her Majesty to represent Australia?

On the other hand, Canada knows very well the value of the Queen’s presence and she represented the Canadian interests for example at Vimy in France. On 9th April 2007 a monument was re-dedicated to remember the bitter Battle of Vimy Ridge in which more than 3,500 Canadian soldiers died. Her Majesty was in France as Queen of Canada to preside over the ceremonies to rededicate the great Canadian Memorial of the Battle of Vimy Ridge, fought ninety years ago. The refurbished memorial was originally dedicated by King Edward VIII, as King of Canada, and it stands on what will forever be Canadian land, a mark of the gratitude France bears for Canada for that great victory.

In the presence of over 15,000 Canadians, The Queen, in English and in French, paid tribute to the Canadians who took the ridge.

It was a hop from the UK to France, saving the Canadian taxpayer thousands of dollars for travel allowances.

But where is no will, there’s no way, just all too predictable and very cheap efforts to discredit royal activities.