SST: A slap in the face
The SST has labelled the decision for no member of the Royal Family to attend Sir Edmund’s funeral as a slap in the face for all New Zealanders. While not quite literally true, they are on the money and I am reproducing the whole editorial as it makes the case so strongly:
Republicans will rejoice that the royals have declined to come to Sir Edmund Hillary’s funeral. Buckingham Palace has, at a stroke, infuriated all of New Zealand and turned mild monarchists into red-hot anti-royalists. As PR botches go, it’s epoch-making and hilarious. But as an insult to this country and its deepest values, it is unforgivable.
Hillary represents the best of us everyone has been saying so since he died and was loved like no other New Zealander. The palace denies that the royal refusal will be seen as a snub to Sir Ed, and demonstrates the gulf between the toffs at court and the people of these islands. It is not only an insult to Hillary, it is a slap in the face for all New Zealanders.
It is also a breathtaking piece of hypocrisy. Britain and its rulers welcomed Hillary’s conquest of Everest as the “crowning glory” of Elizabeth’s coronation in 1953. The bewildered beekeeper found himself transmogrified into a knight. Britain regarded him as an honorary Brit and celebrated his climb as though a Brit had done it.
The new queen was happy to accept Hillary’s colonial tribute to her glory, and later gave him the ultimate royal honour by making him a Knight of the Garter. This is the greatest of the gongs, a personal gift of the sovereign. When Hillary went to London in 2002 she greeted him like an old friend.
This is why it is hogwash for the palace to say that the governor-general, as the queen’s personal representative, will be an adequate ambassador at the funeral. Nobody believes that when the governor-general turns up to cut a ribbon or attend a big-wigs’ tea party that he is a sort of virtual royal presence. The people who listen to him giving yet another vacuous speech of good cheer do not suppose for a minute that they are somehow in the presence of the Queen of England. Sending the governor-general to the funeral of the greatest living New Zealander is therefore not a special enough royal gesture. It certainly is not a decent response to the death of a man feted as a hero not only in New Zealand but in Britain, and whose funeral will be televised in many countries around the world. “Oh, Satyanand can do it,” is not only a lazy response, it is a shameful one.
Edmund and Elizabeth’s twosome was for many monarchists a kind of symbol of the close bonds between their countries. The fact that she can’t be bothered even to send a minor princeling or pint-sized princess to farewell him should tell even them that these bonds are broken. Most New Zealanders know that already. They no longer crowd to see visiting royals. They know that New Zealand is in practical terms a republic. But this astonishing insult should now spur us into making the break with the palace official. What better proof could there be that we no longer have anything in common with this bizarre institution?
Helen Clark won’t do anything, of course, because although she thinks the monarchy is absurd she is also desperately interested in hanging on to power. Till now, she has supposed that stirring up a debate over the monarchy would just cause her unnecessary trouble. But maybe this time around she is wrong. Maybe the Queen’s insult will really spark the start of a republican revolution. Maybe this time Clark will stand up for what she believes.
The Queen offers a memorial service in England for Hillary, as though this makes up for the royal absence at his real funeral. This just makes things worse. One can’t be bothered to go all the way down there, but one will light a candle in one’s chapel.
No, ma’am, it won’t do.
In a separate story, they also report on reaction quoting a UK royal correspondent who labels it an “astonishing” snub.
The Royal Family sent a member to the funerals of Norman Kirk and Keith Holyoake. They have been badly advised in their decision not to attend Hillary’s. There is no question that there were Royals available with no clashing engagements, and there was definitely time for a flight over to be arranged.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Just as an aside, it might be a good time for the SST to stop referring to Sir Ed as ‘the greatest living New Zealander’. Maybe they haven’t heard, but . . .
January 20th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Crap. Piffle. Poppycock. Balderdash.
Grow up.
Alternatively, become a colony and kowtow to the royals. You cannot have it both ways.
January 20th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I’m with Adam Smith.
The “snub” theme of the last couple of days is all about an immature nation’s need to feel loved. Who cares who attends Ed’s funeral?
January 20th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Danyl: Heh.
January 20th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
What a shame the lead quote is from the Daily Mail – a low-rent tabloid that bears out the truth of George Bernard Shaw’s obervation that your average British newspaper can’t distinguish between a lady falling off a bicycle and the end of civilization.
And when it comes to matters of manners and morals, I’ll be asking Amy Winehouse to be my sponsor before The Mail becomes my personal Emily Post.
January 20th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Clarks rudeness comes back to haunt her. No Royal can probably be bothered with her again. And who can blame them.
January 20th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Hear Hear SST.
Danyl – well spotted.
January 20th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I know this is slightly off topic but can anyonw enlighten me as to why the cuurent GG (as the Queens representative in NZ) wasn’t Knighted by her before he took up the appointment.
My understanding is that all previous GGs, if they weren’t Knighted when their appoinment was announced, received the accolade when they visted ‘Buck House’ on the mandatory visit before they assumed office.
Yes, I agree he is a PCNZM and a QSO but those are purely NZ awards made on the recommendation of the Government of the day.
I am talking about a personal award by the reigning sovereign.
There has to be a reason for the change and perhaps the ‘ties that bind’ are being eroded both by commission and ommission.
January 20th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Do you not think that the behaviour of our beloved “Queen” who is now the Queen’s Representative at the Hillary funeral (oh the “GG” can come too) may have something to do with the advice Buck House received from our Government.
Do you not think that they did not seek advice from New Zealand?
I perceive a H1/H2 beat up to make H1 the “Great Leader” in what could be a sad occasion. We should really recognise Hillary for the great works he did after Everest, brought about by good fortune at having been chosen for the final climb and the wonderful achievement of reaching the summit with Tenzing.
Following up from a previous blog of mine I was privileged at school in London shortly after the climbing of Everest to be addressed by Colonel Sir John Hunt on the British Army sponsored expedition climbing of Everest.
I am sure that we were told during questions that he had three main climbers and two Sherpas getting ready for the final push to the summit, which included Hillary.
His speech emphasised that the whole expedition was a team effort, noting particularly the climbers who set up the high camps, to enable the final “job to be done”.
January 20th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Does anybody know if they sent someone to Australia when Don Bradman died?
Possibly that’s the precedent we should be looking at here.
January 20th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
The only Royal worth seeing is the Queen.
She’s getting on a bit, and why would she bother to come here and be spat upon and thrown eggs at. Don’t bother with the trousers story and the prayer issue. The Queen is above your misogyny and obviously more inclusive of other’s beliefs as well. Hopefully, she also ignored the political remarks of Key.
But she is still more intelligent, more influential and with a better work ethic and now with a better idea than any of you plonkers.
It is huge to be invited to a special memorial service at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle, and share time with the Queen and others in England to honour Sir Ed, being a British subject in a British climbing party when he reached the summit of Mt Everest.
Your blogging idiocy knows no bounds. You are also making this country a laughing stock instead of gearing it up to show the world how we celebrate a fabulous New Zealand man’s life.
January 20th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I dont think Ed or his family care if a Royal attends…
January 20th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Ross Miller
We got rid of titles and participation in the British honours system. We are so independent and do not need UK. We have our own. GG will be expected to comply with this. H1 does not want titles.
Re Other Comments
Again, I would point out that everything you are seeing here and complaining about has been visited on us by decisions made here, or with significant input from here. The Queen acts under advice. Who gives advice re NZ – the GG and Helen.
Re Kirk and Holyoake they were former PMs.
Hillary is not. Hillary as pointed out many times is receiving a special service at Windsor, not just the routine one.
BTW the SST in another article, again says H1 will represent HM Queen, this is not what the Buck House press release states.
This as I wrote yesterday, is a load of tosh built up by ill informed, at best, media and a public which has gone totally OTT in this matter.
We really are very, very sad in gseeking marks of approbation from the monarchy, especially given our normally anti attitude especially re English people en masse.
January 20th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
In this vein I want to know why George Bush, Kevin Rudd, President of India, King of Nepal and the Pope are not attending the funeral in person.
After all we really deserve their attendance do we not!!!
January 20th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
craig ranapaia..heh..!
(very ‘tidy’..tying in winehouse there..)
and more shavian quotes..!
we need him now more than ever..
phil(whoar.co.nz
January 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
BlairM
From the BBc website it would appear that Bradman did not have a state funeral, the then Australian GG attended.
Also and I quote a statement by the Don’s son: – John Bradman.
”’He urged people not to treat his father as an icon.
“We must not be too serious about him and we must not treat him as a religious figure,” he said.
“Don’t enslave him with worship.”
The Bradman family sought to hose down the excess, as I suspect the Hillary family wish to.
Let us stop this excess of mawkish sentiment. A great man died and one who wished only that we do something to ensure his work for the Sherpas went on. All the rest is nonsense and flim-flam.
January 20th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
philu
I assume you mean Craig R or failing him GBS?
January 20th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
They still have a king in Nepal?? If so, not for much longer I suspect.
January 20th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Well done SST, which has become arguably the country’s most strident republican media outlet.
I think a key point about the lack of Royal presence at the funeral is that the Queen is the Queen of New Zealand, our Head of State, and at the state funeral of one of the realm’s greatest sons, no personal representative from the Queen’s family will be in attendence.
That the Queen of New Zealand will not be honouring one of her realms most significant lives is very definately a snub.
January 20th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I know that she is Queen of New Zealand. Given, that she rarely if ever attends the funerals as opposed to the memorial services of UK citizens, unless they are family, I do not see this a snub. If she came here or sent one of the others she and they would be doing nothing else but attending funerals.
She is honouring his life with a virtually unprecedented service at Windsor.
No doubt if a Royal did come, many of you would then complain that it was the wrong royal.
Given the overall population of the countries of which she remains monarch, the claims on the royals time for funeral duty for deserving attendance would be huge.
If you persist with the ‘snub’ routine, please recognsie that she acts on advice. Then think who gives her the advice regarding NZ.
In fact I give up on this subject, as the increasingly childish desire for “Mummy’ to fly over and wipe our noses and arses because Uncle Ed has died, makes me want to vomit. Christ on a bike, grow up and get a grip.
January 20th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
No doubt if a Royal did come, many of you would then complain that it was the wrong royal.
More likely they’d be whining about how much it cost for an irrelevant gesture.
January 20th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
I agree it’s entirely possible the one who gives the Queen advice on NZ advised her not to come and there are good security grounds for such.
IF that’s the case however then I would hope that person would let the nation know about said advice so as the nation knew who’s decision it was.
January 20th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Oh, and DPF where do you think the Sunday Star-Times reached the conclusion that a rather pathetic media beat up “nfuriated all of New Zealand and turned mild monarchists into red-hot anti-royalists.” Is the chap who does the horoscope writing editorials now?
FYI for the Slumday Smear-Whines: If you want to ride the republican bandwagon, do try and avoid using the pluralis majestatis.
January 20th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Oh come ON, the snubs have been pretty much one way – from us to them – up till now. Fair enough if the Queen has lost interest. “Jum” above, is right:
(WORTH COPYING AND PASTING IN FULL):
“The only Royal worth seeing is the Queen.
She’s getting on a bit, and why would she bother to come here and be spat upon and thrown eggs at. Don’t bother with the trousers story and the prayer issue. The Queen is above your misogyny and obviously more inclusive of other’s beliefs as well. Hopefully, she also ignored the political remarks of Key.
But she is still more intelligent, more influential and with a better work ethic and now with a better idea than any of you plonkers.
It is huge to be invited to a special memorial service at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle, and share time with the Queen and others in England to honour Sir Ed, being a British subject in a British climbing party when he reached the summit of Mt Everest.
Your blogging idiocy knows no bounds. You are also making this country a laughing stock instead of gearing it up to show the world how we celebrate a fabulous New Zealand man’s life.”
HEAR, HEAR.
January 20th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
What Don’t you people understand! The Palace Policy on Funerals is that members of the Royal family ONLY attend the Funerals of Govenor Generals, Heads of State, and in exceptional cases Prime Ministers.If it wasn’t for this, then members of the Royal family would be forever attending the funerals of every Do-Gooder, record braker, and any person whoever recieved a title in the entire commanwealth, which by the way comprises of 53 independant states with at toal population of aprox 2 Billion people, roughly 30 % of the world’s popultation.I am ashamed that Lewis Holden, the Rebublican movement,and a number of jorno’s in the Media are taking advantage of Sir Eds death to push their Republican agenda.Have some decorum and wait till he’s at least been laid to rest
[DPF: So SIr Ed is now just a do-gooder? The title he received is the highest there is, and is limited to 24 living people. Attending one funeral every decade or so in NZ doesn't seem that onerous for our head of state to do]
January 20th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
DPF. No what im saying is that if they go to the funeral of Sir Ed, then you open the flood gates.And a member of the Royal Family will be expected to attend the funeral of every other well respected, loved,national hero,and icon of 30 % of the worlds Population.Thats absurd, Thats why the Queen has instructed the GG to represent her.
[The title he received is the highest there is, and is limited to 24 living people. Attending one funeral every decade or so in NZ doesn’t seem that onerous for our head of state to do]
A member of the Royal family has never attended the funeral of a civilian member of the Garter. Are you supporting One Rule for Sir Ed and another Rule for every other member of the Garter? If so what about the others that have died and not had a Royal attendance?I hope your not supporting biasism based on your nationality?
[DPF: Firstly you are wrong. They attended Holyoake's. Secondly this is about more than just the title he had. He had a personal connection through the timing of the Everest climb and the Coronation, and he has clearly was NZ's most respected and most known iconic figure (despite hating being portrayed as so). The expectation they would attend was not unreasonable - this is why so many people are surprised]
January 20th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
she is Queen of NZ.
our Head of State.
but is not attending our State Funeral.
this simply shows how disengaged from our national life she is.
if our Head of State is not interested in participating in such a key event in our national life then it is time for us to move on and adopt a local head of state who will be.
January 20th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
[DPF] read carefully what I said.
“members of the Royal family ONLY attend the Funerals of GOVENOR GENRALS, Heads of State, and in exceptional cases PRIME MINISTERS”
Holyoake was both. and not what I consider a Civilian Member of the Garter. So Im not wrong
People you say are suprised – aka Republican people
[DPF: I regard a civilian as someone not in the military. And if they can make an exception for Norman Kirk (when air travel was far less frequent and far less comfortable) they should make one for Hillary]
January 20th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Lets clarify some stuff. You first talk about Holyoake and now Norman Kirk. your missing the point Hillary is not a Head of State, Govenor General or Prime Minister. but Holyoake and Kirk where at least one of those. you are reinforcing my argument completly
[DPF: You are missing the point. All you are doing is devising a list of funerals they have attended and desperately trying to find a common thread which Hillary did not have, so you can claim it is all okay. They made a bad judgement call. Simple as that]
January 20th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Btw Holyoake as GG was Commander in Chief of the NZ Tri Star forces, So did hold a Military Position- The Highest
January 20th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
<i>So SIr Ed is now just a do-gooder?</i>
WTF is wrong with being ‘just’ that? Better to be a do-godder than not, in my book – and climbing a bloody mountain is all very nice and lovely, but its the least of his achievements. In my humble opinion, that is.
<i>The title he received is the highest there is, and is limited to 24 living people.</i>
I’ve asked you this before, and you’ve dodged it: Is it conventional for members of the royal family to attend the funerals of members of the Order of the Garter (many of whom were every bit as well-respected as Sir Ed. in their own countries or fields of achievement)? I don’t believe so, but if I’m wrong please correct me… then the ‘snub’ hyterics might have some merit.
<i>So Attending one funeral every decade or so in NZ doesn’t seem that onerous for our head of state to do.</i>
Gee, I didn’t know there was a quota…
[DPF: I have tried to find out re other Garter holders. Most were local in England and were attended. There was a former Aust GG who was KG and died but Google has no hints as to whether a royal was there]
January 20th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
i should have said in my 8:39 comment
I don’t expect the Queen personally to attend, but one of her senior family members instead
either Charles as heir, or Edward given his close ties with NZ would be appropriate in my opinion
in response to others, Kirk was not a Head of State, he was Prime Minister
January 20th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Craig.
it’s the combination of a number of significant factors,
not just that he was a Knight of the Garter.
greatest NZer.
achieved the greatest exploration feat of the 20th century.
(as a Kiwi, under a British flag, by the way).
she had already personally honoured by making him a Knight at the time.
and
later personally honoured by making him a Knight of the Garter.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Gavin Night – If you read properly I said Either PM GG or other Head of State. I didnt asume that Kirk was GG ( Thank God he wasn’t)
DPF – [ All you are doing is devising a list of funerals they have attended and desperately trying to find a common thread which Hillary did not have, so you can claim it is all okay] NOT AT ALL
What i am saying is that you have to understand Palace Policy and to respect and understand Royal Protocals and Procedure.Protocals and Procedures that have been operating for hundres of years.Don’t get upset just because hes a kiwi and not getting Royal attendance – Icon or Not. I think that over the years the Queen has given him a number of accolades befitting his status in NZ. KG, High Commisioner to India, and ONZ( even though he had a strong political position. which out due any snob that some of you rebuplican go on about
The Queen has shown how high regard she holds Sir Edmund by holding a memorial service – which the pro republican PM said was rare.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Well may I say …
God Save The Queen
Because nothing will save NZ
if DPF views on Constitutional Arrangments are ever inacted
January 20th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Yes, the royals are snubbing us. But we deserve it – the labour government has not shown the queen much courtesy over the years.
Anyway, vote on http://www.stuff.co.nz – and remember, Vote Early, Vote Often
January 20th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
aristoc. the royals got it wrong on diana.
and they’ve got it wrong on hillary.
nothing to do with royal protocol.
i hold republican convictions but my feeling snubbed on this is because our head of state is not attending our state funeral, or sending one of her senior family members in her place.
the fact the head of state we are referring to is an absent constitutional monarch only reinforces my republican convictions.
if our head of state is so disengaged from our national life then it is time to move to a head of state who is engaged in our national life.
January 20th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Aristoc
There is no point setting out the facts for these people. They are determined to be slighted. No matter how often you point out the realities of the situation to them.
The points you make have been made repeatedly by others, but they will not listen.
Interestingly the republicans seem as upset if not more so than the monarchists.
Gavin Knight appears typical, because no doubt if a Royal had come, he/she would have been subject to question as to whether they were the right royal.
All rational thought has disappeared re this matter. Coverage and attitudes are totally OTT.
I now expect to read that Hillary has risen again, given the propensity of so many to comment on him in the present tense. Sainthood is undoubtedly imminent, and miracles will follow shortly.
This whole thing is about mass insecurity, a desire to be loved by the world and a collective mass hysteria as to the man’s place in the world. The debate says a lot more about the people of NZ than about the monarchy.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
DPF you commented that Garter holders in England had royal attendance at their funerals, I am not sure you are correct, for example the funeral of Duke of Devonshire in 2004, as no mention appears to be made in the Court Circular for the day of his funeral, nor in press articles, of any royal attending.
Holders who were former Prime Ministers, holders who were royal, and members of the family do have royal attendance.
There is no snub.
In any case I am still of the opion that the Queen will have been guided by input from NZ.
Plus, as I understand from media reports it is probale that there will be several royals at the Windsor memorail service, plus the chance for many other great and the good to pay their respects and as a garter service that is liklely to include some if not all of the current members of the order. A signal and very tangible mark of respect. Very much not a snub.
January 21st, 2008 at 11:12 am
Adam Smith.
Well Said
January 21st, 2008 at 11:20 am
Gavin Knight.
you cant compare Dianna and Hillary, For a number of reason, especially given that Dianna was a Royal.It has everything to do with protocol( Thats why there not coming)
Your agument is Absurd.
We have a GG who acts as the the Defacto Head of State. He will be representing the Queen.and he is very much engaged with NZ.
The Queen acts on the Advise of Crown Ministers. I doubt they want the Queen to be engaed in national life. If you want the Queen to she would have to be invited by the Govt, which I again doubt they would. and if the Queen did I suspect you would be going on about a Queen that lives overseas engaing to much in NZ. You really are laughable
January 21st, 2008 at 11:40 am
Dear “Republicans”
Please fully explain your proposed Republican system for NZ.
Then I can consider it.
Otherwise shut up.