By Sid Astbury, DPA/Sydney
Somewhere in Canberra, there is a small silver box that Queen Elizabeth II presented to Prime Minister Julia Gillard during her visit last year.A terse exchange over who paid for it - Buckingham Palace or the Australian taxpayer - has exposed a rift between the 85-year-old monarch and the nation’s first female head of government.Gillard refused to go along with Buckingham Palace and gloss over who actually picks up the bill for the gifts the royals give during visits to former colonies.The spat has energized those keen to snap the last constitutional ties with Britain and have a local as head of state.To monarchists, it is a storm in a teacup – Elizabeth II is the queen of Australia and Australians should foot the bill for her visits – and her trips are not private visits and her gifts are not personal gifts.They pointed out that no one demurs at paying for gifts given by the Australian who serves as governor general, the queen’s representative in Australia.But back to that silver box and an Australian newspaper’s claim that Canberra was billed for it.The palace released a statement insisting that the “royal household pays for gifts given by the queen - not Australian taxpayers.” Gillard’s office contradicted that claim, noting it was “long-standing practice for the Australian government to meet the cost of gifts presented by the queen when she is in Australia.”Gillard, an avowed republican who famously refused to curtsy to the queen when the pair met in October in Canberra, won the day.She forced the palace into admitting that it was wrong and that Canberra “has always paid for gifts from both the queen and the prince of Wales as the heir-apparent.”Helping themselves to a big slice of humble pie, the queen’s minders went on to announce that “on this occasion, the Australian government will not be asked to meet the costs of the gifts presented by the queen.”The silver box, the framed photographs and, over the decades of royal visits, even copies of a gardening book partly penned by Prince Charles have all been billed to the Australian taxpayer under a hush-hush protocol in which the cost of royal gift-giving is passed “to the realms.”Does that now change and whatever gifts the queen bestows on her Australian subjects she pays for herself? If it does, royal watchers would likely see this as another example of the Windsors learning from past mistakes.Paying tax, giving girls and boys equal rights to the throne and not least the recent royal wedding have made the monarchy more appealing.The reforms have proved a setback for the republican cause in Australia, now at its lowest point in more than 20 years. The latest opinion poll showed 55% of Australians in favour of keeping the monarch as head of state against 34% wanting a republic.If the speedy retreat over who pays for gifts was another move to restore the fortunes of the monarchy, it was a wise one. An opinion poll in the Herald Sun newspaper showed 84% of 3,836 respondents wanting the queen to pay up for what she handed out.The seeming stinginess - the bill for gifts given last year was A$15,000 (US$15,600) - was pounced on by republicans. “What a joke! We should be a republic already,” a writer identified as Tony posted on the paper’s website.A post from Tim also took a potshot at the royals. “I just shake my head in disbelief that Australia in 2012 has an England Queen as our head of state,” he wrote. “The truth is, Scotland will break her ties with England before us. We are the laughing stock of the world to have a foreigner who lives on the other side of the world as this nation’s leader!”