HOW long can the monarchy survive? Will the House of Windsor inevitably collapse if the termites of Fleet Street continue to gnaw away at its foundations?

Republicans are having several field days following the media frenzy triggered by allegations of Prince Charles's sexual proclivities.

As an anti-royalist, I suppose I should be sharing their triumphalism. I am not, which means that either I am not as far Left as I thought or, hopefully, that a sense of fair play has temporarily overridden my belief that this is an institution we could well do without.

In recent years the Royal Family has been exposed as pretty much a household with severe behavioural problems, particularly in the marital department. That in itself wouldn't be a particularly crippling blow to their standing, as longevity in the marriage stakes has all but disappeared.

However, they are supposed to set an example to their subjects. And if that means sharing air space with someone you quite clearly can't stand, well so be it. Duty first, my dears, and if you must have a dalliance, be discreet. Be very discreet.

Infidelity among the Royals can't be a 20th or 21st century phenomenon. It's probably been going on since Queen Boadicea was knocking seven bells out of the invading Romans. However, the current crop have the jackals of Fleet Street to deal with and it's beginning to look like a very one-sided war. Of course, it would be daft to blame the media for the decline of the Royals but there can be no argument that continued exposure to tabloid revelations has severely damaged whatever respect they might still be able to command.

The very public and bitter split between Charles and Diana and revelations of their extra-marital affairs were the most explosive but stories about other royals have simply added to the theory that their wealth and privilege has not necessarily brought the expected accountability.

Of course we live in a different country to the one ruled by Charles's ancestors. I wasn't around in World War One but I have seen pictures of the then King and Queen being cheered by ranks of "Tommy Atkins", cheerfully waiting to be shipped to France and certain death. The next monarchy performed the same duty in World War Two. Both couples, whatever their personal strengths and frailties, represented something tangible to our service personnel. They were the Royal Family, head of the British Empire and, presumably, worth fighting and dying for.

That was then, this is now. I can't believe the same loyalty and affection is still in place. Charles lacks the necessary physical presence and credibility but I doubt he will ever get the job as William looks the likeliest successor to Elizabeth II, should that eventuality arise. But his continued hounding by the press is inexcusable. And what if Charles is bisexual? Who cares? Only homophobes and the Diana lobby. I'm in neither camp.