Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

I know! Let's have a plebiscite on having a republic!

By John de Meyrick - posted Wednesday, 2 August 2017


Clearly also, our head of state, howsoever titled, should not be directly elected by the people. The Queen is not elected, and to do so would inevitably give rise to the expectation that the person holding that positon has been vested with some kind of implied powers like many presidents of other republics have, including those of the US president.

Further, direct election would result in problems of candidacy. If the position were open to anyone and everyone, then no eminent Australian is likely to submit himself or herself to such a ballot and, expectedly, political parties would all then field their own candidates with 'how to vote' publicity filling our TV screens, newspapers and letterboxes.

Even if our parliament, or the major parties, were to nominate an eminent Australian as the only candidate for election then what would be the point, other than to have the people's endorsement, and what nominee would risk the humiliation of being rejected or in having secured just a bare majority? Then what to do if such a person were rejected? How many ballots would suffice?

Advertisement

A change to a republic is not just a simple matter of a stroke of the pen, as the Chair of the Australian Republic Movement, Peter FitzSimons, suggests. The six Australian States each has a Governor who is appointed by and is directly responsible to The Queen. They are not subordinate to the Governor-General.

Also, our system of lawmaking, our defence forces, our police and other civil authorities, as well as our justice system, are all devised and responsible to and under the crown. So too do we have numerous institutions and organisations that have been granted royal letters patent which then may not be appropriately retained.

Perhaps more important from an international perspective, is that we are still flying a flag that includes in its canton the Union Jack, and saying to the world that, along with all the other 21 Commonwealth nations like Tuvalu, Niue, Fiji and the Cayman Islands on whose flags it is similarly imposed, that we are still very much viewed as a colony of Britain. This is especially so as many of these other small countries exist within our region.

Our national flag (which was approved by King Edward VII in 1903), in any case, is generally regarded to be of very poor vexillological design and should be re-designed as a matter of priority over any move for a republic in order to reflect 21st Century Australia and its people.

Even though the people of New Zealand recently rejected a new design for its national flag (several of which were very striking), we should surely, like Canada, which remains a constitutional monarchy as we do and has the most well-designed and identifiable flag among all the national flags in the World, be so proud and assured of our national identity and our independence, as to show to the world, like Canada, a flag that is uniquely and impressively Australian.

All these things will need to be sorted out with the Queen before and as part of any move to become a republic. Every detail of what is proposed will also need to be provided to the Australian public before it is rushed into saying 'yes' or 'no' to an empty question on throwing out what we have and that works for us now, for something that every politician who is asked has a different concept of what the replacement would look like.

Advertisement

And just think: probably the most important consideration in any referendum for a republic that is sure to exercise the minds of those who love public holidays at the expense of their employer is, if we remove the Queen as our head of state what will happen to the holiday we are supposed to celebrate for her birthday?

We may well become a republic on the promise that we dump the Queen but keep celebrating her birthday.

Now there's a compelling constitutional reason why it would be a good idea to have a republic. In any case, as it is not celebrated on her actual birthday then let's keep it anyway.

Better still, to make sure the referendum passes, let's have an additional Republic Day holiday as well. No, no, don't substitute it for Australia Day to please the Aborigines. Keep that as Invasion Day so we can all benefit.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

15 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

John de Meyrick is a barrister (ret’d), lecturer and writer on legal affairs.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by John de Meyrick

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of John de Meyrick
Article Tools
Comment 15 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy