The launch of a new book, by the Rome-based Australian author, Mr Desmond O’Grady, on the life of Raffaello Carboni, the Italian “digger” and rebellion sympathiser, followed. Signor Carboni has generally been regarded as an advocate of a republic at the time of Eureka. No worries. Mr O’Grady’s program notes stated that Mr Carboni was “scornful of the Chartists and contemptuous of Republicanism”. In fact as Mr O’Grady told us that Carboni had described republicans as “thumb sucking babes”. (Constitutional monarchists two, republicans nil).
Later that afternoon during his paper on Carboni, Mr O’Grady again downplayed the significance of republicanism, which supposedly resulted from Eureka. He claimed that the Crimean War particularly the battle of Sebastopol had put a “kibosh” on republicanism because nobody in the colonies wanted to be so disloyal as to advocate a separation from the British Crown, when the British were under threat abroad.
The republicans were to even the score during the afternoon. The session entitled "‘Talk’ about democracy" was chaired by Mr Peter Consandine from the Republican Party of Australia who was under the impression that the title of the session was “Talk about a republic”. He curtailed the amount of time given to the paper presenters by taking up a substantial amount of the session time advocating the benefits of a directly elected president even suggesting that from now on we should change the name of the colour “royal” blue (colour of the Eureka flag) to “Eureka” blue.
Advertisement
The last session I attended that afternoon was given by Mr Ken Mansell whose thesis was that the Australian Constitution of 1901 “places severe constraints on the practice of democracy”. The Federation of 1901 represents the forces of privilege and conservatism - only Labor has made social advances in Australia - the true birthplace of democracy was Eureka and if we wish to continue the legacy of Eureka, we must usher in the republic as “let’s face it, Eureka is a celebration of republicanism”. Mr Mansell concluded by deploring the fact that one can go into public places and community halls in rural Victoria and still see pictures of the Queen on the wall. “Let’s get the Queen off the wall” concluded Mr Mansell. Nobody demurred.
Friday evening was the official conference dinner (at $120 a ticket - very democratic) and was surely to be the highlight of the conference. First there was an address by Mary Delahunty MP, Minister for Eureka 150, whose topic was advertised as “Australian identity, citizenship and democracy”. Ms Delahunty’s address was brief and the sound system bad. The highlight of the evening’s entertainment followed. Guest speaker the Hon Gough Whitlam AC QC was to be interviewed by ABC journalist Geraldine Doogue.
The first question Ms Doogue asked the “elder statesman” as she termed him was, “Well from Eureka in 1854 to the republic referendum in 1999 we haven’t come very far have we?” - general laughter. “The 1999 result must have been disconcerting to you as a republican?” “Well I was never a republican until November 11, 1975”, - more general laughter and applause.
The former prime minister then informed us that had the Queen been in the country at the time, the dismissal would never have occurred. He then went on to express the conviction that Australian elections for both houses of parliament should occur at the same time and that we should have fixed term parliaments. This would be along the same lines as the American system where all the elections take place the first Tuesday in November. Mr Whitlam with characteristic modesty, then informed us that he was a constitutional expert. In fact he claimed to have been “the best lawyer ever to have been Prime Minister of this country”. This seemed to me to be an extraordinary claim considering he doesn’t seem to be aware that the Governor-General would deal with an Australian constitutional crisis whether or not the Queen was in the country or not. He also seemed to be unaware that, despite the aberration of the recent constitutional amendment in NSW, fixed term elections and responsible government are totally incompatible unless one is prepared to accept that the legislature has no right to hold the executive accountable.
At the end of Mr Whitlam’s speech every person in the room except me, my husband and two people at our table who were no doubt concerned at our solitary predicament, rose and gave the “elder statesman” a standing ovation.
The interview with Mr Whitlam was followed by an address by “Sir Murray Rivers QC” on the subject “The risk of democracy”. This address had been a prime inducement to me to pay the $120 for the dinner. I assumed it might say something about checks and balances. However my suspicions were roused when the Master of Ceremonies informed us that “Sir Murray” was the only judge in Victoria’s history to have had every single judgement he had made overturned on appeal. “Sir Murray” took to the podium and proceeded to spend the next 10 to 15 minutes lampooning the Howard government.
Advertisement
On Saturday morning I decided to head off to the Eureka Centre itself - the centre on the site of the Eureka Stockade which hosts a commemorative display relating to the events of 1854. The centre uses multimedia displays to set the unfolding of the Eureka story in its proper context. It was informative, interesting and most importantly totally disinterested and objective in its presentation.
I then headed back to the conference for the late morning session. The speaker for the session was Mr Greg Barns (the well known former head of the Australian Republican Movement) whose topic was listed as “Revisiting the constitution”. To my surprise Mr Barns was not speaking about a republic at all but was in fact proposing a Bill of Rights the same as Canada has. Mr Barns has just returned from Canada full of praise for Canada’s commitment to human rights, and to its liberal and progressive values. Canada is a multicultural society committed to human rights and equality he said. Unlike Australia, Canada is a serious democracy, which takes human rights seriously. A bill of rights, in Mr Barns’ opinion, is essential for any democracy. Australia doesn’t have one because its Constitution is totally outmoded created as it was as a document of “political conservatism”. We will never be a “serious democracy” until like Canada we have one concluded Mr Barns.
Of course Canada is a constitutional monarchy and has every intention of remaining so. Yet Canada is a “serious democracy” and a “progressive” and “pluralist” one at that. How galling that the constitutional monarchy of Canada is held up for emulation while its southern neighbour, the republic is an object of criticism by Mr Barns.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
1 post so far.