Republicans often declare themselves to be ”passionate”; I have never heard a constitutional monarchist do that. But Paul Daley (“Public passion for a republic waning” The Sun Herald 29/8) says polling shows that passion is waning.
Meanwhile, he says, The Queen's representative Quentin Bryce is “a pivotal figure in determining who should form a government after the election.”
[ How a republican pussy cat sees himself ]
“That is a process that seems to work well enough – a fact that, hypothetically at least, should give comfort to the good old ‘if it ain't broke don't fix it’ brigade of constitutional monarchists who have been the negative face of what was once a vibrant debate about an Australian republic,” he says.
But I have to take issue with this following comment:
“The great irony now is that others in the same corner would seek to undermine the efficacy of the office of the Governor-General by floating the absurd proposition that being the mother-in-law of the junior Labor frontbencher, factional convener and prime ministerial aspirant Bill Shorten, somehow represents a “conflict of interest” for Bryce.”
The claims of a conflict of interest have not come from constitutional monarchists. The principal critics have been a prominent barrister, Peter Faris QC, the columnist Andrew Bolt and an ethicist, Leslie Cannold. To my knowledge, none has taken a strong monarchist position.
The opinion expressed clearly in this column and to the media has been to deny that the marriage of the Governor-General’s daughter to a junior minister, even one seen as a significant power-broker, could in itself constitute a conflict of interest.
....Peter FitzSimons....
On this, it is comforting to find that Mr. Peter FitzSimons approves of the position this column has taken over the allegations of a vice regal conflict of interest. As readers would know, Mr. FitzSimons positions on constitutional or flag change are not in accord with those of ACM.
Australian National Flag Day will be celebrated across our nation on Friday, 3 September, 2010.
“This day commemorates the first occasion when our national flag was flown, on 3 September 1901 when Prime Minister Edward Barton announced the winning design from a public competition to select our new nation’s flag. 32,823 entries were received with five of the designs being identical, writes John Vaughan, National Spokesman and Vexillographer for the Australian National Flag Association.
“The winners, three teenagers, a woman and a man shared the honour of creating Australia’s chief national symbol, the Australian National Flag.I encourage you to conduct or to participate in an Australian flag raising ceremony to celebrate this day, the 109th anniversary of our national flag of “Stars and Crosses”.
“Our flag represents our nation when it is flown both in Australia and across the world. This day is a wonderful opportunity for us to reflect on the how our flag unites us as a nation and our pride in our achievements.
[ To continue reading about the celebrations , click on "Read more" below ]
On the 7PM Project Professor David Flint talks about the drop in support for an Australian republic.
This was a segment of the Channel 10 programme 7PM Project, broadcast nationally on Tuesday 31 August 2010.
It related to a poll announced with the headline "Republic takes a king hit," in The Sun Herald with similar headlines on other Fairfax newspapers on 29 August, 2010.
It concerned an exclusive Sun Herald/Age/Nielson poll on removing the Crown from our constitutional system, This confirmed that the support for this proposed change has fallen to a 16 year low.
In this poll respondents were asked whether Australia should become a vague undefined republic. Forty eight per cent of the 1400 respondents were opposed to this constitutional change (a rise of 8 per cent since 2008), while 44 per cent agreed (a drop of 8 per cent since 2008).
When questioned further, 31 per cent said Australia should never become a republic, 29 per cent said Australia should become a republic as soon as possible, and 34 per cent said Australia should become a republic only after Queen Elizabeth II's reign ends . Backing for some vague undefined republic is at its lowest since 1994 - five years before Australia had a referendum on the topic.
Paul Kelly has advised the Governor-General on how to exercise her role in the formation of the next government and on whether to grant an election ( “Many pitfalls for the G-G to avoid”, The Australian 1 September).
For such a republican, his test on what viceroys should do is instructive, and for constitutional monarchists, comforting.
His test is: what would The Queen do? Why he is a republican is not apparent.
[ Thank you Mr.Kelly. So why have you been campaigning against me for two decades? ]
How often has ACM advised viceroys to adopt this test, especially those few who undermine their allegiance to the Crown by going on about a politicians’ republic? As we pointed out here, Richard Butler even “verballed” The Queen on the 7.30 Report in 2003.
The best policy is this:” If you are in doubt, Your Excellency, just ask yourself what would The Queen do.”
..very early election doubtful...
Mr. Kelly is correct in saying that a very early election is doubtful, especially if Ms. Gillard were to lose the confidence of the House.
He is also correct in saying that the situation in the Senate is irrelevant to the Governor-General’s considerations, but not necessarily to the independents.
Then he says the numbers in the Senate cannot decide whether Ms. Gillard or Mr. Abbott has the confidence of the lower house, which is correct.
Curiously, he cannot resist returning to his bête noire, the “wrongful” dismissal of the Whitlam government in 1975.
So he gratuitously adds these words, “despite (Chief Justice Sir) Garfield Barwick's wrong opinion on this issue in 1975.”
...Chief Justice’s 1975 advice....
Sir Garfield was advising on a refusal to grant supply. Notwithstanding suggestions that Gough Whitlam and Governor-General Sir John Kerr should have ignored the Senate’s refusal, no one seriously doubts that the government could not have continued.
The only arguments were first, whether the Senate might succumb under the pressure. It was suggested some Coalition Senators might cross the floor. As far as I know this has never been confirmed.
The other argument was the timing. Sir David Smith points out that it was Mr Whitlam who triggered his dismissal on 11 November.
This was by his advice that morning to call a half Senate election. Even if the States had agreed, any new state Senators would not have taken office until 1 July 1976. He forced the Governor-General’s hand.
The point is that had the Senate and Mr. Whitlam refused to compromise in the next few days or even weeks, Mr. Whitlam’s commission would have had to be withdrawn.
No government can constitutionally continue without a grant of supply, and that is the point Sir Garfield was making.
...Calling in the independents...
Mr. Kelly also says the Governor-General has no role at any time in calling in the independents to test their intentions. That would surprise many viceroys.
In March 1944, when John Curtin was ill, the supreme Allied commander in the Pacific, General Douglas MacArthur, sent the Australian leader a photograph of himself across which he scrawled in pen:
"To the Prime Minister who saved Australia in her hour of deadly peril."
When Curtin died months before Japan's surrender in 1945, MacArthur in a communique said of him: "He was one of the greatest wartime statesmen, and the preservation of Australia from invasion will be his immemorial monument."
...Battle For Australia Day proposed...
Now James Bowen convener of the Battle for Australia Historical Society, reminds Australians that today, 2 September 2010 is Battle for Australia Day. In The Australian (1/9) he asks why we do this. “Proclaimed by the Governor-General in June 2008, Battle for Australia Day is to be observed nationally on the first Wednesday in September of each year, joining Anzac Day and Remembrance Day in the calendar of formal national commemorations in Australia,” he explains .
“For this reason, it is important for Australians to appreciate the justification for observance of Battle for Australia Day. Younger Australians may reasonably ask whether Australia faced a grave threat from imperial Japan in 1942 and whether that threat produced a Battle for Australia.”
As the person who first proposed commemoration of a Battle for Australia in 1942, and defined its concept and scope, he feels he should explain my reasons for doing so. His reasons follow.
[To read Mr. Bowen’s reasons, click on ”Read more” below]
Under the heading “THEY SAID” the Sun Herald (29/8) splashed the following comments with photographs alongside the report on the poll which shows more Australians are now opposed than support an undefined vague republic.
In particular, Greens Leader Dr. Bob Brown, now the leading republican in Parliament, confirms that flag change is also on the republican agenda. This was just before National Flag Day to be celebrated on 3 September.
PATRICK McGORRY Australian of the Year
"Australia's adolescence has lasted more than 100 years … It is time for Australia to pass the test of maturity and emerge from its prolonged adolescence into the full flower of independent adulthood as the republic of Australia.'
'JULIA GILLARD Prime Minister
''The appropriate time to be a republic is when we see the monarch change. Obviously, I'm hoping for Queen Elizabeth that she lives a long and happy life, and having watched her mother I think there's every chance she will.''
TONY ABBOTT Opposition Leader
''I think that our existing constitutional arrangements have worked well in the past. I see no reason whatsoever why they can't continue to work well in the future.''
[ Tony Abbott at Oxford Universty ]
BOB BROWN Greens leader
''It is high time we replaced the Union Jack with a dinkum Australian symbol on our flag. There can be no reason to delay at least holding a plebiscite on whether or not Australia wants to become a republic.''
This is from the same people who told us in the nineties that a republic would reduce unemployment, improve trade, increase immigration and that even the then editor of The Sydney Morning Herald would actually deign to take out Australian citizenship.
Oh, and if we didn’t accept their republican model we would be Asia’s and the world’s laughing stock. (We weren’t; the world’s respect for this country just increased. I watch the SBS TV news from Paris whenever I can. Australia seems to be mentioned often favourably almost every second day.)
[ Sydney Cricket Ground , 3rd Day, Australia vs India, 4th Jan 2008, Source: Privatemusings ]
Well, you probably saw the story in the Fairfax press on Sunday: ” Republic takes a king hit” in The Sun Herald and Josh Gordon’ s “Republican hopes take a king-hit,” in The Sunday Age, and Jessica Wright’s “Not ready for a republic? Well, we are amused” in The Sydney Morning Herald.
As Josh Gordon put it, The Age/Nielsen poll “shows support for a republic is now running at 44 per cent. This is the lowest level since 1994, and well down from the peak of 57 per cent in 1999, the year the question was tested in a national referendum. The national poll of 1400 people found almost half (48 per cent) are now against the idea."
...hostility to republic...
As The Age said, "Such a level of hostility has not been recorded since the late 1970s, when about 61 per cent were against a republic.”
James Jeffrey’s popular Strewth column in The Australian (30/8) tells us just what the republican movement is capable of:
WHAT a difference emphasis can make. Here's the headline and lead paragraph from a press release from the Australian Republican Movement that lobbed into our inbox yesterday:
"Neilsen poll says 2/3 of Australians want a republic . . . A poll published in The Sun-Herald today reported that support for a republic had slipped, even though, consistent with previous polls on this issue, at least 63 per cent of Australians support a republic, or around 2/3 of the population."
So let's go to the source, namely the original story in The Sun-Herald, and examine its headline and lead paragraph: "Not ready for a republic? Well, we are amused . . . Public support for a republic has slumped to a 16-year low with more Australians in favour of retaining the monarchy for now."
Well and truly caught out - they just don’t learn, these “passionate” republicans.
Many thanks to ANFA for making these messages available.
From the Governor General:
It is 109 years since our nation was first identified under the banner of the Australian National Flag, selected in the year of the Australian Federation.
Today our flag is flown and worn by Australians in communities across the nation and on foreign shores where we work and where we remember the efforts and sacrifice of those who have come before us.
Australian National Flag Day is an opportunity to recognise and learn more about our history under this icon, and to embrace all that it stands for in unity, shared identity and values, and an enduring spirit of fairness, peace, courage and resilience through times of optimism and challenge.
On the 3rd of September, 2010, I join all Australians in celebrating the heritage, symbolism, memories and aspirations that our national flag evokes.
(signed)
Quentin Bryce
19.8.2010
From the Prime Minister:
The Australian National Flag is our paramount national symbol, richly signifying our nation’s history and proclaiming to the world our identity as a free and democratic society proud of its past and optimistic about the future.
Our flag, first flown on 3 September 1901, was created from among the Australian people through an open public competition and can only be changed by the will of the Australian people – and that is as it should be.
Since 1996, Australian National Flag Day has fittingly been officially recognised as an occasion of nationwide celebration.
I therefore encourage all Australians to mark this occasion by proudly flying the Australian National Flag and honouring our forbears who have striven, through their hard work and sacrifice in peace and war, to make our Commonwealth “renowned of all the lands”.
Australia is first in our hearts and in our loyalties. Let us always be grateful for this land of abundance and opportunity that we so proudly call home.
(signed)
The Honourable Julia Gillard MP
Prime Minister of Australia
From the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition:
Few national flags have been chosen directly by their citizens and even fewer have stood the test of time. Ours has lasted over a century.
On Australian National Flag Day, I encourage all Australians to fly our flag, appreciate its significance, and be proud of what we have achieved.
Our flag is a symbol of unity and enduring pride for the Australian people. It reflects our past and helps to define our present. The Union Jack represents our respect for the rule of law, liberty, freedom and parliamentary democracy. The Southern Cross signifies our place in the world as a vibrant and dynamic nation at the footsteps of Asia, offering opportunities for every citizen. The Commonwealth star depicts our national origin – a federation of states and territories, united for the common good of the Australian people.
Throughout the world the Australian flag is respected and admired. It encourages our defence forces as they serve overseas, and reminds people of our willingness to serve. The flag flies above battlefields of wars long past, where Australian soldiers served with distinction. It remains a poignant reminder of our troops’ loyalty, courage and service under fire. All Australians can be proud of our flag and the qualities and achievements it represents.
Australians are renowned for their modesty, but it makes me happy to see more and more Australian flags flying when I travel around this country. I am glad to see the popularity of our flag amongst young Australians. I am confident that it will remain our pre-eminent symbol.
This was the front page headline on 29 August, 2010 on The Sun Herald, the major Fairfax Sunday newspaper. It was a report on an exclusive Sun Herald/Nielson poll on removing the Crown from our constitutional system, This confirmed that the support for this proposed change has fallen to a 16 year low.
This is in line with other polls, which where they have measured it, have also indicated something which will worry those republicans who think they need only wait until the present generation of monarchists go to the other world. This is the massive decline in support among the young.
There was one exception to this trend, a rogue poll which the republicans revealed on the tenth anniversary of the referendum. The point about polls surely is that it is the trend which is useful, not one poll which suspiciously goes against the trend.
The poll was conducted two weeks before the federal election. It shows that more Australians are now in favour of retaining the monarchy than in favour of an undefined politicians' republic. This poll is entirely consistant with the long term trend from the 1999 referendum.
[ Support for republic collapsing ]
[ To continue reading, click on "Read more" below. ]
To hear a report on the ABC’s AM on Wednesday 25 August concerning the claim that the Governor-General has a conflict of interest because of her daughter's marriage to Bill Shorten, a parliamentary secretary, is at least premature and probably cannot be sustained, click here
But because this has been raised, the Governor-General, quite correctly, sought legal advice on the claim.
When and if she comes to act under the discretionary powers of the Australian Crown - the reserve powers - she will no doubt act in accordance with that advice.
On this, I found myself in agreement with my republican colleagues, Professor Greg Craven and Professor George Williams. We all agree that there was no conflict of interest.
...Solicitor-General’s advice....
Now according to a report by Nicola Berkovic in The Australian (27/8) the Solicitor-General for the Commonwealth, Stephen Gageler, says it is unnecessary for the Governor-General to stand aside. He has also cleared her to discharge her duties to resolve a constitutional crisis if the need arises.
[ To continue reading this follow the "Read more" link below ]
The last thing republicans are interested in is improving the way we are governed. They are only concerned to increase the power and influence of the political class. That is why they want to take the crown out of our crowned republic and make it a politicians’ republic.
Now Professor Patrick McGorry, Professor of Youth Mental Health at the University of Melbourne, has criticised Australians for failing to "seriously" address the issue of a republic.
According to a report by Lanai Vasek In The Australian (27/8, he likened the country to a 27-year-old who just won't leave home -- "a Gen Y nation". This hardly seems serious.
[ Nations do not do this ]
[To continue reading this column, click on the "Read more" link below ]
