 |
Background Paper 11 1997-98
The Recent Republic Debate-A Chronology: 1989-1998
(update of Background Paper No. 9 dated 25 June 1996)
Carolyne Hide
Consultant, Law and Bills Digest Group
25 June 1996
Karen Davis
Law and Bills Digest Group
Ian Ireland
Law and Bills Digest Group
2 February 1998
Contents
An Introduction
Ready Reference:
The Recent Republic Debate-A Chronology
Endnotes
This is a revised and updated version of a paper prepared
by Carolyne Hide for the Parliamentary Research Service in 1996. Its publication
reflects ongoing interest in the republic debate and is timed for release
during the Constitutional Convention being held at Old Parliament House,
Canberra, from 2 to 13 February 1998.
Until mid 1997, the republic debate had been dominated
by, but not limited to, politicians such as former Prime Ministers Paul
Keating, Malcolm Fraser and Bob Hawke, and Prime Minister John Howard.
Former High Court Chief Justices Sir Harry Gibbs and Sir Anthony Mason
and current High Court judge Michael Kirby have expressed their views
as have opera singer Joan Sutherland, RSL Victorian President Bruce Ruxton,
author Thomas Keneally, and Australia's wealthiest woman Janet Holmes
a Court among others. Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles, too, have contributed.
(Even English cricketer Ian Botham became involved when, in March 1992,
while on tour in Australia, he threatened to 'flatten' Mr Keating over
comments he had made supporting a republic.) However, other participants
have gained greater prominence with the passage of time and, in particular,
since the start of campaigning for election to the Constitutional Convention.
At the time of writing, the future of the debate remains
unclear with republicans securing handsome majorities in most States and
Territories in the Convention ballot but with no single republican alternative
having emerged. Direct popular election of the President enjoys widespread
community support amongst those favouring a republic but is less well
regarded by those with more day to day experience in professional politics.
A number of interesting alternatives to popular election have been canvassed,
including options which do not give an exclusive or pre-eminent role to
the Commonwealth Parliament.
The Constitutional Convention also opens with a measure
of disagreement as to whether the Convention itself should canvass a range
of issues extending beyond the appointment and removal of the head of
state. Opinion is divided as to whether the Convention will prove 'a defining
moment' or 'an expensive fizzer'.
The chronology is, like the earlier version, intended
as a working tool and an aid for imperfect memories. There is no intention
to push a particular view or argue either the republican or the monarchist
cases. The reflecting a broad ranging and lively public debate, the collection
is a potpourri of factual material, comment and interesting and
speculation.
The compilers recognise that some readers may query the
inclusion of some items and the exclusion of others. As comprehensive
coverage is not possible (and probably not desirable), any such chronology
is somewhat idiosyncratic and inevitably incomplete. Hopefully however,
no major 'milestones' in the ongoing public debate have been missed. If
an explanation is needed as to why this recent history has been set out
in such detail, one can do no better than to quote the compiler of the
first edition:
I can only say that although I read the newspapers
and watched the television news at the time, it was not until I re-read
the newspaper clippings and other material that I realised how quickly
I had forgotten how far the debate had moved.(1)
Ready Reference:
For those wanting to follow the remarks of a particular
individual or organisation, there is an index at the back of the paper
which cross-references commentators and page references.
Accuracy:
Where possible, the text of published press reports relied
on here have been checked for accuracy.
16 February 1989 Bill Hayden, described by the media
as fiercely republican, was sworn in as Governor-General of Australia.(2)
3 April 1991 At a Constitutional Centenary Conference
in Sydney, Mr Justice Pincus, a Federal Court judge, said:
that the year 2001 was an obvious date for Australia
to become a republic. He also stated that the basic reason why we
should have an indigenous head of state, who is either popularly elected
or elected by some method which gives him what might be described
as more obvious authority, is that the day will come, and we'd perhaps
got close to it in 1975, when the question of who is in charge here
became terribly important...I think the position of the Governor-General,
in short, is a bit weak and it should be clarified and defined and
upgraded.(3)
5 April 1991 The Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, spoke
at the Constitutional Centenary Conference at Parliament House Sydney.
At the press conference, he said:
(Y)ou know my position on the question of a republic.
It is inevitable Australia will become a republic. It is a question
of when. I think it is something in which political parties have to
get a sense of the feeling of the community. It still would be something
which for a lot of people would be hurtful but for an increasing number
of the Australian population I think there is probably a feeling that
Australia should in all it's constitutional and legal apparatus be
seen to be and in fact be totally independent. Now having said that
I make two other points. I think in fairness to Her Majesty that I
should say that she has been an ideal sort of head of this nation
in the strictly prescribed sense in which she does it. She doesn't
seek to intervene in the affairs of this country. She has a great
knowledge of this country. So therefore when I say that it's inevitable
that this country will become a republic it involves no reflection
upon the role that Her Majesty has played in her constitutional role.
The second thing is I think we shouldn't get this question of a republic
in the wrong sort of proportions. I think it is something that will
and should come to make Australians absolutely understand that we
are a completely sovereign independent nation. But we shouldn't believe
that it's going to make any difference to the daily life of Australian
citizens...It's something which will probably give them a greater
sense of an independent nationhood, well that's OK. It'll come in
due time. What's the right year? I don't know.(4)
7 April 1991 The leader of the National Party,
Mr Tim Fischer, said on the Sunday program, in relation to Prime
Minister Hawke's comments, that
'The prospect of President Paul Keating would be
an absolute disaster for Australia resented by all Australians. I
do not see it as inevitable that Australia will become a republic
and it's a matter for the people and the people, especially in country
Australia, will reject that all the way.'
25 June 1991 A proposal prepared by the Federal
Minister for Employment, Education and Training, John Dawkins, was put
to the ALP National Conference.
This conference calls upon the Government to embark
upon a public education campaign, culminating in a referendum which
would effect reform of the Australian Constitution and other political
institutions to enable Australia to become an independent Republic
on 1 January 2001.
The resolution, proposed by Senator Chris Schacht, was
passed unanimously.
25 June 1991 The Leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, commented on the question of Australia becoming a republic
in the year 2001.
It's just a diversion. Turning Australia into a republic
won't do anything for our foreign debt or our interest rates, it won't
create any jobs for Australians. It is just a diversion.(5)
26 June 1991 The Western Australian Premier, Dr
Carmen Lawrence, supported Australia becoming a republic.(6)
26 June 1991 A former Prime Minister, Malcolm
Fraser and his Defence Minister, Sir James Killen, opposed Australia becoming
a republic on the basis that the issue was divisive.(7)
26 June 1991 A former Liberal Senator, Neville
Bonner, said that Australia had been served well by the ties it had maintained
with Britain.
And besides, if Australia became a republic we, the
Aboriginal people, would be no better off because the changes that
are needed to help us don't include republican status. I see no point.(8)
26 June 1991 Dr Hewson said
(O)ur Party position on republicanism, is that we
are opposed to it. I mean, we believe in a constitutional monarchy,
it has been a central part of our platform, if you like, since the
days of Sir Robert Menzies. I know people are saying with the changing
nature of our economy, we are moving towards the circumstances where
people will want a republic, I don't believe that. I don't think it
is inevitable in Australia... .What disturbs me is that, the last
resort I guess of the failed economic manager of the failed Government,
is to appeal to patriotism and nationalism and it came out yesterday,
as an issue, as diversion.(9)
27 June 1991 Prime Minister Hawke reiterated his
view on the inevitability of a republic and said '(n)ow just how quickly
that happens I feel has got to be a matter for the community to allow
itself to express. That view of mine is consistent with the resolution
that's been adopted by the Conference.'(10)
27 June 1991 The Opposition spokesman for Industrial
Relations, John Howard, commenting on the ALP National Conference proposal
said:
I'm not in favour of it. I would not presently favour
changing Australia to a republic. I believe in the Westminster system
of government where you have a division between the head of State
and the head of Government. The present system has served us well.
We are for all practical purposes an independent country...and in
some senses we have the best of both worlds. Those people who don't
particularly care for the royal link, don't find their daily lives
invaded with it. On the other hand, there are millions of Australians
who hold the association very dear, and whilst others will disagree
with them, what the Labor Party is now embarking upon is a 10 year
period of division and the development of enmity and bitterness in
the community over an issue which, if it were left alone, would in
the fullness of time solve itself in a non-divisive manner.
27 June 1991 The Queensland RSL 75th Congress
meeting in Mackay, voted unanimously to oppose the proposal adopted by
the ALP national conference in Hobart. The RSL's vice president, Ray Devere
said 'It's against everything Australian servicemen and women have fought
for.'(11)
28 June 1991 A Liberal backbencher in the South
Australian Parliament, Bob Such, said that he saw the establishment of
an Australian constitutional monarchy, as easier, legally and constitutionally,
than declaring a republic. Mr Such suggested that either of the Queen's
two younger sons, Prince Andrew or Prince Edward, would be ideal as resident
monarch.(12)
28 June 1991 The Federal Management Committee
of the National Party reaffirmed the Party's long standing support for
the constitutional monarch. The committee agreed that the National Party
should vigorously oppose any referendum question aimed at turning Australia
into a republic or changing the existing Australian National Flag. The
party's motto was Honour to God, Loyalty to the Crown, Justice for All.
'Our policy specifically supports loyalty to the Crown and Nation, pride
in the Australian National Anthem and God Save the Queen and respect for
the existing Australian National Flag.'(13)
4 July 1991 The Victorian President of the RSL,
Bruce Ruxton, said the decision of the ALP national conference to endorse
a referendum on becoming a republic was 'an obscenity'.(14)
7 July 1991 At the launch of the Australian
Republican Movement by author, Tom Keneally, the following declaration
was issued.
We, as Australians, united in one indissoluble Commonwealth,
affirm our allegiance to the nation and people of Australia. We assert
that the freedom and unity of Australia must derive its strength from
the will of the people.
We believe that the harmonious development of the
Australian community demands that the allegiance of Australians must
be fixed wholly within and upon Australia and Australian institutions.
We therefore propose as a great national goal for
Australia:
THAT BY THE FIRST OF JANUARY, 2001-THE FIRST DAY
OF THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY AND THE CENTENARY OF THE PROCLAMATION
OF THE FEDERATION-AUSTRALIA SHALL BECOME AN INDEPENDENT REPUBLIC.(15)
7 July 1991 A special task force was set up to
fight for the preservation of royal ties with Britain, headed by former
Liberal Party President Sir John Atwill. Its members included Federal
Opposition Industrial Relations spokesman John Howard.(16)
8 July 1991 Merchant banker and lawyer Malcolm
Turnbull said that if the Westminster political system were retained,
a simple change to the Constitution was all that would be needed to declare
a republic. 'The reference to "the Queen and Her Majesty's heirs and successors
in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom" could be replaced with "The
Queen shall mean the President of Australia who shall be selected by [whatever
means]", he said.' Mr Turnbull also said that 'The Liberals are just turning
what should be an apolitical citizens issue into a party political one
for shabby political gain and I think that's a great pity.'(17)
8 July 1991 The Liberal Party president, Peter
King, said the 'ARM was an ALP inspired move as obvious as night follows
day. The Labor Party needed a smokescreen to detract attention from its
poor economic performance. It's Labor's republic and nobody should be
fooled by it.'(18)
9 July 1991 Heather Gow, the vice-president of
the Royal Commonwealth Society, which had about 600 members said that
anyone who spoke ill of the Queen and who pushed for a republic was guilty
of 'sedition and/or treason'.(19)
12 July 1991 Liberal Senator Rod Kemp wrote to
the Australian Financial Review and argued that there were a number
of important constitutional matters to be resolved such as: 'What will
be the role of the republican head of State? How will the republicans
prevent the head of State either from becoming a mere political cipher
(by prime ministerial appointment), or a major political power (by direct
election)? What protections will be put in place to check a government
which acts illegally?'
17 July 1991 Former Treasurer, now Labor backbencher,
Paul Keating was asked where he stood on the republic by Ray Martin and
replied 'I've got a sneaking suspicion there's a certain inevitability
about it all. But I think it's good there's a public debate about it rather
than a political debate. Because you know once you get a political debate,
it all becomes polarised, it's like the referendums.'(20)
17 July 1991 Liberal Senator Bronwyn Bishop issued
a media release which said:
It may well have been High Noon on the Midday Show
when Ron Casey took a swipe at Normie Rowe but this conduct indicates
just how divisive the debate on the Monarchy has become. Not content
to see the country on its knees as a result of the recession the Labor
Party must be pleased that it is dividing the community on an issue
which has absolutely no political relevance.(21)
21 July 1991 The Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations John Howard, writing in The Sunday Telegraph, said:
the republicans are trying to have it both ways.
They want to achieve a fundamental change to Australia's Constitution
yet have made the political judgement that the chances of winning
that change are much greater if the public are lulled into believing
that there is really no change at all. As a democrat I totally accept
and respect the right of fellow Australians to advocate a republic.
However their advocacy should be upon the basis that Australia will
be better off by putting aside the present system. There are many
who think it quite incongruous that Australia's head of state should
live in the United Kingdom. If so we have lived with that incongruity
for a long time and there is little evidence that our independence,
self-esteem and dignity as a nation has suffered as a consequence...In
many ways we have at present the best of both worlds. Some describe
it as a crowned republic.(22)
21 July 1991 The Governor-General, wrote to Labor
backbencher Barry Jones, in relation to a reference by Mr Jones to Mr
Hayden as 'a closet republican'. Mr Hayden reportedly said that he had
never professed such (republican) beliefs to anyone,
including you. Indeed, for many years up to the present, and especially
when I was Leader of the Opposition for several years, I had gone
out of my way, and continue to do so, to point out that I believe
the republican cause to be unimportant in its own right and to be
politically counter-productive. I wonder if you would be good enough
to let me know the basis on which you made this sweeping claim? ...can
I take it that, should you be commenting in this area in future, you
will do so with accuracy?(23)
24 July 1991 The Labor Premier of South Australia,
John Bannon, said that 'there was no overriding constitutional or social
reason for becoming a republic, though the move was probably inevitable'.(24)
26 July 1991 Former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam
said that 2001 would be a realistic target date for establishing a republic
and that he believed the person appointed to the presidency would be elected
by all members of parliament, rather than by the people or on the advice
of the Prime Minister.(25)
4 August 1991 The Anglican Bishop of Canberra
and Goulburn, the Right Reverend Owen Dowling said that 'I personally
am in favour of the debate about a republic, though I know there are many
members of the church who are horrified by the thought and are against
the matter being debated in Australia.'(26)
12 August 1991 The Victorian Liberal Party State
president, Michael Kroger, said that the Victorian Liberal Party would
begin a campaign to win grass-roots support to fight moves to make Australia
a republic. Mr Kroger said 'Liberals could not afford to ignore recent
statements of support for a republic from the ALP.'(27)
20 December 1991 Paul Keating sworn in as Prime
Minister after deposing Bob Hawke.
10 January 1992 The Labor Government in South
Australia replaced the royal coat of arms in courtrooms with the South
Australian coat of arms, featuring the piping shrike, a type of small
magpie which lives in the State.(28)
11 January 1992 The Republican Party of Australia
advised that it would apply to the Australian Electoral Commission for
accreditation as a political party and that it would field two Senate
candidates in each mainland State at the 1992 election. The party had
applied to the Commission in 1987 but the RSL had objected and it was
not accredited.(29)
27 January 1992 The Australian Republican Movement
(ARM), in its first annual Australia Day statement said that ill-informed
and misguided debate had created much confusion about a republican Australia.
They called for a republican convention to draft the necessary constitutional
changes and restore a focus to the debate.(30)
31 January 1992 The Victorian State President
of the RSL Bruce Ruxton, wrote that the RSL and its membership 'will never
agree to this country becoming a republic. We are proud to be associated
with the Queen, who is our patron, and who, as this country's head of
State, has never once put a foot wrong. Show me a politician with such
a record.'(31)
1 February 1992 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating,
called for a new Australian flag. 'I suppose people around the world are
entitled to say, "We look at your flag-you've got the flag of another
country in the corner. Are you a colony or are you a nation?"' The Leader
of the Opposition, Dr John Hewson, supported the present flag but said
debate over the flag was far less important than solving the problems
of the economy. Dr Hewson said 'I personally think our flag has served
us well...I know a lot of Australians have fought under it and many have
died for it ...If it's working well, why change it?'(32)
4 February 1992 Sir Richard Kirby of Aus-flag,
argued for a new Australian flag without the Union Jack incorporated into
its design as the current flag 'proclaims that Australia is still ...
a dominion of Great Britain', and is, therefore, 'inadequate, divisive
and demonstrably colonial'(33)
10 February 1992 The chairman of the ARM, Tom
Keneally, referring to the forthcoming visit of the Queen and the Duke
of Edinburgh, said: '(i)f we Australians feel we cannot have our own ceremonies
and celebrations without importing a Royal person to give them legitimacy,
then of course, we should pay for the expense of the British monarch's
journey.'(34)
10 February 1992 The Opposition spokesman for
Industrial Relations, Employment and Training, John Howard, issued a news
release that in part stated, 'Although I strongly support the monarchy,
I fully accept that a respectable intellectual and emotional case can
be made for an Australian republic ...however, those advocating a republic
should not be allowed to escape with the furphy that getting rid of the
monarchy would save money. Clearly it would not.'(35)
15 February 1992 In an article in the Australian,
Tom Keneally proposed that:
Australia should have a head of State who is an Australian
citizen, who is appointed by and can be removed by the Australian
people and who represents and owes sole allegiance to the people of
Australia. This head of state or President would have powers approximating
those of the Governor-General and would act solely on the advice of
prime ministers and ministers. He or she would have none of the executive
powers enjoyed by the presidents of the United States or France.(36)
15 February 1992 John Howard, in an article in
the Australian said:
Australia is, and has been for some time, a crowned
republic. To many, the status quo is the best of both worlds. Those
who do not care for the royal link do not find it intruding into their
everyday lives. On the other hand, millions of Australians have a
deep respect for the institution and admire the dedication and sense
of duty displayed by the present occupant. Although this is a minimalist
defence of the monarchy and is not the sole basis of my own view,
it does thrust a heavy onus on those wanting to change to establish
a clear national benefit in becoming a republic. A mixture of historical
sentiment, constitutional utility, the proven deficiencies of alternatives
and an instinctive feeling that the aphorism 'If it works don't fix
it' is apt leads me to advocate the retention of the monarchy.(37)
18 February 1992 The Queen arrived in Sydney for
the Sydney Council's 150th anniversary. She also visited Dubbo, Canberra
and Adelaide before returning to Britain on 25 February.(38)
19 February 1992 Five State Labor MP's Franca
Arena, Ian Macdonald, Meredith Burgmann, Ann Symonds and Andy Mason, stated
that they would not attend the Queen's unveiling of her official portrait
and the afternoon tea at Parliament House and any other social function.
They added that:
Australians should be politically mature enough to
have their own head of state and flag. The Queen should not be the
head of the Australian people simply because she is the British monarch.(39)
23 February 1992 Former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam
speaking at the Australian Young Labor Conference dinner said that it
was inevitable that Australia would become a republic and that it would
simply involve a referendum to change the constitution and to substitute
the word President for Queen and Governor-General.(40)
24 February 1992 During the Queen's visit to Australia,
Prime Minister Keating gave a speech of welcome in which he congratulated
the Queen on the 40th anniversary of her accession to the throne. Mr Keating
noted that Australians had changed over those 40 years, and that some
of those who had sat in Parliament during the Queen's first visit to Australia
in 1954 had seen the world through imperial eyes and that many remembered
monarchs from Queen Victoria onwards. 'This is an altogether different
generation, reflecting the profound change in our two countries and the
relationship between them,' Mr Keating said. The Prime Minister also said
that:
As our constitutional relationship has evolved, so
have the circumstances of our economic and political lives. These
days we must both face the necessities of a global economy and global
change of often staggering speed and magnitude. Just as Great Britain
some time ago sought to make her future secure in the European community,
so Australia now vigorously seeks partnerships with countries in our
own region. Our outlook is necessarily independent. That independence
in part was reflected in your becoming, in 1973, Queen of Australia.
In 1992 it is reflected in our growing sense of national purpose.(41)
25 February 1992 The Opposition spokesman on Trade,
Alexander Downer, said that the Prime Minister's speech was 'poorly conceived,
weakly delivered and downright ungracious. He suggested that Mr Keating
would be remembered as Australia's most petty, mean-minded and ungracious
Prime Minister since Federation.'(42)
25 February 1992 The Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations, John Howard, said 'the reception for the Queen was insultingly
low key and that Mr Keating's speech was inappropriate.'(43)
25 February 1992 The Opposition Leader, Dr Hewson,
said 'he was very disappointed that Mr Keating had taken the opportunity
to give a tilt in favour of republicanism in front of the Queen. I come
from a similar background to Paul Keating. We were taught to show a bit
of respect and I think that was an occasion to show respect and not to
make a political statement.'(44)
26 February 1992 Prime Minister Paul Keating was
criticised in the British press for putting his arm around the Queen.(45)
27 February 1992 During Question Time, the Prime
Minister accused Britain of abandoning Australia to the Japanese during
the Second World War. He said that Britain was the 'country which decided
not to defend the Malayan peninsula, not to worry about Singapore and
not to give us our troops back to keep ourselves free from Japanese domination.'
He also accused Dr Hewson of having subservient respect for Britain, rather
than respect for his own nation. 'If he believes that I cannot say that
this is a more independent country, that we're not tied to Britain's coat
tails...if he thinks that we ought to be basically into British boot-strapping,
forelock tugging, and he calls that respect, it's not respect for this
country,' Mr Keating said. He then spoke of the 1950's as 'the golden
age when vast numbers of Australians never got a look in: when women did
not get a look in and had no equal rights and no equal pay; when migrants
were factory fodder; when Aborigines were excluded from the system...and
that awful cultural cringe under Menzies which held us back for nearly
a generation.'(46)
28 February 1992 John Howard wrote to the Australian
Financial Review and said:
If Australia were to become a republic because the
majority of Australians believed we would be better governed as a
consequence, then so be it. That would not be a judgement I would
advocate or that I believe on a proper analysis of the arguments should
be accepted. However, it would at least have the merit of a decision
taken for the right reason. If by contrast, we throw out the Monarchy
because we think it will make us more acceptable in our region, we
will not only be mistaken but our decision will be regarded with patronising
contempt by our Asian neighbours.(47)
28 February 1992 The Leader of the National Party,
Tim Fischer, issued a media release that said in part:
The National Party and indeed the Coalition strongly
supports the retention of our Constitutional Monarchy, it has served
us well in the past and present and helps provide a great deal of
stability and continuity. It is for these practical reasons, rather
than sentimental reasons, that the Constitutional Monarchy be retained;
in saying this it does not cut across the need for Australia to greatly
boost its relations and its economic and export links with Asia.
Mr Fisher also warned that a Republic of Australia and
the creation of an Office of President of Australia would lead to greater
centralisation of powers within the cocoon of Canberra.'(48)
28 February 1992 The Leader of the Opposition,
Dr Hewson, appeared on the Alan Jones' radio program and the Hinch
Program. Dr Hewson said on the Hinch Program that
I don't think it (republicanism) will be an issue
in the next election. I think it is an issue that we will debate in
Australia for quite some time...I'm not (a republican), I actually
think that the constitutional monarchy has worked particularly well
for Australia and I have this quite simple view that when things work
well and they don't need changing, why bother changing them? I am
concerned that these issues quite often arise as a diversion that
keeps us away from the main game and right now that is creating jobs.
28 February 1992 The Sydney Morning Herald
reported that
A palace spokesperson confirmed that there was no
royal protocol on touching the Queen, who arrived back in Britain
today. The Queen is a normal person and there are no rules and regulations
about touching her.(49)
29 February 1992 The Sydney Morning Herald
reported that former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser had written to the
Daily Telegraph in London defending Mr Keating's speech to the
Queen and claiming that Australia 'got the worst end of the deal' from
Britain in both world wars.(50)
29 February 1992 Fifty-seven per cent of people
questioned by the Saulwick Age Poll wanted Australia to become a republic,
81 per cent supported Australia remaining a member of the Commonwealth,
39 per cent said they wanted the Queen to remain head of state and 4 per
cent, didn't know what they wanted.(51)
1 March 1992 The Sunday Telegraph reported
that Mr Keating had said 'I think Australia will end up a republic at
some point but certainly not while I'm Prime Minister.'(52)
1 March 1992 Former Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam
said
I've changed my views on the question of the monarchy
in the past 16 years. My old view was that it didn't matter...Why
I changed my mind is because of the conduct of Sir John Kerr...What
we would propose is that the president should be the head of state
and should carry out the only job there is for a head of state: transfer
power from one administration to another if an election shows that
the former administration no longer has a majority in the House of
Representatives, or if the Parliament shows the former administration
has not got a majority in the House of Representatives. (53)
1 March 1992 Labor Senator Bob McMullan said that
'for more than 20 years I have been of the view that it is both inevitable
and desirable that Australia should become a republic.'(54)
1 March 1992 The Saulwick poll in the Sydney
Morning Herald and the Melbourne Age showed that 42 per cent
of people questioned preferred that Australia remain in the Commonwealth
as a republic, 15 per cent wanted Australia to become a republic outside
the Commonwealth and 39 per cent wanted Australia to remain in the Commonwealth
with the Queen as head of state.(55)
1 March 1992 The Young Liberal Movement of Australia
issued a press release which said:
Prime Minister Keating's attack on our friends in
Britain is simply a tactic to divert attention... and attempt to fix
the mess that he has created...Keating cannot make us a republic until
he makes us one nation: his plan to try to do that is a dismal failure
and has set back his republican cause by years as we repay the debt
it leaves us with.(56)
1 March 1992 The Sunday Telegraph reported
that hundreds of people had joined the Australian Republican Movement
since the Queen's visit, including Australia's wealthiest woman, Janet
Holmes a Court. To join the Australian Republican Movement, members sign
the following declaration.
'By January 1, 2001...the centenary of the proclamation
of federation, Australia shall become an independent republic. Into that
goal we now pledge our best endeavours.'(57)
2 March 1992 Following Prime Minister Keating's
remarks on World War II, debate continued as to whether Britain did all
it could or whether the British knew that Singapore could not be defended
but kept the reports secret from Australia.(58)
2 March 1992 On the first day of the Wills
by-election campaign, the leader of the Opposition, Dr Hewson said that
republicanism would not reduce the number of unemployed in Australia and
any debate on the issue should be secondary to economic recovery.(59)
3 March 1992 Research conducted by the Federal
Liberal Party secretariat showed that seven Labor held seats which would
be lost with a swing of less than 5 per cent, contained high concentrations
of British migrants and that Prime Minister Keating's attack on Australia's
traditional links with Britain and the monarchy could cost the Government
a number of vital marginal seats.(60)
3 March 1992 Former Prime Minister Hawke said
that the Government should make a statement of intent that it wanted Australia
to become a republic and proposed that a referendum be held in the life
of the next Parliament.(61)
6 March 1992 The Deputy Premier of the National
Party in NSW, Wal Murray, said that Mr Keating's criticism of Britain's
role (in the fall of Singapore) during World War II (and the defence of
Australia) was 'a transparent and deceitful exercise in back-alley politics'.(62)
6 March 1992 The Governor-General, Bill Hayden
speaking at a book launch, said that 'too many Australians remain jammed
in the jaws of an old imperialist vice that refuses to let them move on
to a more productive understanding of our neighbours.'(63)
6 March 1992 Mr Murray retaliated, accusing the
Governor-General of 'insulting the Queen and being a stooge of the republican
movement'.
The Governor -General has deliberately trammelled
the protocol and convention of his high office and has shown his true
colours as a stooge of the republican push. He has denigrated his
high position by issuing a calculated insult to Her Majesty in the
form of a political comment, reflecting on Australia's existing constitutional
system.(64)
7 March 1992 Prime Minister Keating suggested,
at the launch of Rodney Hall's novel, The Second Bridegroom, at
Writers Week in Adelaide, that it was a 'curiosity' to have the Union
Jack in the corner of the Australian flag. He also said, in reply to a
question about how Australians could be more Australian, 'Well, for a
start, by not tugging the forelock at the British establishment. That's
a place for starters, the Liberal Party have yet to learn about that.'(65)
8 March 1992 Former Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser
wrote that
Those who want to change the system and become a
republic seem to believe that Australia would stand taller, that Australians
would be better off. There is no evidence of that.
There is no point idly and without purpose cutting
off 200 years of history.
In welcoming Her Majesty to Parliament House, the
Prime Minister pointed out that Britain had decided that its economic
future lay with Europe, and that we, partly as a consequence of that,
had to recognise that our economic future lies with the countries
of Asia. It was an obvious comment and not one that could possibly
have given offence to Her Majesty as Queen of Australia.
It was taken, however, by some to be a republican
statement, by others to be discourteous and led to a great furore
and a lot of nonsense, especially in the British press. It also led
to further debates in the Parliament. Here the question of our constitutional
forms became much confused with the question of Australian nationalism
and Australian pride.(66)
8 March 1992 English all-rounder Ian Botham, commenting
on the republican debate said 'Bring Mr Keating here and I'll flatten
him.' The English cricket team later stormed out of Ballarat just hours
after arriving as they claimed that their beds were too short.(67)
8 March 1992 National Party MP, Michael Cobb,
said that he was considering whether to write a letter of complaint to
the Queen over comments by the Governor-General Bill Hayden. During a
speech, Mr Hayden had joked about losing his job after opinion polls showed
a surge of support for a republic. Mr Hayden said 'It doesn't look good
does it? This might be my swan song.' NSW Deputy Premier Wal Murray claimed
the 'outrageous remarks' insulted the Queen and showed Mr Hayden to be
a stooge of the republican movement.(68)
8 March 1992 Liberal Member for Goldstein Dr David
Kemp wrote that:
The Prime Minister appears to be one of the few people
who has not realised that Australia is a fully independent country...Let
no one imagine that a republic can easily be brought about in this
country. There is nothing inevitable about Australia becoming a republic.
A move to a republic would require the powers of the President to
be specified, including his powers in relation to the Senate, and
in the case of a deadlock between the Houses of Parliament. The powers
of the Senate would therefore have to be redefined. This would open
up the whole federal compact on which this country is based.(69)
9 March 1992 The Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations, John Howard, referring to Prime Minister Keating, said:
that '(i)t is quite obvious, both from his historically
inaccurate anti-British outburst in Parliament and his more considered
speech in Adelaide last Friday, that the Prime Minister has embarked
upon a course of politicising Australian patriotism...Nothing could
be more divisive, nothing more destructive of the united national
spirit we need and which he claims to champion.(70)
10 March 1992 The Australian reported that
'Mr Howard's decision to press on with his defence of Australia's ties
to Britain in the face of Dr Hewson's warning has led some shadow Cabinet
members to question what they see as Mr Howard's claim to be able to be(sic)
speak out on a range of issues beyond his portfolio area of employment'.
The paper reported that 'Dr Hewson had told the Shadow Cabinet that Mr
Keating's push for a loosening of ties with Britain was an "artificial"
issue and that Shadow Cabinet members should not be distracted by it and
should return "to the main game". Dr Hewson urged his colleagues to "get
back to the economy" rather than focus on emotional side issues.'(71)
10 March 1992 The Secretary General of the Commonwealth,
Chief Emeka Anyaoku, in a Commonwealth Day radio interview, said that
growing republicanism in parts of the Commonwealth with traditionally
close links to Britain, such as Australia, did not jeopardise the broad-based
organisation.(72)
15 March 1992 The Leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, said 'I haven't changed my position at all, I'm surprised
to see that people think I have'.(73)
17 March 1992 Prime Minister Keating, in a speech
to the Irish-Australian Chamber of Commerce on St Patrick's Day, said:
I said a few things recently about the flag, but
let me say this. We've got to be certain of who we are to take our
place in the world, and we can't fly two symbols with our nation for
much longer. A nation internally uncertain about its representational
image is of course a nation uncertain about itself. I spent a decade
trying to transform the Australian economy...to make it a country
with an international economic ambition. It became increasingly plain
to me that another kind of transformation is necessary, a social transformation,
a mental transformation, because we are not going to make it simply
be getting the nuts and bolts together, by getting the macro-economy
right,...we won't ever get it right until we get that mental transformation
that Australia is a country of its own character. Australia is a country
which will make its own way in the world. That's the transformation
we need to really pull off, our internationalisation, our true independence...But
when it is said in Australia that the contribution we made to Britain
in World War I was not returned in full in World War II when an Australian
view is expressed-scandal and outrage. Yet those who care to consult
the histories, even those written by Englishmen, will find that it's
not wrong or even indeed those who recently consult the Financial
Times or the Guardian or the London Times, will
find that it was not wrong. Yet my dissatisfaction and disaffection
is not with Britain or the British, it is with those who cannot find
it in themselves to speak with an unashamed and wholehearted Australian
voice, who not only fail at the essential task to grasp the future
but will not even grasp the past.(74)
17 March 1992 The Shadow Minister for Trade and
Trade Negotiations, Alexander Downer, issued a media release which said,
in response to the Prime Minister's remarks:
Mr Keating's campaign against Australia's national
flag-which he continued today-is a campaign to make Australians abandon
their national heritage, to turn their backs on their history and
to remodel Australia as a cold, austere, soulless and technocratic
State without traditions, heritage or history. One of the great differences
between Mr Keating's Labor Party and the Coalition is that Mr Keating
is essentially ashamed of our past whereas the Coalition is proud
of it...It is only natural in a country which owes so much to Britain
for the way it is and the outward expression of that heritage-the
language it speaks-that we should have the Union Jack in the corner
of our flag.(75)
18 March 1992 The Treasurer, John Dawkins, said
at the launch of Reluctant Nation: Australia and the Allied Defeat
of Japan 1942-45 - by David Day, that:
[The republican debate] is not a diversion. It is
a very important issue which many Australians are already thinking
about, have been thinking about for some time and it is about time
the Liberal's stopped trying to spoil in relation to this issue...it
will only be divisive if the Liberal Party continue to be irrelevant
on this issue. Of course, they are capable of creating a diversion
and a division as they did, or their predecessors did, right back
during the war when something as simple and automatic as giving effect
to the Statute of Westminster was turned into a political issue by
the conservative parties of the time.(76)
18 March 1992 Dr Hewson said:
It's not going to do anything about jobs if we change
the flag or drop the constitutional monarchy. It's not going to create
any more confidence in individuals simply by changing the symbols.
The problem is, we have been independent for decades and decades,
since the beginning of this century. He [Mr Keating] had a real choice
over the 1980's as to whether we pursued economic success or economic
failure. He chose economic failure.(77)
23 March 1992 The Minister for Tourism, Alan Griffiths,
said that Australia was at a turning point and that Australians were psychologically
prepared to cut the '12 000-kilometre umbilical cord'. Mr Griffiths
also said Britain had 'cut Australia off at the knees' by joining the
European Community and he supported the attack by the Prime Minister on
its record as a war ally. On the question of why we have not had civil
war in Australia he said 'the reason why we haven't had civil wars is
that Australians are basically sensible people and we've had differences
of opinion but they have usually been over football or things like that'.(78)
24 March 1992 The Leader of the National Party,
Tim Fischer, said that 'Keating's move to cut the gordian knot that has
seen this country evolve free of division, full of pride in its achievements
with a truly democratic government and a sense of belonging can only mean
one thing and that is he is intent on destabilising the Australian nation...For
one who loves the beauty and craftsmanship of antique French clocks it
seems strange he cannot appreciate the civility offered by years of tradition
and refinement that has been steeped in chivalry, democracy and freedom.'(79)
25 March 1992 English cricketers Graham Gooch
and Ian Botham walked out of the World Cup cricket final dinner in protest
against a comedy sketch by royal impersonator Gerry Connolly. The English
cricket manager said that 'We thought it entirely in poor taste for an
occasion like this.'(80)
15 March 1992 Opposition leader Dr Hewson said
that he would not object to Australia becoming a republic if it became
clear that most Australians supported the change but that the change was
not inevitable and that Australia continued to be served well by the constitutional
monarchy.(81)
29 March 1992 The Australian Republican Movement
South Australian Campaign Launch proposed:
'...that by 1 January 2001-the first day of the 21st
century and the centenary of the proclamation of federation-Australia
shall become an independent republic.'(82)
31 March 1992 According to a Bulletin poll, 41
per cent of Australians believed that Australia should become a republic,
45 per cent were opposed to the change and 14 per cent were uncommitted.
These results compared with 1979 when a similar poll disclosed 31 per
cent in favour, 61 per cent against and 8 per cent uncommitted.(83)
3 April 1992 The Governor-General, Bill Hayden
was 'stricken with despair' on hearing that moves had been made to ban
him from official ANZAC day ceremonies in Ipswich for making 'pro-republican
statements'.(84)
4 April 1992 Ministers in the Indonesian Government
expressed 'delight' at the Prime Minister's urgings that Australia become
a more independent nation.(85)
5 April 1992 Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke wrote
that:
I said myself as Prime Minister on a number of occasions
that it was inevitable and appropriate that Australia would become
a republic within the Commonwealth. Inevitable, because increasingly
younger generations of Australians, particularly for those from a
non-British background, the idea of sharing another country's head
of state doesn't make much sense. Appropriate, because our proper
sense of robust national sovereign independence is not complete until
Australia does have its own entirely separate head of state.' Mr Hawke
said that he did not believe the issues was one of 'overwhelming urgency'
and that the timing of the change to a republic should be when the
reign of the current sovereign ends.(86)
7 April 1992 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating
said, referring to Mr Hawke, 'I never heard a peep out of him about the
flag or our constitutional future when he was Prime Minister, but he's
got plenty of views now'. On the timing of the republic, the Prime Minister
said that to wait until the reign of the Queen finishes 'could be a very
long time from now.'(87)
8 April 1992 The leader of the Australian Democrats,
Senator John Coulter, told the Australian that most Democrats were
'soft Republicans'.(88)
12 April 1992 RSL members barred republican supporters
from entering their clubs on Anzac day.(89)
23 April 1992 Academic Dr John Hirst wrote that:
...as the sensible multiculturalist recognises, our
fundamental institutions and values, which all citizens must support,
are the old (and British) ones; parliamentary government, the rule
of law, civil liberties, tolerance. As our society becomes more diverse,
we need to insist more firmly on their centrality...A republic which
disowned our political and cultural heritage would be a pathetic and
impoverished body.(90)
27 April 1992 The Prime Minister visited Kokoda.
He distanced Australia from its British links and drew attention to the
significance of the Papua-New Guinea battles.(91)
28 April 1992 The Canberra Times editorialised
that:
Our constitutional set-up and the flag need to be
looked at in the light of the changing make-up of Australia's population.
But the way he (Mr Keating) has gone about it is unsavoury...He has
belittled the role of those who served outside the Pacific in both
wars. And he has used his overseas trip as a platform to pursue his
political aims. The most appalling thing is that the strategy is working,
or more correctly being allowed to work because of the ineptness of
the Opposition's response. The Leader of the Opposition, has said
that the economic debate must come first and that Mr Keating's launch
into nationalism is a diversion. That is true. But surely we can have
two debates at the same time.... Mr Keating would then have the harder
job. It is all very well saying change the flag and the monarchy,
but what to?(92)
28 April 1992 The Anglican Archbishop of Brisbane,
Peter Hollingworth, said that:
'Rather than talking about independence, we should
be trying to pursue a policy of inter-dependence'. 'The idea of independence
is a very difficult notion, and I am not sure in the end that that
is an important thing that we should be pushing.'(93)
30 April 1992 It was reported that the ALP generally
supported changing the flag but senior members of the Government believed
that Mr Keating was moving too quickly and would urge him to set a time-table
well beyond the next election.(94)
2 May 1992 Merchant banker and lawyer, Malcolm
Turnbull, wrote that Australia deserved a national flag which unambiguously
symbolised Australia and its unique destiny as an independent nation.
He said however that while a consensus was developing on what sort of
republic Australia should become nobody had come up with a new flag which
excited popular imagination. He said '[i]n this respect, the Prime Minister
has miscued in pushing the new flag harder than the republic'.(95)
3 May 1992 The National Party Victorian State
conference condemned the Prime Minister Mr Keating for the 'disgraceful
manner in which he is pursuing his republican aims.' Mr Fischer pledged
to fight Mr Keating 'all the way' to retain the flag.(96)
5 May 1992 An opinion poll showed that 54 per
cent of people would never want to see the flag changed, compared with
42 per cent who favoured a change now or later. There was a reversal in
relation to a republic with 45 per cent opposed, compared with 41 per
cent in favour, which eliminated the narrow majority in favour in the
previous poll.(97)
8 May 1992 Mr Keating said that the heightened
sense of Australian identity had struck a positive chord in Indonesia
and that it was not surprising that a country like Indonesia, which had
fought so hard for its independence, should be interested in the emergence
of a more clear-cut view of Australian nationhood here. He also said that
Australian people had to have a belief in themselves to make change occur.
By this, I mean that to seize the opportunities and
assure our long-term security, without prejudice to our predominantly
British and European origins and our continuing affections for those
places, we must determine as a people to think of Australia as a place
whose history is its own, whose traditions and values are its own,
whose future is most definitely its own.(98)
11 May 1992 A Saulwick Herald poll showed 56 percent
of people thought Australia should become a republic while 42 per cent
favoured it remaining a constitutional monarchy.(99)
14 May 1992 RSL president Brigadier Alf Garland
said that Mr Keating was 'an Irish republican bigot.'(100)
15 May 1992 The Australian Republican Movement
opened a Victorian branch with about 200 members.(101)
15 May 1992 Malcolm Turnbull said that Mr Keating
had hindered the move to a republic by calling Liberals 'bootlickers'
and lickspitters' to the British. '[O]ur battle is to win the hearts and
the minds of the Liberal and National parties because until we have their
support a referendum is going to be a doubtful proposition'.(102)
18 May 1992 At the launch of the Western Australia
Branch of the Australian Republican Movement, Mr Turnbull said that the
republican movement was too important to become the property of one political
party. He also said that the most disappointing feature of the Liberal
Party's stance on republicanism was that at least half of its leaders
supported Australia becoming a republic.(103)
25 May 1992 Former Solicitor General, Sir Maurice
Byers, said that:
the practical chance of Australia's becoming a republic
in the foreseeable future was nil, both because of the difficulties
of getting party political consensus and because of the difficulties
of getting any measures adopted by referendum. A republic was probably
inevitable, but...important questions-not least the issue of the powers
that the president of a head of state should have and how he or she
should be elected-were rarely canvassed.(104)
2 June 1992 Academic Geoffrey Partington, writing
in The Bulletin on the monarchy, portrayed the republican debate
thus:
Since the leadership change did not bring any immediate
improvement in the economy or the political fortunes of the ALP, Keating
sought an issue that might present him as both a patriot and genuine
radical. Republicanism and pom-bashing were his answers. His tactics
succeeded in the short run and he and his party have risen in the
opinion polls for months.(105)
2 June 1992 Dame Joan Sutherland pledged her full
support to 'Leadership Beyond Politics - Australians For Constitutional
Monarchy.'
4 June 1992 Australians for Constitutional Monarchy
held their first public meeting at Sydney's Lower Town Hall attended by
about 450 people. The foundation council consisted of the former Chief
Justice of the High Court, Sir Harry Gibbs, the Chancellor of Sydney University,
Dame Leonie Kramer, former Sydney Lord Mayor, Mr Doug Sutherland, the
President of the NSW Court of Appeal, Justice Michael Kirby, former Liberal
Party Federal President, Sir John Atwill and Mr Barry O'Keefe QC.(106)
(107)
7 June 1992 The chairman of the Australian Republican
Movement, Mr Tom Keneally, said that an aboriginal woman would make an
ideal first President of the proposed Republic of Australia.(108)
7 June 1992 The convenor of the Republican Movement
in Victoria, Dr John Hirst, said that he wanted the Queen's Birthday holiday
replaced by Wattle Day.(109)
8 June 1992 The leader of the National Party,
Tim Fischer, challenged Australians who supported the Prime Minister's
bid for a republic and a new flag, not to take the Queen's Birthday public
holiday and to spend a day at work.(110)
8 June 1992 Professor Donald Horne said that the
Queen was no longer a relevant symbol for Australia.
Basically the problem is that Queen Elizabeth is
always the Queen of Great Britain...She is Queen of Australia only
when she comes to Australia. If the British Government wants her to,
she will make speeches that go against Australian interest. In this
sense, Australia has a monarch some of whose activities can, in effect,
be those of a foreign agent. Queen Elizabeth is an admirable person.
But by going on pretending she is Queen of Australia, Australians
place her in a position in which she could be used as the agent of
a foreign power against the interest of Australia.(111)
10 June 1992 The Anglican Archbishop of Adelaide,
Ian George, drew a parallel between Mr Keating's push to change the flag
and make Australia a republic with the 'bread and circuses' staged by
Roman emperors to divert public attention from serious problems.(112)
10 June 1992 The Australian editorial said
that the private lives of the Prince and Princess of Wales were not remote
from Australian constitutional affairs.
The intangible factor is the esteem in which Prince
Charles is held and, more immediately, the extent to which the activities
of the royal family are undermining ongoing support for the existing
constitutional arrangements...The dignity of Australia, its independence
and the recognition of its sovereignty will only be fully achieved
when it becomes a republic. No amount of royal harmony can change
that fact. An amount of royal disharmony may speed its recognition.(113)
26 June 1992 The Prime Minister, at the Australian
Book Publishers Awards in Sydney said that:
Visitors like John Mortimer could be forgiven for
wondering why we are so pre-occupied with questions of identity...But
it seems to me a fundamental concern...We have always been ambivalent
about who we are. Robert Menzies of course resolved the dilemma by
saying we were like a child...He imagined us in our relationship with
Britain as being like a youth returning to its mother, the old family-as
if back from a spell at Timbertop, or jackerooing. Hudson (W. J. Hudson,
an historian of Australian foreign policy) uses a similar metaphor
but puts a different spin on it. When Britain formalised her withdrawal
into Europe, he (Hudson) said, Australians "felt bereft and betrayed'.
Australia was like an adult son having affairs (economically with
Japan and militarily with the United States) but still living at home
and, worse than kicking him out of the old home, mother was moving
house and not taking him with her.
The Prime Minister said
In the 1990's, without the slightest disrespect to
a country for which I have the greatest admiration, and to whose language
and institutions I am a very grateful heir, I want to see us leave
home...I believe the Oath of Allegiance sworn by new citizens at naturalisation
ceremonies should proclaim unequivocally their loyalty to Australia
and the things we believe Australia stands for-including liberty,
tolerance, social justice-those very beliefs which underpin multiculturalism.(114)
28 June 1992 The Federal Opposition spokesman
on Immigration, Mr Phillip Ruddock, indicated that the Opposition would
resist any push by the Prime Minister to remove the reference to the Queen
in the oath of allegiance sworn by new citizens. Mr Ruddock said that
unless Australia became a republic, the oath of allegiance should remain
to the Queen as Australia's head of state. He described the move as part
of Mr Keating's 'Irish agenda' to turn Australia into a republic.(115)
29 June 1992 The Democrats leader, Senator John
Coulter, said that he thought the Australian Democrats would take the
view that a change to the oath, like the proposal for a new flag, should
go to a plebiscite at the election.(116)
30 June 1992 The Australian editorial said
that:
There is no firm reason why symbols obscuring the
path of republicanism-which is clearly an evolutionary path-cannot
be removed along the way...Unlike the constitutional oath of allegiance
sworn to the Queen by Mr Keating and every member of the House of
Representative or Senate-which would require a national referendum
to amend-the citizenship oath comes under the Australian Citizenship
Act and can be changed by the simpler method of legislative amendment.
If Parliament so wishes, then let the Prime Minister begin to put
his republican principles into practice(117)
2 July 1992 The national president of the RSL,
Brigadier Alf Garland, said the League would 'oppose to the bitter end'
Mr Keating's plans to change the flag and the oath of allegiance.(118)
8 July 1992 Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke said
that:
it was inevitable that Australia would become a republic,
probably even by 2001. But I'm damned it I'm going to waste any of
my time, at this stage, getting my mind or my knickers in a knot about
this issue...If we were a republic tomorrow, it would have no impact
on the daily welfare of the men, women and children of this country.(119)
14 July 1992 The Clerk of the Senate, Harry Evans,
said that the republicans wanted the constitutional system left as it
was with the exception of a change in the head of state and that this
showed that our constitutional system was in good shape.(120)
23 July 1992 At the first meeting of the Constitutional
Centenary Foundation, the Attorney-General, Michael Duffy said that:
the public should be educated about the Constitution
before any serious debate about becoming a republic. At the end of
the day you are going to have to go back to the people on many of
these issues and you won't succeed on that unless you have firstly
discussion and education on the issues and, at the end of the day,
bipartisanship.(121)
29 July 1992 A debate between the republicans
and the constitutional monarchists was held at the Queen Victoria Building
in Sydney and the Sydney Morning Herald described the debate as
'fighting in an extremely civilised manner. It may be a sign of Australian
maturity.'(122)
23 August 1992 The Canberra Times editorial
stated that
The latest shenanigans from the Royal family-albeit
the younger in-laws-strike a blow at the heart of support for its
retention at the head of the Australian system of government. The
photographs of the Duchess of York cavorting semi-clad with her Texas
friend which have been splashed around the world are sadly offensive
even to the most died-in-the-wool promoter of the Royal connection.(123)
30 August 1992 At the annual conference of the
Northern Territory Country-Liberal Party in Darwin, the leader of the
Liberal Party, Dr John Hewson, and the Leader of the National Party, Tim
Fischer, warned that a republic would be used by Labor to try to centralise
power in a new office of the President of Australia.(124)
30 August 1992 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating
indicated that he did not intend to push republicanism as an issue in
the federal election and that a republic was 'years away'.(125)
30 September 1992 Mr Keating said in an interview
for British television:
I think the Queen has been regarded as entirely conscientious
and well-liked by Australians but they do wonder about the relevance
of a constitutional arrangement which relies on the Queen of Australia
being largely resident on the other side of the globe.(126)
16 October 1992 Media magnate Rupert Murdoch said
that he always had sympathy with the republican debate. He said 'I think
it's all happening. We don't have to get excited about it. Another generation,
another 20 years or so, and it'll be over.'(127)
29 October 1992 A former secretary to the Governor-General,
Sir David Smith, speaking at a conference at Parliament House said that
'Constitutional monarchy does not have to justify its continued existence,
but rather it is up to those who wish to replace it to provide the reasons.'(128)
1 November 1992 A poll conducted by Quadrant Research
showed that 49 per cent of people wanted the present system of Federal
parliamentary government but with an Australian head of state chosen by
both Houses of Parliament. twelve per cent favoured a change to the US
system and 37 per cent wanted to continue with the present system retaining
the Queen as head of state.(129)
14 November 1992 The Prime Minister, Mr Keating,
expressed support for changes to the Oath of Citizenship to encourage
a stronger sense of national identity. He also raised, for the first time,
the possibility of an Australian head of state. He stressed that the Government
was not pushing the issue but simply indicating that it should be debated.(130)
18 November 1992 A reader in Law at the University
of Melbourne, Greg Craven, wrote that any proposal to convert Australia
into a republic would be attended by three main constitutional complications.
The first concerns the 'covering clauses' of the Constitution (that is
the first eight sections of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
Act) which contain references to the monarchy. Section 128 is expressed
to apply only to 'this Constitution' but section 9 of the Constitution
Act has the effect that 'the Constitution' only begins after the covering
clauses. There is thus an argument that the covering clauses cannot be
amended under section 128. The second concerns the nature of the change
to the Constitution. Section 128 does not permit changes that would vary
the fundamental or essential character of the Constitution and the abolition
of the monarchy would arguably be such a change. The third obstacle is
that the constitutional systems of the Commonwealth and the States are
quite separate. Australia effectively has not one but seven monarchies.(131)
19 November 1992 At a debate on the monarchy at
Sydney University the question of religious discrimination was raised
(the Act of Settlement 1701 requires the monarch to be an Anglican.)
The question of sexual discrimination was also raised as males always
supersede females in the succession.(132)
10 December 1992 The Prince and Princess of Wales
separated. Liberal Senator Rod Kemp said that the 'royal marriage difficulties
need not affect Australia's constitutional system because the powers of
the Crown were exercised in this country by the Governor-General. His
powers are derived from the Australian Constitution, not the monarch of
the day'. Senator Schacht and Dr John Hirst argued that the stability
and continuity for which the royal family once stood no longer applied.(133)
18 December 1992 Mr Keating announced Cabinet's
decision to amend the Citizenship Act and the oath of allegiance. The
new preamble to the Act would define citizenship as a common bond involving
reciprocal rights and obligations uniting all Australians. The new oath
would be:
From this time forward I pledge my loyalty to Australia
and its people whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties
I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.
The previous oath or affirmation was to be 'faithful
and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of
Australia, her heirs and successors according to the law, and I will faithfully
observe the laws of Australia and fulfil my duties as an Australian citizen.'(134)
20 December 1992 The Parliamentary Secretary to
the Treasurer, Senator Bob McMullan, writing in the Canberra Times
said:
I have long held the view, and expressed in previous
articles, that Australia should have an Australian head of state selected
under an Australian process determined by the Australian people. No
independent nation can accept less.(135)
5 January 1993 The 25th annual convention of the
national Young Liberals supported a referendum on republicanism after
the next federal election but also supported the constitutional status
quo in a series of motions supporting the monarchy, the flag and regular
tours of Australia by the monarchy.(136)
24 February 1993 Prime Minister Keating, giving
the Policy Launch Address for the 1993 Federal Election said:
It is perhaps in part because Australians are growing
in confidence that more and more of them are questioning whether it
is appropriate for Australia to have as its head of state the monarch
of another country. Many Australians-some surveys suggest a majority-believe
that we will be better able to succeed in the world with the unique
and unambiguous identity which an Australian head of state, chosen
by the Australian people, could provide. While it is far from the
most pressing matter facing the nation, it is nevertheless important
that we do not let this decade leading to the centenary of the Federation
pass without advancing the debate. To do this we will set up a broadly
based committee of eminent Australians, including representatives
of the States, to develop a discussion paper which considers the options
for a Federal Republic of Australia. Any options developed by the
committee would not seek to change our way of government; only to
have an Australian, chosen by Australians, as Australia's head of
state. I would like to extend an invitation to the Opposition to participate
in the workings of this committee. It would be the intention that
as a result of this committee's deliberations and the public discussion
that would follow, the Australian people would be in a position to
decide by referendum later in the decade whether Australia should
become a Republic by the year 2001.(137)
25 February 1993 National Party leader Tim Fischer
said that Mr Keating's announcement was a last ditch effort to distract
the public and that Mr Keating 'will not be in government when this issue
needs to be addressed in three weeks' time.'(138)
25 February 1992 Opposition leader Dr John Hewson
said that the Keating committee was unnecessary because former High Court
judge and Governor-General, Sir Ninian Stephen already chaired a body
examining possible changes to the constitution and that the republic was
not an issue but a distraction.(139)
26 February 1993 Professor George Winterton wrote
that the proposal for an Australian republic raised four main questions:
What constitutional change would be required? How should the president
be chosen? What powers should the president have? What should be done
at State level?(140)
1 March 1993 The 'Squidgy' tape was played on
Australian television.
4 March 1993 The Leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, said that the Opposition would not stand in the way of a
groundswell of opinion to make Australia a republic but warned that a
shift to republicanism would involve more fundamental changes to government
than so far discussed. He said that he was 'a strong defender of open
and public debate on all these issues because I think they are very important.
They're not the preserve of a politician to change...because in the end
it has got to be the decision of the people.'(141)
13 March 1993 The Federal Election was won by
the Australian Labor Party.
16 March 1993 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating,
said that he had put his vision of a republic to voters and been endorsed
and that he would now move ahead with his plans for a referendum to sever
constitutional links with Britain and create a republic by 2001.(142)
20 March 1993 Former NSW Premier Nick Greiner
called on the Liberal Party to abandon the monarchy as an 'article of
faith' and take a pro-active role in leading the republican debate. Mr
Howard said that the Coalition had erred during the election campaign
in ignoring republicanism.(143)
22 March 1993 Northern Territory Chief Minister
Marshall Perron supported calls for a Liberal Party debate over moves
to make Australia a Republic.(144)
27 March 1993 Dr Hewson said that he did not think
that a republic was inevitable but that he thought that the debate was
inevitable.
It's a debate we have to have. What I want is a specific
proposal that I can express a view on. Right now, where there is no
alternative proposal...I strongly support the debate about the Republic
and Australia, but it's up to the Government to now tell us exactly
what he's got in mind.(145)
28 March 1993 NSW Premier John Fahey said that
'It is inevitable that Australia would become a republic' and he proposed
a national constitutional convention-to be called by Prime Minister Keating,
to decide the issues this year. Mr Fahey's remarks on the issue were supported
by Young Liberals at the NSW Liberal State Council meeting in Sydney.(146)
29 March 1993 Northern Territory Chief
Minister Marshall Perron said that he had sought legal advice on the likely
legal and political implications for the Territory in a new republic.
He said that the community needed to embrace the republican debate and
discuss directions for the Territory if republicanism was pursued by the
Labor Federal Government. He described himself as a 'fencesitter', one
who would neither support nor condemn the republican push.(147)
29 March 1993 National Party leader Tim Fischer
said he remained a supporter of a constitutional monarchy but that if
the people chose a republic, 'I'm an Australian first and I would accept
that.'(148)
29 March 1993 The Opposition spokesman for Industrial
Relations, John Howard, said that he would accept a republic if Australians
voted for it although he was personally unconvinced of the need to move
to a republic.(149)
29 March 1993 The NSW National Party Leader, Wal
Murray, said support for the republic debate was repugnant and that he
would vigorously oppose any move for a republic.(150)
29 March 1993 Western Australia Liberal
Premier Richard Court, said 'John Fahey is entitled to his views. Western
Australians are always suspicious of the thrust taken by the major states
of Victoria and NSW because they have the most influence in our Federal
system.' He also said that he was willing to go to a constitutional convention
and that 'You wouldn't want to throw away a system that many other countries
in the world would give anything to have in place.'(151)
30 March 1993 Queensland Labor Premier
Wayne Goss announced plans to remove references to the Queen and the Crown
from all state oaths, affirmations and legislation.(152)
30 March 1993 Tasmania's Liberal Premier, Ray
Groom, said it was inevitable Australia would become a republic.(153)
30 March 1993 Victoria's Liberal Premier, Jeff
Kennett, said that the republic was a 10th order issue.(154)
30 March 1993 South Australia's Labor Premier,
Lynn Arnold, said that Australia should already be a republic.(155)
31 March 1993 A motion was passed in the NSW Lower
House to:
endorse the Premier's public statement concerning
the inevitability of an Australian republic and support community
consultation and the holding of constitutional conventions as proposed
by the Premier prior to the consideration by the Australian people,
through a referendum, of any change to the form and structure of the
constitution of Australia.(156)
31 March 1993 South Australia's Opposition leader,
Dean Brown, became the first Liberal Party leader to declare his personal
support for Australia becoming a republic.(157)
1 April 1993 Opposition spokesman for Industrial
Relations John Howard issued a news release which said:
Gough Whitlam wants a future President of Australia
to be elected by the same procedure which chooses the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the President of the Senate. That's the
system which gave us Leo McLeay! ... If the Whitlam formula is adopted
we could end up with a party hack but without the constraints now
applying to the office of Governor-General.(158)
13 April 1993 The Democrat's Senator Cheryl Kernot
said that:
Australia must 'seize the day' of debate on any move
towards republicanism and accompany it with major constitutional reform.
The existing Commonwealth constitution is rigid outmoded and essentially
undemocratic...Whether or not Australia becomes a republic, constitutional
reform must occur for the protection of all Australians from excessively
literalist constitutional interpretations.(159)
15 April 1993 The Australian Democrats leader,
Senator John Coulter, warned that Australians should not rush into republicanism
by setting arbitrary deadlines. 'A republic is both inevitable and desirable,'
he said. 'But our Prime Minister is giving us the bum's rush, setting
an arbitrary deadline in 2001 and talking of referendum questions as if
the need to redefine our constitutional status were dire. It is not.'(160)
27 April 1993 A former Victorian Liberal Premier,
Sir Rupert Hamer acknowledged that a republican Australia was both inevitable
and, in a minimal form, desirable and agreed to become an adviser to the
Republican Movement.(161)
26 April 1993 On PM, the deputy leader
of the Liberal Party, Dr Michael Wooldridge, said that the Coalition did
not rule out the possibility of bipartisan support for the Prime Minister's
eminent persons' committee which will consider the republican issue, but
that it was unlikely. Journalist Ellen Fanning also reported that the
National Party leader, Tim Fischer had said that the Coalition should
be cautious about participating in the eminent persons' committee.(162)
28 April 1993 The establishment of a Republic
Advisory Committee was announced by Prime Minister Keating in his H. V.
Evatt lecture. The committee's terms of reference were to examine the
issues and develop an options paper describing the minimum constitutional
changes necessary to achieve a viable federal republic of Australia, maintaining
the effect of current conventions and principles of government, including
the relationship between the Commonwealth and the States.'(163)
The committee was asked to address the following matters:
- The removal of all references to the monarch in the constitution.
- The need for and creation of a new office of head of state and consideration
of what the office might be called.
- The provisions for the appointment and termination of appointment
of the head of state including the method of selection and appointment,
eg
selection and appointment by the government of the
day
selection by the government and endorsement by both
Houses of Parliament
appointment by an 'electoral college' comprising representatives
of various parliaments
appointment following election by the Federal Parliament
popular election.
- How the powers of the new head of state and their exercise can be
made subject to the same conventions and principles which apply to the
powers of the Governor-General.
- The nature of the amendments to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
Act required to implement the options.
- The implications for the States.
- Other aspects which arise in the Committee's deliberations and consultations
providing they are relevant to the overall objective in the opening
paragraph above.(164)
The chairman of the committee was lawyer Malcolm Turnbull
and the six other members were former NSW Premier Nick Greiner; SBS presenter
Mary Kostakidis; chairwoman of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island
Commission Lois O'Donoghue; former Hawke Cabinet Minister Susan Ryan;
and two academics, Dr John Hirst and Professor George Winterton. Two future
members of the committee were to represent the States and Territories
and the Opposition Leader, Dr Hewson, was invited to nominate a representative.(165)
28 April 1993 A new ministerial oath removing
reference to the Queen was taken for the first time at the swearing in
of the Attorney-General, Michael Lavarch. Mr Lavarch promised to 'well
and truly serve the Commonwealth of Australia', instead of 'well and truly
serve Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according
to law'.(166)
29 April 1993 The Leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, responded to the Prime Minister's announcement of the Republic
Advisory Committee. He said that he formally committed the Liberal Party
to a very active role in the debate but that it was important to recognise
that the Liberal platform was committed to constitutional monarchy. It
says:
Australian Liberalism means support for the constitutional
monarchy and freedom for all under the rule of law. It supports the
constitution not as a lifeless record of the compact of federation
but as a living framework capable of development by discussion and
consent.
He announced that that item would be on the agenda
at the Federal Council meeting planned for early August to start the
process of debate within the Party and he urged all of the party to
play an active part in the debate.
Dr Hewson said that the Liberal Party could not support
the Keating committee on the basis of its composition, its agenda or its
deadlines and that he would not be nominating a representative. He denied
that the committee was a genuine attempt at bipartisanship and said that
it was a blatant political exercise. Dr Hewson also said that 'I have
no doubt, given the shift of community attitudes and opinion, that the
hardline monarchist position is out of touch with the realities of Australia
today'.(167)
29 April 1993 The leader of the National Party,
Tim Fischer, said, by way of formal response to the Prime Minister's speech
on the republic, that the Parliamentary National Party, the Victorian
Conference and the Federal Management meeting of the National Party had
all discussed the issue in detail and that 'All three key organisations
of the National Party reaffirmed their strong support for a progressive
constitutional monarchy.'(168)
30 April 1993 The National Party urged all Australians
to think very carefully before tampering with the constitution and said
that it would be playing a very active part in the debate about the republic.
The National Party said that the 'so-called minimalist position' was far
more radical than it may seem as the constitution, literally read, gives
very wide powers to the Governor-General and only convention restricted
the effective powers of the Governor-General. The leader of the National
Party also warned that any referendum must be carried by all six States
as all States would have to adopt consequential changes and amendments.
If a particular State voted 'NO' the State Government and the Parliament
would face a very real dilemma.
(W)e have a system under the Constitutional Monarchy
which works extremely well. It is an important factor behind the tolerance
and cohesion which have always been a hallmark of Australian society.
To argue the case for a Republicanism, means arguing the case that
it is a better alternative.(169)
30 April 1993 The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney,
Richard Goodhew expressed cautious support for Australia becoming a republic.(170)
30 April 1993 The former leaders of the youth
wings of the Liberal Party and the ALP made a joint appeal to Mr Keating
to include young people in the republican debate.(171)
1 May 1993 The new leader of the Australian Democrats,
Senator Cheryl Kernot, attacked as a 'cop-out' the minimalist position
advocated by the Prime Minister and called for the consideration of questions
such as the role of the States in a republic, the prior occupation of
the continent by Aborigines and the reserve powers of the Governor-General.(172)
1 May 1993 Sir Ninian Stephen said that the Constitutional
Centenary Foundation would not prepare a specific options paper on a republic
for the Federal Opposition, but the Foundation would examine the republic
issue as part of a broader study on constitutional change in Australia.
The inquiry could take up to four years and would be wider than the more
narrowly focused Republican Advisory Committee.(173)
5 May 1993 A Liberal Party committee comprising
Dr John Hewson, John Howard, Andrew Peacock, Rod Kemp, Senator Robert
Hill, Daryl Williams and Andrew Robb was established to review the Liberal
platform. The National Party announced that it would not be represented
on the committee.(174)
5 May 1993 The Victorian Premier, Jeff Kennett
said that he wanted Professor Geoffrey Blainey to represent the States
on the Prime Minister's Republic Advisory Committee.(175)
5 May 1993 An AGB McNair survey found that 83
per cent of Australians want to elect a president themselves, 53 per cent
believed a future head of state should have a role with greater power,
38 per cent wanted the head of state to have a mainly ceremonial role
and nine per cent did not know.(176)
5 May 1993 Mr Kennett told Parliament that while
he privately believed Australia should remain a constitutional monarchy,
it was important for the Victorian community to participate in the republican
debate.(177)
7 May 1993 John Howard said that he would not
'commit suicide' if Australia becomes a republic tomorrow. 'I am an Australian
above anything else. I always have been and I will die being an Australian
before anything else. But that is not really the issue. It is a question
of what is the better form of Government for the Australian people'.(178)
13 May 1993 The Republic Advisory Committee issued
a 15 page issues paper designed to stimulate comment.(179)
21 May 1993 The Northern Territory Legislative
Assembly held a formal debate on republicanism but no vote was taken on
the issue. Most speakers supported republicanism of some kind (with the
exception of MLA's Fred Finch and Rick Setter) but a motion supporting
the Prime Minister's initiative failed on party lines.(180)
25 May 1993 The Prime Minister announced that
Namoi Dougall and Dr Glyn Davis were appointed as the State/Territory
Government representatives on the Republic Advisory Committee. All States
and Territories were also invited to submit comments to the Committee
in response to an Issues Paper released earlier in the month.(181)
14 May 1993 Dr Hewson told Parliament that 'key
members of the ALP wanted to abolish the States and the Senate and water
down the reserve powers of the head of state, not just replace the Queen
with an Australian.'(182)
17 May 1993 Dr Hewson said the Federal Government
would want to take Australia out of the Commonwealth if voters supported
a republic.(183)
27 May 1993 Opposition frontbencher, Dr David
Kemp, said that the Prime Minister's headlong rush toward a republic was
driven by an obsessive hatred of the British origins of Australia's political
institutions, law and language and risked dividing the nation. 'We do
not need to deny our British heritage and its symbols in order to move
beyond it into the future.'(184)
27 May 1993 The federal Liberal Party deputy leader,
Dr Michael Wooldridge, said he suspected that Australia would become a
republic during his lifetime but rejected that it was inevitable.(185)
28 May 1993 The inaugural meeting of the Republic
Advisory Committee took place on 27 May 1993. The full committee was expected
to meet four times before September when it was to deliver a report on
options for a republic to the Government. Several public meetings were
to be held in capital cities and country towns.(186)
4 June 1993 Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy
appointed Tony Abbott, a former advisor to Dr Hewson, as its salaried
executive director.(187)
5 June 1993 A former High Court Chief Justice,
Sir Harry Gibbs, said that once the Office of President was established
it would inevitably be politicised and that this would create a series
of constitutional dangers, including the danger that the nation might
proceed down the road to dictatorship.(188)
7 June 1993 The Republic Advisory Committee advised
that they would visit Brisbane, Townsville, Cairns, Toowoomba. Hobart,
Launceston, Melbourne, Geelong, Albury, Perth, Bunbury, Kalgoorlie, Port
Hedland, Darwin, Alice Springs, Whyalla, Adelaide, Canberra, Wagga, Tamworth,
Lismore, Newcastle and Wollongong. Consultation would include public hearings
wherever possible.(189)
9 June 1993 The Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Senator Gareth Evans, assured the Commonwealth Secretary-General that
an Australian republic would not leave the Commonwealth.(190)
13 June 1993 The Australian Republican Movement
and the Australian Conservation Foundation launched a campaign to have
the Queen's Birthday weekend abolished in favour of a national 'Wattle
Day' in September.(191)
15 June 1993 The Leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, said that support for a republic would depend on the Prime
Minister Paul Keating and other advocates of constitutional change providing
clear evidence existing arrangements were flawed, inappropriate and unworkable.
He said the nation's freedom, independence and stability had to be protected
and the onus put firmly on 'the proponents of constitutional change that
they will not end up throwing the baby out with the bath water.'(192)
18 June 1993 The Anglican Archbishop of Brisbane,
Peter Hollingworth, warned that Mr Keating's republican push risked dividing
the nation and warned of the potential for providing a president with
an undue amount of power. He also urged Australians to question whether
republicanism was part of a political agenda.(193)
19 June 1993 A former Premier of NSW, Nick Greiner,
warned the Liberal Party that 'if we go to the 1996 election saying 'vote
for us, we will continue to ensure that there is no move to a republic',
then in my view that is a large step towards losing the election. He said
a republic was supported by at least two Liberal Premiers and a significant
section of the parliamentary Liberal Party.(194)
20 June 1993 At the NSW National Party State Conference
in Wagga Wagga, Tim Fischer said:
The Republic debate...is on the national agenda and
I have been very proud of the National Party's steadfast and resolute
role. I am confident that the National Party will continue to provide
a sheet anchor role in this debate, it our duty to do so. We as a
party know where we stand on this issue. We oppose Keating's republic.(195)
22 June 1993 The President of the WA Liberal Party,
Bill Hassell, told the Bulletin:
that he was personally committed not to the concept
of nationhood or one indissoluble Australia but to a belief that WA
would be far better off in a dozen ways if it was separate...It need
not mean a state of war with the eastern states It could be a perfectly
co-operative relationship like the one Australia has with New Zealand.(196)
23 June 1993 A former Premier of NSW, Nick Greiner
warned fellow members of the Liberal Party that they risked handing Prime
Minister Keating a 'powerful weapon at the next election if they continued
to oppose a republic'. He said that it was open to Senator Bronwyn Bishop,
John Howard, and Peter Reith to take a 'short-term political win' by killing
off the republic but that it would be a 'pyrrhic' victory.(197)
30 June 1993 The leader of the Opposition, Dr
John Hewson, in an interview with Peter Couchman, said that it was not
a mistake not to have joined the Turnbull Committee as that was not a
'bipartisan attempt to deal with a difficult issue' and that the so called
minimal approach was a furphy.(198)
2 July 1993 Australians for Constitutional Monarchy
held a meeting at Sydney Town Hall to commemorate the centenary of the
Central Federation League. The speakers were Sir Harry Gibbs, Dame Leonie
Kramer and Lloyd Waddy QC.(199)
5 July 1993 A Victorian federal MP, Lindsay Tanner,
of the left wing of the ALP, rejected Mr Keating's minimalist approach
and said that the 'focus of the Left's position in this debate should
be the assertion of the principles of democracy-not the nationalist crusade
for independence from Britain.' He also said that the States were outdated
and that there should be a Bill of Rights.(200)
8 July 1993 Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations, John Howard, addressed the 46th Annual Council of the Australian
Liberal Students' Federation. He said:
My opposition to an Australian republic is a happy
amalgam of personal conviction and political judgement...By all means
those in the Liberal Party who genuinely believe a republic would
be in Australia's long term interests should argue their case both
internally and externally.(201)
8 July 1993 Blinky Bill was officially unveiled
at a ceremony to mark the second anniversary of the Australian Republican
Movement as the movements national treasure, standard bearer and icon.(202)
10 July 1993 The Australian Conservation Foundation
said that the Republic Advisory Committee should examine a wide range
of constitutional reforms including the issue of State and federal rights
in relation to the environment.(203)
10 July 1993 The Liberal Party's Federal Executive
'killed off moves to change the party's constitution, which supports the
monarchy.'(204)
11 July 1993 The Federal President of the Young
Liberals, Trent Zimmerman, said that Liberals should be free to follow
their consciences on whether they supported the push for an Australian
republic. The Young Liberal leaders drafted a resolution to be put to
the Party's Federal Council meeting in August proposing that the republican
issue be a conscience matter for members.(205)
14 July 1993 The Australian Chamber of Commerce
chief executive said that the republican debate should be widened to include
state and federal powers in relation to industrial relations, educations,
job training, immigration and land rights.(206)
19 July 1993 The Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy, in its submission to the Prime Minister's Republican Advisory
Committee, said that there were strong reasons to think that a referendum
would be ineffective to cut links with the crown and to turn Australia
into a republic as the preamble to the Constitution declares that the
purpose of the document is to establish 'one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth
under the crown.' The submission argued that the federal compact might
not survive the elimination of this fundamental condition and that minimal
change was not viable.(207)
19 July 1993 Seventy-nine per cent of Australians
questioned said that they wanted a republican head of State to be elected
by popular vote. (208)
21 July 1993 An Age editorial said that
the constitutional changes required for Australia to become a republic
would not be minimal and that those Australians who supported a move to
a republic needed to understand this.(209)
22 July 1993 The Premier of Western Australia,
Richard Court, announced that within a month he would appoint a committee
of eminent West Australians to examine the ramifications for WA of the
Federal Government's push to a republic. He said that members would be
drawn from different sides of politics and different age groups.(210)
25 July 1993 The Federal Government instructed
the Governor-General not to forward any more requests to use the prefix
'royal' to Buckingham Palace for approval.(211)
25 July 1993 The Nationals' Senate leader, Ron
Boswell, told delegates at the National Party's State Conference in Brisbane
that:
If Paul Keating has his way, Australia will soon
have a new Constitution, giving all real power to the national government.
The States will be little more than administrators of policies set
in Canberra-if they exist at all. He said that the National Party
wants nothing to do with the Prime Minister's push to make Australia
a republic.(212)
26 July 1993 Delegates to the Victorian and the
Western Australian branches of the Liberal Party, at their annual conferences,
passed resolutions rejecting the republic.(213)
30 July 1993 Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett, in
an address to the Samuel Griffith Society in Melbourne entitled 'The Crown
and the States', said that section 128 of the Federal Constitution was
unsuited to the task of removing the monarchy because 'The Constitution'
was not an Act but clause 9 of The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
Act 1900. Thus 'without some imaginative interpretation' section 128
might amend 'the Constitution' but not the covering clauses of the Act
- clauses 1 to 8. Since the passing of the Australia Acts 1986
the United Kingdom could not alter those provisions and amendment would
require the unanimous participation of State Parliaments. A second difficulty
was that the Crown was implicit in the constitution and it was arguable
that to remove the Crown was not to amend the constitution but to change
it for another and that this could not be done by section 128. The third
legal barrier concerned the position of State Constitutions and State
Governors.
31 July 1993 Prime Minister Keating, in a speech
at the Corowa Shire Council Centenary Dinner at the Corowa RSL Club said
'I am for a republic. Not because I am against Britain-I like Britain
very much...Nor am I against the British monarch...Nor am I against the
British Commonwealth of Nations...Nor am I for the republic because I
am against the States...I am for the republic not for what I am against,
but what I am for; not for what a republic will throw away, but for what
a republic can deliver: It can deliver a new sense of unity and national
pride in which Australians of this and future generations can share...In
the end, as with Federation, it will be the people of Australia who decide.'
1 August 1993 The leader of the Australian Democrats,
Senator Cheryl Kernot, said there were valid arguments for abolishing
the States and replacing them with regional governments and that the Democrats
were setting up a Task Force to examine possible models for a two-tier
system of government. Senator Kernot also said that the Constitutional
debate should be widened to include a Bill of Rights, appropriate/democratic
electoral systems and the role of Upper Houses, especially the right to
block supply.(214)
9 August 1993 A Saulwick Age Poll found
that in the four months since the last poll, support for the monarchy
had gone up four points to 34 per cent. Support for Australia becoming
a republic dropped correspondingly four points to 62 per cent.(215)
16 August 1993 The Australian Republican Movement
submission to the Republic Advisory Committee said that
All references to the monarch must be removed from the
Australian Constitution.
The term president should be used for the new, non-executive
head of State, who should be separate from the government.
The only qualification for appointment should be Australian
citizenship.
The president should be elected by a two-thirds majority
of both Houses of Parliament.
The reserve powers of the president should be codified.
The future of the Governors should be decided by each
State.
The Constitution should be rewritten in plain English.(216)
17 August 1993 The NSW Young Liberal Movement
said that 'Young Liberals, as young Australians, see our nation's future
as a republic' and that 'Our Constitution must recognise Australia's identity
into the 21st century and beyond.' They said that they hoped that 'the
parliamentary party will now reconsider its position and support the republic'.(217)
28 August 1993 The NSW Treasurer, Peter Collins,
said it was Australia's destiny to become a republic. 'Australians should
be embarrassed by the "distant devotion of Anglophiles" to the British
monarchy, Mr Collins said. The rest of the world must find it bizarre
that Australians were resisting their "natural and inevitable destiny"
to form a republic.'(218)
30 August 1993 The Liberal Party Federal Council
refused to allow party members a conscience vote on the republic and said
that:
it had confidence in Australia's existing constitutional
system, but that no Australian institution was immutable. While entering
into the debate constructively we are totally opposed to the hidden
agenda that Labor has in supporting the move to a republic, including
its long-term plans to undermine the power of the states, to abolish
the Senate, change the flag, and eliminate the reserve power of the
Governor-General, the motion declared.(219)
30 August 1993 Mr Keating said that he was not
interested in becoming president. 'It's a position I would never accept,'
he said. 'Having been Prime Minister, it would not be right to look over
another PM's shoulder. Such delusions would only compromise my effectiveness
in trying to spirit this change through.'(220)
30 August 1993 Author Tom Keneally, actor Kym
Wilson and designer Jenny Kee 'launched' the wattle as an Australian Republican
Movement symbol in the Royal Botanic Gardens.(221)
31 August 1993 The ACTU congress supported the
Federal Government's push for Australia to become a republic and called
for unions to play an active role in the republican debate.(222)
7 September 1993 On the eve of Prime Minister
Keating's visit to Britain, senior British sources made it clear that
the republican debate was a matter for Australia and that they hoped the
visit would strengthen ties between the two countries.(223)
9 September 1993 The Labor Premier of South Australia,
Lynn Arnold, announced the State Government's support for a Republic of
Australia and support for a republican system in the State.(224)
13 September 1993 The Governor-General was interviewed
by former Prime Minister Bob Hawke and asked about whether the way the
position of President was filled would have 'a considerable significance
on the likely discharge of the position?' Mr Hayden replied:
Absolutely. I will risk my arm by going further as
Governor-General, and say this: the present system works well. It
allows us to have stable government in this country because the head
of state is aware of the restraints under which he must function.
They are understood all round and they have worked since Federation
quite effectively. If we move away from that and there is no restraint,
then my apprehension would be that we could go through periods-intense
periods sometimes-of quite unstable government. Now I am sure that
the people who are interested at a policy making level in the direction
of a Republic, are aware of this because it is obvious. But there
is a potential obstruction to transferring the system from what it
is now, to the same sort of system with a President as head of state,
appointed in the same way as now. And that is that overwhelmingly
the opinion polls show that the public-between 70 and 80 per cent
of them, which is much higher than those who want a Republic-want
to select a President themselves. That is inherently a problem.(225)
15 September 1993 A survey of federal parliamentarians
found that 66 per cent favoured a republic, including 98 per cent of the
ALP and 26 per cent of the Coalition. The survey also recorded 60 per
cent of voters in all States supported a republic including a majority
in all States.(226)
18 September 1993 Prime Minister Keating had an
audience with the Queen at Balmoral Castle. He issued a press release
which stated that he had:
explained to Her Majesty that, notwithstanding the
deep respect and warm affection felt towards her by the Australian
people, there was a growing feeling that Australia should make the
necessary constitutional changes to allow the appointment of an Australian
head of state. I said such a move was seen as necessary to establish
clearly Australia's identity as an independent nations...The Australian
Government's view was that, if approved by the Australian people at
a referendum, it would be appropriate for Australia to become a republic
by the centenary of Federation in 2001. I told Her Majesty that, in
such a situation, Australia would remain a member of the Commonwealth
of Nations, and that the Australian people would warmly welcome visits
to Australia by Her Majesty as Head of the Commonwealth and as the
Queen of the United Kingdom. Her Majesty authorised me to say that
she would, of course, act on the advice of her Australian Ministers,
as she always has, and on any decision made by the Australian people.(227)
27 September 1993 At the end of a two week overseas
trip, Mr Keating, said that the Sydney Olympics in September 2000 should
be opened by an Australian head of state. 'I think the world would wonder,
would they not, if Australia's Games are opened by the constitutional
head of another nation,' Mr Keating said on Channel Nine's Sunday
program.(228)
29 September 1993 The Prime Minister announced
that Prince Charles would visit NSW, Tasmania, Western Australia and Queensland
from 25 January 1994. He said that he had issued the invitation for the
visit during his meeting with the Queen at Balmoral.(229)
29 September 1993 The latest Newspoll figures
showed that 46 per cent of Australians favoured a republic, 36 per cent
were against it and 18 per cent were uncommitted.(230)
29 September 1993 The Prime Minister said
in question time that
My views on the flag have been known for a very long
period of time and that is the symbols of this nation and its identity
ought to be clear to all Australians and the rest of the world. And
that's why I believe Australia should move towards an Australian head
of State and, naturally in the course of that, all of the symbols
of our national identity will change with it.(231)
1 October 1993 The Senate passed a citizenship
oath in the following terms:
From this time forward (under God) I pledge my loyalty
to Australia and its people whose democratic beliefs I share whose
rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.
The old pledge was in the following terms
I swear by almighty God that I will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of
Australia, her heirs and successors according to law, and that I will
faithfully observe the laws of Australia and fulfil my duties as an
Australian citizen.(232)
5 October 1993 The Republic Advisory Committee
reported that:
(t)he only constitutional change...required to make
Australia a completely republican system of government is to remove
the monarch...In order to replace the monarch with a republican head
of state, the Constitution would need to be amended in only three
substantive ways:
establishing the office of a new Australian head
of state (including the method of appointment and removal);
providing for the powers of the head of state; and
providing for the States.(233)
The committee concluded that there was much to be said
for a national figure who could represent the nation as a whole, both
to Australians and to the rest of the world.
The committee said that leaving the appointment of the
head of state to the Government of the day is the option which most closely
reflects the current practice but that it may be viewed as a partisan
practice if left to the Prime Minister alone. If the people were involved
through their parliamentary representatives there are a number of issues
to be resolved in relation to voting and the nomination of candidates.
The committee said that while popular election is democratic, it may encourage
the head of state to believe that he or she has a popular mandate to exercise
the powers of that office.
The committee was of the view that if popular election
is chosen as the method of selecting the head of state, then if the effect
of our current conventions and principles of government is to be maintained,
the Constitution should be amended so as clearly to define and delimit
the powers of the head of state.
The committee was of the view that there were no strong
reasons why a new head of state should not continue to exercise the same
kind of 'government' functions on the advice of the Government of the
day as were presently exercised by the Governor-General. However, in order
to eliminate any uncertainty, the constitution should provide that in
the exercise of these powers the head of state acts on ministerial advice.
In relation to the reserve powers the committee said that some attempt
to codify the reserve powers in the interests of political certainty should
be made.
In relation to the States, the committee accepted the
conclusion of the Acting Solicitor-General that in order to minimise legal
debate on these matters it would be sensible for amendments creating a
republic to deal specifically with the position of the States. The committee
concluded that Australia could become a republic and that the States could
be left free to choose their own course.
In an accompanying press release the committee said that
the report 'demonstrates that a republic is achievable without threatening
Australia's cherished democratic traditions'.
5 October 1993 The Prime Minister received the
report of the Republic Advisory Committee (the Turnbull Report). Mr Keating
advised that the Government did not have a timetable for a republic but
hoped to see a republican structure in place by the turn of the century
and that it was essential that people have time to consider the issues.
The Prime Minister also announced the establishment of a small working
party of senior Ministers to consider the issues and develop a paper for
cabinet in the first half of 1994. The working party included Gareth Evans,
Kim Beazley, Michael Lavarch, Graham Richardson, Ros Kelly and Frank Walker.
5 October 1993 Following the release of the Turnbull
report, Opposition leader John Hewson said that the real question was
not how we achieve change but whether such change was either warranted
or desirable.(234)
5 October 1993 The Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy (ACM) issued a press release which described the Turnbull Report
as fundamentally flawed because:
- It presupposes that a republic is the only option to our present monarchy.
- The process of proceeding by committee approved and funded by Mr Keating
was wrong in principle when every citizen's vote is equal to every other!
The musings of the elite are not a substitute for the voice of the people.
- The report is vast in length-far from the simple changes with TIPPEX
we were told were possible, the incidental changes needed are vast,
legally complex and highly contentious, apart from the major question
of, "Why change at all?"
ACM also raised the position of some States that wished
to remain monarchies and said that the 'very length of the report belies
its bland assurances that change is "easy".'(235)
11 October 1993 A poll published in the Bulletin
magazine found that 48 per cent of people (up three points) believed Australia
should become a republic, 42 per cent (up six points) opposed such a change
and 10 per cent were undecided.(236)
23 October 1993 Addressing the Commonwealth leaders
in Limassol, the Queen said:
Nowadays, I have enough experience, not least in
racing, to restrain me from laying any money down on how many countries
will be in the Commonwealth in 40 years time, who they will be, and
where the meeting will be held. I will certainly not be betting on
how many of you will have the head of the Commonwealth as your head
of State. I suppose that the only reasonably safe bet is that there
will be three absentees - Prince Phillip, Britannia and myself.(237)
The Queen also said:
In a family of 50 [nations], it is hardly surprising
if some of you have constitutional problems at home to resolve. To
those who have I wish you well.(238)
24 October 1993 A Herald Sun survey found
that 77 per cent of readers were against Australia becoming a republic
and 23 per cent were in favour.(239)
3 November 1993 Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy wrote to the Prime Minister attaching a legal opinion by Sir
Harry Gibbs which questioned some of the assumptions of the Turnbull Report.
The opinion was also signed by Justice Ken Handley of the NSW Court of
Appeal, ex-Supreme Court Justices Jack Lee and David Yeldam, Professor
Ivan Shearer and other members of the Legal Committee of Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy. In Sir Harry's opinion, the Turnbull report was
wrong to suggest that the legal complexities of becoming a republic were
readily soluble. The opinion states that abolishing the monarchy in all
the States would require a change in the Australia Act which would require
the agreement of all the States which would be almost impossible to obtain.
Sir Harry also said that there was 'another, deeper question of political
principle at stake'-The Australian people agreed to federate under the
Crown and if that bond is to be extinguished 'there must be a new agreement
to unite'.(240)
6 November 1993 Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations, John Howard, addressed the Samuel Griffiths Society Conference
in Fremantle. He said
Paul Keating is the first Australian Prime Minister
to openly and consistently advocate turning Australia into a republic.
He is Australia's best known republican.
Therefore, his views on the subject and the nature
of his participation in the debate are crucial. Suggestions that the
republican debate be de-politicised are both naive and illogical.
This is all the more so as the Prime Minister has
sought since this debate began, to politicise Australian patriotism...
It is neither reactionary nor old-fashioned to adopt
the Burkean view that institutions should not be discarded unless
they have clearly failed...
Although the republican momentum has slowed, it would
be foolish to think for a moment that the debate has been won.
I suspect it has entered a long, lethargic stage.
That is worse news for republicans than for those opposed to change.
Australians no longer see the change to a republic
as a simple thing without risk. There is greater recognition of the
complexity of change...
As we move to the next phase of the debate, there
are two lines of argument which the defenders of the present Constitution
should further emphasise and develop.
The first of these is the simple and positive argument
that the present arrangements for a head of state deliver better than
any alternative available under a republic a politically neutral head
of state...
The other argument which should be more strenuously
developed is to draw attention to the way in which an almost ritualistic
use of the external affairs power by the present government is bit
by bit handing over Australian sovereignty to foreign committees and
institutions.(241)
14 November 1993 Senator Rod Kemp asked Senator
Gareth Evans whether the Government planned to make Australia a republic
by 2000. Senator Evans replied that 'It is still the plan of the Government
to generate a sensible and intelligent debate on it and to encourage others
to do likewise, with that (change by 2000) being the result that we hope
will emerge from it, but we will have to wait and see.'(242)
17 November 1993 The Australian reported
that Justice Michael Kirby, President of the NSW Court of Appeal, at the
launch of the South Australian Council of Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy, said that a republic could cause a destabilising tension between
president and prime minister instead of the prime minister being the 'undisputed
top dog'. Justice Kirby rejected the 'inevitability' of a republic and
'the call back into the bosom of primitive South Seas nationalism...it
is so passe.'
19 November 1993 The Minister for Immigration
and Ethnic Affairs, Senator Nick Bolkus, argued that it was inevitable
that Australia would become a republic. The inevitability was based on
the changing world environment and the fundamental change that had taken
place in Australia through immigration.(243)
28 December 1993 The Morgan poll showed that 44
per cent of Australians thought Australia should become a republic (down
eight points since April), 48 per cent wanted a monarchy (up 10 points)
and eight per cent were undecided (down two points).(244)
26 January 1994 Prince Charles, who had arrived
in Sydney for a tour on 24 January, gave an Australia Day speech. He said
that whether Australia became a republic or not was something only Australians
could decide. He said it was not surprising there were those who would
wish for a change in Australia's institution, adding 'and perhaps they
are right'. 'By the very nature of things it is not surprising that there
are differing views-some people will doubtless prefer the stability of
a system that has been reasonably well tried and tested over the years,
while others will see real advantages in doing things differently,' he
said. 'The point I want to make here, and for everyone to be perfectly
clear about, is that this is something which only you-the Australian people-can
decide. Personally, I happen to think that it is the sign of a mature
and self-confident nation to debate those issues and to use the democratic
process to re-examine the way in which you want to face the future'.(245)
7 February 1994 Prince Charles's private secretary,
Commander Richard Aylard, said that 'The prince would not regard it in
any way as a personal failure or tragedy if [Australians] do vote for
a republic.'(246)
17 February 1994 Labor frontbencher
Kim Beazley, in the inaugural Sir John Monash Lecture at Monash University,
said that the debate needed to focus on the functions of the head of state,
that there were strong arguments that the reserve powers should be codified
and that '[w]e need a more broadly based procedure to select our Governor-General'
which involved some more direct expression of national opinion.(247)
31 March 1994 The new head of Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy, Kerry Jones, called on Australian women to join
the fight to retain the Queen as head of state.(248)
9 April 1994 Mr Justice Terry Higgins of the Federal
and ACT Supreme Courts said that the introduction of a republic was possible
by legislative amendment of the Crown Act, replacing references to the
Queen, the Crown and the Governor-General with another office holder.
Justice Higgins said that while such legislation was possible, it would
create a furore and would be politically unacceptable. 'It would be preferable
to do it by referendum and constitutional amendments,' he said.(249)
15 April 1994 The federal Attorney-General, Michael
Lavarch, suggested that the rules governing the monarchy breached human
rights, in that royal succession discriminated against women by favouring
the oldest male child over older female children and the rule that the
monarch should be a member of the Church of England discriminated on religious
grounds. The national convenor of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy,
Lloyd Waddy, QC, said that Mr Lavarch had raised 'old issues' settled
by popular vote at Federation.(250)
16 May 1994 The ACT Opposition Leader, Kate Carnell,
called for a two-part referendum on the republic. The first question would
be 'Do you want the present constitutional monarchy or change to a federal
republic?' The second question would ask how people wanted the head of
state chosen: popular election, two-thirds of a federal joint sitting
or two-thirds of a joint federal and state parliamentary sitting. She
thought a republic was inevitable and objected to the present religious
and sex-discrimination in the selection of the present head of state.(251)
23 May 1994 Alexander Downer became Opposition
Leader, defeating Dr Hewson at a special meeting of the Parliamentary
party.
27 May 1994 The Opposition Leader, Alexander Downer,
told the SBS 'Dateline' program that:
The reason I'm not in favour of a republic is that
the change from our existing system to a republic would just, frankly,
be far too complex. I don't think in the end it will be easy at all...to
rewrite the Australian Constitution. If it is ever to happen, I don't
think a Labor Government would ever find it easy to do. That's why,
if you look at the history of constitutional reform in Australia,
it's the Liberal Party not the Labor Party that's delivered it.(252)
15 June 1994 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating,
said that he did not think the issues of changing the flag and the republic
had to go together. 'I have got an opinion on the flag but I don't have
a plan for the flag,' Mr Keating said on Nine Network's A Current Affair.(253)
27 June 1994 Prince Charles said that he would
rather be seen as 'the defender of faith' than 'defender of the faith'.
On the 25th anniversary of his investiture as Prince of Wales, he said
'I happen to believe that the Catholic subjects of the sovereign are as
important as Protestants, not to mention the Islamic, Hindu and Zoroastrian'.(254)
30 June 1994 London newspapers proclaimed doom
for the Royal Family as a result of Prince Charles admitting that he had
cheated on his wife, the Princess of Wales. The Executive Director of
Australians for Constitutional Monarch, Tony Abbott expressed disappointment
with Prince Charles's comments but dismissed the idea that Royal misdeeds
had an impact on the republican debate. Support for the institution was
not the same as supporting the office-holder, he said.(255)
4 July 1994 Andrew Parker a former advisor
to Dr Hewson, confirmed that the Liberal Party had a secret cell of 100
members called the New Republic who were dedicated to opposing the official
pro-monarchy party line in favour of an Australian republic. The group
was said to be working closely with the chief executive officer of the
Australian Republican Movement, Mark Ryan, on ways to encourage high profile
'closet Liberal republicans' to come out and voice their support for a
republic.(256)
6 July 1994 The Australian Liberal Students Federation
confirmed the commitment of the Liberal Students for the present constitutional
arrangements and said that their organisation represented more than three
times the number of NSW Young Liberals in the State than the NSW Young
Liberals.(257)
6 July 1994 Former Liberal leader John Hewson
denounced internal criticism of Liberal republicans as 'McCarthy-like'
and reminiscent of a 'Gestapo state', describing suggestions that they
were disloyal as ridiculous.(258)
6 July 1994 Mr Downer said he was happy to debate
the constitutional changes required to establish an Australian republic
but that he did not think such changes were worth the bother or the effort.(259)
6 July 1994 It was reported that more than half
of the NSW Liberal Ministry backed the push for an Australian republic
or considered it inevitable. In a Herald survey of the 20 members
of the Cabinet, only Ethnic Affairs Minister Michael Photios openly supported
retaining the monarchy.(260)
7 July 1994 It was further reported that more
than half the Liberals in the federal shadow Cabinet appeared to believe
that Australia would inevitably become a republic. More than half of the
South Australian Cabinet either supported a republic or believed it was
inevitable, the Tasmanian Cabinet was evenly divided, the West Australian
Cabinet was unanimously opposed to a republic. In Victoria only the Premier
and two ministers were prepared to express an opinion, and that was to
oppose a republic.(261)
7 July 1994 Opposition leader Alexander Downer
reaffirmed that the Opposition was prepared to debate any detailed proposal
by the Federal Government for a republic. But he did not accept the inevitability
of it happening and was personally opposed to the change. Mr Downer said
the constitution had delivered extraordinary political stability and the
change which would be necessary to establish a republic would create massive
upheaval and division.(262)
8 July 1994 The ACT Liberal leader, Ms Kate Carnell,
accused the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy of using threatening
tactics against her because she was perceived as being pro-republican.
Ms Carnell described herself as an emotional republican but an intellectual
constitutional monarchist. It was suggested that Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy would vote against her in the ACT election if she did not support
the monarchy. Ms Carnell said the debate about a republic had been hijacked
by Mr Keating in an attempt to centralise power. 'Hence, although I maintain
an open mind on the question of a republic, I would vote no to a Keating
style republic', she said.(263)
9 July 1994 It was reported that the Government's
blue-print for a republic was not going to be available for up to five
years. Instead the Government's response to the Turnbull report was to
be a discussion paper that canvassed options and was due for release before
the end of the year. The aim of the discussion paper would be to stimulate
debate.(264)
9 July 1994 Mr Downer said that the Turnbull report
only put forward a range of options for a republic but made no specific
recommendation and that Mr Keating was apparently planning to produce
yet more options. Mr Downer said that Mr Keating 'must reveal his real
agenda for a republic to Australians.'(265)
9 July 1994 Former Victorian Premier Sir Rupert
Hamer launched the Australian Republican Movement branch in Ballarat,
the first outside the capital cities. He said that he was 'on public record
as believing that Australia will eventually have its own head of state.(266)
11 July 1994 Opposition Leader Alexander Downer
was quoted as saying that 'With greater maturity you understand that it
[the Royal family] is not the issue'. 'The issue is the constitution.
They're irrelevant to it. That is a red herring.' He was also quoted as
saying 'The Queen of England doesn't mean anything to most people in Australia.
"Quaint, nice woman and all that, but English"'. Mr Downer subsequently
denied that he had described the Queen as quaint and said 'the Governor-General
is the de facto head of state of the country and the Queen is only in
a very theoretical sense the head of state...This is a debate about rewriting
the Australian Constitution. It will, in the end, be a choice between
our present constitution and a rewritten constitution. It's not a debate
about the Royal family or the personalities of the Royal family.'(267)
12 July 1994 Prime Minister Paul Keating said
that Mr Downer had failed to stand by his view that the monarchy was 'the
foundation stone' of the constitution".(268)
13 July 1994 The Australian Democrats called for
the republican debate to be broadened to include a shake-up in power sharing
between all levels of governments and redrawing of state boundaries. After
a poll of members, Democrats Leader Cheryl Kernot declared the party was
officially pro-republican. She said that an Australian head of state should
be elected by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Parliament to prevent
a partisan figure from winning the position through popular election.(269)
18 July 1994 The federal Coalition said that it
would not unveil any policy on a republic until after the Prime Minister
released details of his own plans for constitutional change.(270)
25 July 1994 Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser
suggested that a republic was inevitable. He cited as reasons the behaviour
of the heirs to the British throne and the attitude of young Australians.
He said that the Australian Constitution would need to be almost entirely
rewritten if the country became a republic but that this was no reason
to shy away from the issue.(271)
31 July 1994 The NSW Division of the Liberal Party
passed a motion reaffirming support for the 1993 Federal Council resolution
on the Constitution/Republic. That resolution expressed respect and confidence
in the existing constitutional system which 'has worked extremely well
and delivered political stability to Australia for nearly a century'.
The Council said that they would enter into and be fully involved in the
debate but that the Labor Party has put the question of a republic on
the national agenda without making a compelling case for change and that
it is the Government's responsibility to provide a compelling case against
the existing arrangements and an equally compelling case for any alternative.(272)
1 August 1994 The Opposition spokesman on Industrial
Relations, John Howard, said that the republic was a federal issue and
the actions of State Liberals should not undermine those of the Federal
Coalition. He said that those who supported changing the constitution
could argue within the party forums that the party should change its policy,
but that once the policy was set they were obliged to assent to it.(273)
6 August 1994 In a speech to Melbourne University
students, Prime Minister Keating said that Australia needed an appropriate
head of state who stood unambiguously for Australia, and who stood for
the things Australians believed in. He said that in the 1950's the British
monarchy constituted a significant element of Australia's national sentiment
and national cohesion and that the British monarchy commanded great respect,
affection and loyalty as Australian head of state.
But there is no denying that the British monarchy
no longer commands that respect, affection and loyalty...It is equally
true that our interests have grown increasingly away from those of
Great Britain and that the proportion of our population who have come
from non-English -speaking backgrounds has dramatically increased.
And it is just as true that these trends will continue.(274)
17 August 1994 The Australian Constitutional
Monarchy, published by Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy was
launched. The book, edited by Gareth Grainger and Kerry Jones, contained
essays by the President of the NSW Court of Appeal Justice Michael Kirby,
a former Chief Justice of the High Court Sir Harry Gibbs, former Queensland
Senator Neville Bonner and others.
22 August 1994 NSW Young Liberals passed three
motions urging consideration and debate about a republic at their national
convention.(275)
29 August 1994 Former Opposition leader Dr John
Hewson said that the Liberal Party would become irrelevant unless it constructively
considered the possibility of constitutional reform including changing
the head of state. He said that under the influence of John Howard and
NSW Liberal backbencher Tony Abbott, there was 'basically a nod and a
wink to say we ain't moving on constitutional reform...Maybe we can put
up alternatives to Keating on the republic. If we take a hard-line absolute
defence of the monarchy, we will be seen as irrelevant in Australia.'(276)
30 August 1994 South Australian Liberal Senator
Baden Teague became the first Liberal during the present debate to use
Parliament to call for an Australian head of state. He said:
I strongly believe that we should see a constitutional
change that would see an Australian head of state. Accordingly I think
it is quite inappropriate that Australia has as head of state, a foreigner,
a person who is not a citizen of Australia and who has prior allegiances
to the United Kingdom or in fact a range of allegiances to some 12
or 14 countries, he said. The time has come, I believe, for an Australian
citizen to be the head of state of Australia and for that person to
have no other allegiances but to Australia. In that way, our national
symbol, vested in the head of state, will be directly reflecting our
independence and sovereignty as the Australia nation.(277)
1 September 1994 The National President of the
ALP, Mr Barry Jones, told the National Press Club that the 'minimalist
republic' was 'dead and buried' 18 months ago and that he wanted a bolder
recipe in which the Constitution was amended essentially to reflect the
reality of the exercise of power.'(278)
7 October 1994 Dame Joan Sutherland addressed
a lunch organised by Australians for Constitutional Monarchy and said:
I was brought up having a British passport and it
upsets me that I don't have a British passport now...When I go to
the post office to be interviewed by a Chinese or an Indian-I'm not
particularly racist-but I find it ludicrous, when I've had a passport
for 40 years'. She said I think it would be a great shame to go to
all that trouble of changing to a republic to find that it doesn't
work. Why bother?(279)
8 October 1994 The Federal Government postponed
until at least early next year, an announcement of its preferred options
for an Australian republic. Mr Keating said that 'pressure of work' meant
that he was unable to deal with the response this year, but vowed to 'say
something about it in the life of this Parliament'.(280)
3 November 1994 According to a Herald Saulwick
poll, 45 per cent of those who intended to vote Liberal at the next election
said they supported an Australian republic within the Commonwealth and
42 per cent supported the retention of the Queen as head of state. Nine
per cent of Liberal voters said they supported a republic outside the
Commonwealth. Fifty-two per cent of National Party voters supported a
republic and 47 per cent supported keeping the monarchy. The poll found
66 per cent support for a republic-either within or outside the Commonwealth,
an increase of three percentage points since the last poll in February.
31 per cent of voters supported the retention of the monarchy, a fall
of four percentage points since February.(281)
10 November 1994 Opposition Leader Alexander Downer
said that:
(W)e believe in holding a 'People's Convention' where
Australians will be able to express their views about the future of
our Constitution, and can participate in the progressive evolution
of the Australian Constitution...we would place tremendous importance
on the People's Convention ... and take extraordinarily seriously
any recommendations it came forward with...The only way you will ever
achieve Constitutional change in this country-and we've seen this
since 1901 ...is by building a national consensus. And that is precisely
what we're proposing to do in relation to the evolution of our Constitution...I'll
announce the details of how the Constitutional Convention will work
in the fullness of time which will be towards the, or at the end of
next week...(282)
11 November 1994 The Leader of the National Party
said the party would continue to stand in strong defence of the Australian
Constitution, against the government's plans for a republic.
There are certainly aspects of our Constitution which
deserve review-the foreign affairs powers of the Commonwealth in regard
to international treaties for a start-but that is a long way from
making wholesale change to a republic, Mr Fischer said. Nor should
we allow ourselves to be sidelined in silly arguments about the behaviour
of the Royal Family. There is a legitimate place for debate and discussion
about our Constitution as we approach its centenary, but it is a domestic
debate, Mr Fischer said.(283)
19 November 1994 The Leader of the Opposition,
Alexander Downer, announced further details of his proposal for a constitutional
convention. If the Coalition were elected, the convention would be elected
in 1997 to 'conduct a 100 year review of the Australian Constitution'.
Half of its delegates would be elected by the community and the other
half appointed 'by virtue of the elected positions that they already hold'.
Special encouragement would be given to young people, women and people
of ethnic background to stand. The convention would be asked to look at
the role of the head of state in the constitution, including implications
of change for the role of the States; the allocation of legislative and
executive powers and functions between Federal and State Governments,
including areas of overlap and duplication: the use of the external affairs
power, and four-year terms. Mr Downer promised that a coalition government
would put significant recommendations approved by a broad consensus of
the convention to a referendum but he noted that the Government would
'reserve the right to campaign for or against any referendum proposal'.
He also said that in advancing the proposal 'we are in no way changing
our current policy in relation to Mr Keating's proposal for a republic'.(284)
24 November 1994 Malcolm Fraser wrote that:
It is idle to pretend that the recent difficulties
surrounding the Royal Family have not had a deep impact on the family's
standing within Australia...The young Royals have a demonstrated ability
to achieve publicity in ways that do not enhance their standing within
Australia and which could, in an untimely way, have a dramatic and
adverse effect on a referendum vote.(285)
12 January 1995 The Young Liberal Movement, at
their national convention, defeated a motion supporting a constitutional
monarchy and supported a motion urging the federal Liberal Party to put
forward their preferred model for a future republic.(286)
17 January 1995 The West Australian constitutional
committee reported that a 'minimalist republic' would not be detrimental
to the State and that secession was not the answer to the West's problems
with Canberra.(287)
26 January 1995 An Age AGB McNair Australia
Day poll, revealed that most people would not support Australia becoming
a republic if they were unable to elect the head of state. The poll found
52 per cent of people favoured a republic, 38 per cent opposed a republic
and 11 per cent were undecided.(288)
30 January 1995 John Howard became Leader of the
Opposition after Alexander Downer stood aside.
17 February 1995 The Leader of the Opposition,
John Howard, agreed that the issue was in a state of flux. 'If we had
a referendum tomorrow I would still vote no to a change. If we had a referendum
in five years' time well you'll have to come to The Lodge in five years'
time and ask me how I vote, I just don't know.' Mr Howard said he accepted
that the idea of an Australian head of state was a totemic issue for many
people. 'Now if there comes a time when most Australians clearly felt
comfortable with a republic, I will accept that with the greatest of goodwill
because it is what my fellow Australians want and I will be quite happy
with that. I am not going to slash my wrists if it occurs.'(289)
10 March 1995 In Bonn, Prime Minister Keating
expressed his preference for a system in which the head of state is elected
by Parliament rather than by the people.(290)
11 March 1995 Leader of the National Party Tim
Fischer said that he supported an Australian constitutional monarchy 'but
also having a convention ahead of any referendum.' Mr Fischer said that
'The make-up of Australia means any president appointed or elected by
the cocoon of Canberra will face the risk of being despised. Australia's
size requires a people elected president'. 'I personally favour an elected-by-the-people
ceremonial president, not withstanding the double mandate concerns.'(291)
13 March 1995 Democrat Leader Senator Kernot said
that the Federal Parliament should select the President by an election
of both houses of Federal Parliament (by a two thirds majority) from a
short list drawn up with the involvement of the public.(292)
17 March 1995 Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett said
constitutional change was inevitable and might even be appropriate. He
declared his support for a German method of electing a president by Members
of Parliament. He said that he was still aligned with monarchists but
'that's not to say that I wouldn't be prepared to change to something
else if something else came along'.(293)
17 March 1995 Mr Fischer stated that in the context
of the constitutional debate, he preferred a largely ceremonial president
directly elected by the people. That in no way was an admission 'that
a republic is inevitable. I remain wedded to support for the existing
"Australian constitutional monarchy"-a phrase that needs to be understood
as representing the totality of a unique and very successful system of
government.'(294)
18 March 1995 Mr Kennett said that he supported
the present constitutional system and that his earlier comments in support
of the German republican model had been misinterpreted.(295)
25 May 1995 The Opposition Leader, John Howard,
said he did not believe the republic debate would be a big election issue.
'Liberals who want a republic are not going to change their vote over
it and Labor people who want the present arrangement won't change their
vote either,' Mr Howard said.(296)
7 June 1995 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating,
gave a speech entitled 'An Australian Republic The Way Forward' to Parliament.
The speech was televised nationally. In the speech the Prime Minister
said that in the government's view
- Australia should become a republic by the year 2001 and Australia's
'head of state' should be an Australian.
- The key proposal advanced by the Government for the establishment
of a federal republic was the election of a federal President. Other
related proposals included:
- the president to be elected by a two thirds majority vote in a joint
sitting of both Houses of Parliament on the nomination of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet
- the question of a republic to be put to the people in 1998 or 1999
- the president be appointed for a non-renewable term of office of
five years
- the president be an Australian citizen of voting age who may not
hold any other remunerated position while in office. Serving Commonwealth,
State and Territory parliamentarians would be excluded from nomination
and former Commonwealth, State and Territory parliamentarians would
be excluded from nomination until five years had passed since departure
from parliament
- the president to be subject to removal by a two-thirds majority
vote in a joint sitting of Parliament, with either House having the
right to initiate the joint sitting by passing a motion supported
by a simple majority of members
- the president perform ceremonial and representational functions
currently performed by the Queen and the Governor-General
- the reserve powers currently possessed by the Governor-General (eg.
powers to appoint and dismiss the prime minister and to refuse to
force a dissolution of the lower house of parliament or a simultaneous
dissolution of both houses) remain with the president. The Constitution
would provide that the constitutional conventions governing the exercise
of these powers would continue.
- The Government argued that the president should be an Australian and
elected by a two thirds majority of both Houses of Parliament because:
- the election of a President who is an Australian expresses a desire
to have a 'head of state' who is an Australian
- the election of a President who is an Australian will make clear
and unambiguous Australia's independence and responsibility for our
own affairs
- an Australian 'head of state' can embody Australia's modern aspirations,
cultural diversity, evolving partnerships with Asia and the Pacific,
quest for reconciliation with Aboriginal Australians, ambition to
create a society in which women have equal opportunity, equal representation
and equal rights
- the process will oblige the Government to nominate non-partisan
candidates
- it will require consultation with non-Government parties to ensure
the candidate has bi-partisan support
- it will avoid parliamentary debate on the relative merits of competing
candidates, which could discourage appropriate candidates from accepting
nomination
- popular election would guarantee that an Australian 'head of state'
would be a politician, the major parties would run candidates and
those candidates would be backed by large party organisations with
the funds necessary to run nationwide campaigns.
7 June 1995 The Leader of the Australian Democrats,
Senator Cheryl Kernot, issued a media briefing note setting out the Democrats
views on a Republic as follows.
- The Democrats supported Australia becoming a republic and believe
the 'head of state' should be an Australian.
- The Democrats argued that the president should be elected by a two
thirds majority of both Houses of Parliament for the following reason:
- If the reserve powers (eg. powers to appoint and dismiss the prime
minister and to refuse and force a dissolution of the lower house
of parliament or a simultaneous dissolution of both houses) are to
be retained the Democrats support election of a President by a two
thirds majority of parliamentary democracy.
- The election of a President by a two-thirds majority of both Houses
of Parliament was not the Democrats preferred position. The Democrats
believe:
- the most appropriate method of election for a President depended
to a large extent on the role and powers of the President
- the powers of the President should be codified
- a process should be developed under which all Australians could
make nominations to a short-list from which Parliament would then
choose the President
- a petition system should be instituted under which a candidate could
be nominated by no less than 25 000 and no more than 40 000
eligible voters
- there should be a Bill of Rights incorporated into the Constitution,
an environmental head of power and the Government should fund the
Constitutional Centenary Foundation to lead public debate over the
next four years.
8 June 1995 The leader of the Opposition, John
Howard, put the Oppositions' position on a republic. In his speech to
Parliament he put the following proposals:
- The establishment of a 'Peoples Convention' in 1997 which would examine
such issues as:
- whether or not Australia should become a republic
- the role of the 'head of state' in the Australian Constitution,
including implications of change for the role of the States
- allocation of legislative and executive powers and functions between
federal and state governments, including areas of overlap and duplication
- whether we should introduce four year instead of three year terms
of Parliament
- the basis upon which new states, in particular the Northern Territory,
would be admitted to the federation
- any other matter which the 'Peoples Convention' members determine.
- The 'Peoples Convention' would consist of:
- 50 per cent of members appointed by the Government of the day, 10
per cent of which would be between 18 and 25 years of age
- 50 per cent elected.
- The arguments put forward by the Coalition for a 'Peoples Convention'
included:
- enabling a range of community views to be properly examined
- gauging the mood for change in the Australian community
- providing a forum which unified rather than divided the community
- allowing the people of Australia to decide the questions, the options
and the referendum; and
- involving all Australian people at the beginning, in the middle
and at the end of the debate process.
- If consensus for change emerged from a 'Peoples Convention', that
consensus would be put to a referendum and promoted by the Government
of the day. If no consensus emerged from the 'Peoples Convention' the
Coalition would go to the people and seek their views on a range of
options.(297)
9 June 1995 The Victorian Premier, Jeff Kennett,
referring to the Coalition's proposed 'people's convention' said that:
he believed a national convention was 'just another
committee'. I have attended many constitutional conventions in my
life over the years and while (there is) a great deal of spirit, camaraderie
and good meals, I am not sure ... they achieve anything, he said.
Just as I respect Mr Howard's honesty and his right to have an opinion
that a convention would be the best way to go, I have got to say to
you honestly that I am not a great committee man and would rather
get on with the deed and produce outcomes.(298)
10 June 1995 Mr Howard, referring to his proposal
to put a referendum for a republic if there was a 'consensus' on that
from the people's convention, said that 'consensus' meant 'a clear majority'.
He said 51 per cent would not be a clear majority but that '60-70 per
cent is obviously a clear majority'. He would not be tied to a particular
figure.(299)
11 June 1995 The National Party leader, Tim Fischer,
said that he would feel 'duty-bound' to facilitate a referendum after
the people's convention. 'There will be no sleight of hand, no stacking
of the convention, no infinite filibuster,' he said. 'In reality, a referendum
is inevitable.'(300)
11 June 1995 Tasmanian Liberal Premier Ray Groom
announced a referendum to be held in 1997 to give Tasmanians an opportunity
to express their views on the issue. Mr Groom said that change was not
a question of if, but when. 'In my view, Australia has reached full adulthood
as a national and must be self-reliant and self-sufficient in every sense,'
he said. 'In due course an Australian will be our head of state...That
will also be reflected in each of the States.'(301)
12 June 1995 Opposition leader John Howard, in
a speech aimed at removing 'misconceptions' about his plan, said that
his proposed people's convention would deal with the question of a head
of state as its prime task. If the convention was unable to arrive at
a consensus he would 'go to the people to seek their views on a range
of options'. These would include the retention of the present constitutional
arrangements, a popularly elected president, a president chosen by a parliamentary
process (as proposed by the prime minister), and possibly another option
whereby a head of state could be chosen by some other process. The multiple
choice plebiscite would be held to determine the community's preference.
This would be followed by a formal referendum on the central question.(302)
Mr Howard also said that if the convention reached a consensus on a change
to a republic, a coalition government would campaign for it in a referendum.(303)
21 June 1995 The Liberal Premier of South Australia,
Dean Brown, said South Australia would face a referendum within two to
three years on the State's transition within a republic, including the
role of a State figurehead. He said 'I've indicated for the last two years
that I believe Australia becoming a republic is inevitable and when it
occurs and how it occurs is in the hands of Australians.' 'If Australia
is to become a republic then I believe the States should make their decision
(on a head of State) at the same time. We can't afford to have an absolute
mish-mash with the States being under a monarchy while having a republic
at the federal level.'(304)
4 July 1995 The head of the Anglican Church of
Australia, Archbishop Keith Rayner, said that the republic debate was
'firmly on the national agenda' and a republic appeared inevitable. 'If
we are to become a republic, and I think the signs are that this will
happen, I agree with the view that the president should not be chosen
by popular election because that would inevitably politicise the office'.(305)
5 July 1995 Sir Maurice Byers QC wrote that 'if
both Cabinet and president are to be elected and the president's mandate
is the more direct, irreconcilable opposites are likely to yield chaos.'(306)
30 August 1995 A former Liberal Prime Minister,
Malcolm Fraser, a former supporter of Australia retaining its ties to
the monarchy, wrote in his newspaper column that:
Emotionally, I have been attached to the monarchy
because I believe nations should protect their past and build on it
for the future. For a variety of reasons, which relate more to what
has happened in Britain than what has happened in Australia I now
accept that a republic is inevitable and right.(307)
29 September 1995 The ACTU passed a resolution
at the second day of the biennial ACTU congress endorsing the Federal
Government's model for a republic and calling for widespread debate on
issues such as the preamble and the rights of indigenous people before
a referendum in 1998 or 1999.(308)
26 October 1995 The Governor-General, Bill Hayden
warned that:
the Federal Government plan for a republic had 'very
serious pitfalls' which might threaten effective government. Mr Hayden
said 'Imagine a president who had been elected who becomes an opportunist
populist and who is able to cobble together sufficient support in
the Parliament to avoid being thrown out and yet have a majority of
the Parliament opposed to his conduct and he then sets upon a course
of wilful behaviour which makes the proper process of government very
difficult to sustain. You could have a difficult situation...we need
to think a lot about the implications of what we are talking about.
We need to be sure if we do anything that it is workable and doesn't
have serious defects'. Mr Hayden also said that an elected president
might cost more than a Governor-General because of the likelihood
of more frequent overseas travel. In his time as Governor-General,
spending on the office had fallen by 3 per cent a year in real terms-inconsistent
with someone who is self-indulgent, living high on the neck of the
hog, wallowing in self gratification.(309)
3 November 1995 Journalist Brian Toohey estimated
the savings which would flow from a decision not to replace the Governor-General
with a president and if State Governors were not replaced by State Presidents,
as approximately $24 million.(310)
4 November 1995 The Prime Minister, in a speech
to the Australian Republican Movement, said that Britain's support of
nuclear testing by France in the Pacific showed Australia's and Britain's
interests 'are often very different and even fundamentally opposed'. 'The
lesson to be learned from it is not an anti-British one but one about
the inappropriateness of Australia having a head of state who is not one
of us,' he said.(311)
5 November 1995 The executive director of Australians
for Constitutional Monarchy, Kerry Jones, said that Mr Keating's comments
linking Britain's refusal to oppose French nuclear testing in the Pacific
to the need for a republic drew attention to the dangers of an all-powerful
political president.(312)
9 November 1995 An Age editorial entitled
'Revisiting 1975 on the road to a republic' asked how should a republican
constitution deal with the possibility of parliamentary deadlock? And
where should the line be drawn between the principles of representative
and responsible government on the one hand and the rights of the Senate
as a house of review on the other? If we do not wish the Senate to retain
the right to block or vote against money bills, should we rely on the
prevailing convention or write this into the constitution? The editorial
concluded that for 20 years these questions have been consigned to the
too-hard basket but that we cannot make the transition to a republic without
resolving them.(313)
11 November 1995 The Opposition Leader, John Howard,
on the 20th anniversary of the dismissal of the Whitlam Labor government
said that the Prime Minister's model for a republic by 2000 gave the proposed
president more powers than those exercised by the Governor-General Sir
John Kerr in 1975, powers that still divide the community.(314)
14 November 1995 The November issue of Choice
magazine stated that a change to a republic is neither imminent nor
inevitable and that 'It's not just a choice between retaining the monarchy
with the Queen as head of state, or becoming a republic with the president
as head of state. A head of state has powers and how these powers are
exercised is a crucial issue in the debate'.(315)
22 November 1995 Following revelations by the
Princess of Wales about her personal life, the executive director of the
Australian Republican Movement, Michael Ward, said 'There's a lot of interest
in it, but I don't think there is anything specifically pertinent to Australia's
future with a head of state'.(316)
24 November 1995 The Foreign Minister, Senator
Gareth Evans, told a Senate estimates hearing that Governor-General Bill
Hayden had received second-order treatment from the Americans when he
attended the United Nations' 50th anniversary celebrations because he
was not recognised as Australia's effective head of state. '(T)he Americans
simply refused to believe, after checking the question with the British
Embassy, that the Governor-General was the head of state.' Senator Evans
said the constitutional convention under which Australia operated, in
which the Governor-General was the practical head of state, was not understood
overseas.(317)
29 November 1995 A former Governor-General, Sir
Zelman Cowen, delivering the 1995 Sir Robert Menzies Lecture, said that
a 'sea change' had taken place in Australia, turning the tide in his own
mind about the need for a native head of state. He said the central argument
for change was that only a native head of state could ensure that 'primary
and full time commitment' was given to Australia's citizens. He criticised
the idea of direct election of a president on the grounds it would favour
candidates backed by the big political parties and exclude people like
himself and Sir Ninian Stephen.(318)
12 December 1995 The British High Commissioner,
Sir Roger Carrick, said that it was 'none of our business' whether Australia
became a republic and that neither government could allow the 'tabloid
level of comment' to affect the substance of the bilateral relationship.(319)
14 December 1995 Opposition Leader John Howard,
in his fourth 'Headland' speech said that the choice faced by Australia
was not 'between our past and our future, between our history and our
geography. The task is to take with us into the future what is best from
our past, as well as to maximise the potential benefits of our geographic
position.' Mr Howard said that his proposed People's Convention would
provide a calm forum for deliberation. He said 'We are not offering a
republic by stealth. Nor do we believe that government ought to try to
create a stampede. Nor will we erect artificial barriers to prevent the
people expressing their views.'(320)
17 December 1995 Deputy Opposition Leader Peter
Costello said that 'I think that there is a real case, if people really
want to elect the president, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed
to, myself.'(321)
22 December 1995 A cross section of monarchists
and republicans appeared to agree that a divorce of the Prince and Princess
of Wales would be unlikely to influence the country's republic debate.(322)
1 January 1996 The chairman of the Constitutional
Centenary Foundation, Sir Ninian Stephen, released a 'key issues' paper
which raised for debate questions such as 'Should there be a more formal
separation of powers between parliament and government?' 'What should
be the rights and responsibilities of Australian citizens?' 'Should Northern
Territory become a State?' Sir Ninian said that the only aspect of governance
which had been 'debated with any degree of seriousness' in recent years
was 'the republic and whether there should be a wholly Australian head
of State'. 'The same considerations of national identity which underlie
the republic debate justify a fresh look at the rest of the constitutional
system in light of the values and needs of the present,' he said.(323)
17 January 1996 Alan Lees, a 67 year old war veteran
who served two tours of duty in the Korean war, resigned from the RSL
because he would not swear allegiance to 'the Queen of a foreign country'.
Mr Bruce Ruxton defended the league's anti-republican stance and said
that the league 'was not prepared to accept republicans...and its rule
regarding allegiance to the Queen would 'never change'.(324)
17 January 1996 The NSW Premier, Bob Carr, announced
the appointment of a new Governor, Gordon Samuels, a former judge of the
NSW Supreme Court, for four years instead of the usual five. The Governor-designate
would not have to give up his present positions, including chairmanship
of the NSW Law Reform Commission and would not take up residence in Government
House. He would be accommodated instead in a government office suite.
The Governor's revised role would include some ceremonial duties but Mr
Samuels expected that his ceremonial and community duties would be reduced.
Mr Samuels said 'he did not think such tasks were of the first importance.
Mr Carr's changes take the right approach. They involve stripping away
the mystique and the superfluous trimmings, and focusing on the serious
responsibilities of the Governor's position. The pressure will come on
other State to follow suit.'(325)
17 January 1996 The New South Wales Opposition
called for an immediate recall of Parliament and a referendum on the role
of the Governor and Government House following Mr Carr's announcement.(326)
18 January 1996 The Opposition foreign affairs
spokesman, Alexander Downer, said that NSW Premier Bob Carr's decision
to downgrade the Governor's job to a part-time position had national implications.
'Mr Carr has treated the public with complete contempt and has telegraphed
what Mr Keating will do...try to ram through changes he wants to our Constitution
without any consultation.' A spokesman for Mr Keating rejected Mr Downer's
claim saying 'The Prime Minister has no intention of changing in any way
the status or role of the Governor-General or his staffing arrangements,
working conditions or accommodation.'(327)
21 January 1996 National Convenor of Australians
for Constitutional Monarchy, Mr Lloyd Waddy, condemned Prime Minister
Paul Keating's announcement of a plebiscite on the question of a republic
promised to be held within 12 months of the return of a Labor Government.
Mr Waddy stated:
Mr Keating knows that we already have a local constitutional
head of state in the Governor-General, who is nowadays always an Australian,
and who will no doubt open the Olympic Games....If the Prime Minister
were fair dinkum he would ask the following questions of the people:
Do you want to change to a republic? If so:
- Do you want a politician as head of state?
- Do you want to elect that politician yourself or do you want other
politicians (i.e. Parliament) do it for you?
- Do you want the Head of State to have the powers to dismiss a Prime
Minister?
- Do you want the Head of State to have the powers of an American President?
- Do you want the Head of State to be irremovable for 5 years?(328)
24 January 1996 Justice Elizabeth Evatt, former
chief judge of the Family Court, speaking at a pre-Australia Day function
at the Evatt Foundation, said Australia needed to become a republic with
a legislative bill of rights to stop basic human rights violations of
Aborigines. Justice Evatt stated:
It is quite a good thing to analyse in our minds
whether the ceremonial trappings of the office of Governor is something
Australia wants...The focus needs to be on the integrity and independence
of the individual. Why would such a person need all those extra things
that even our elected representatives don't get?...Australia shares
with the United Kingdom not only the monarch but also the doubtful
distinction of being the only Western democracies that have no entrenched
bill of rights.(329)
8 February 1996 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating
said that a vote for Labor was a vote for the republic, while a vote for
John Howard was a vote for the retention of the monarchy.(330)
11 February 1996 Mr Fahey, the Liberal candidate
for the federal seat of Macarthur, said a Coalition federal government
would support the establishment of an Australian republic if the 'mood
of the people' wanted it. He said it was a decision the people, not governments,
must make.(331)
13 February 1996 National Party Senator Ron Boswell
at the National launch of Senate candidates in Brisbane, said:
...a vote for the National Party was a vote to retain
the existing constitutional system and flag. He said 'If the people's
convention calls for a referendum, the National Party will support
one being put to the Australian people...But we will reserve the right
to campaign against the Keating republic idea, not because we are
besotted with the House of Windsor, but because of the uneasy and
significant shifts in our democratic structure which Keating's republic
would entail'. The National Party leader, Tim Fischer, said that regardless
of what happened at the people's convention, a referendum would be
held.(332)
14 February 1996 Mr Keating said that if re-elected
his Government would conduct a plebiscite (a non binding popular vote)
on the single question: 'Do you want an Australian to be Australia's head
of State?' If the plebiscite was passed, a joint parliamentary committee
would frame constitutional changes to be put to the people in a referendum.(333)
14 February 1996 Democrat's leader Senator Cheryl
Kernot said a plebiscite was a good first step to settle, once and for
all, whether the Australian people wanted an Australian as head of state.
The next step, a joint house committee, must include examination of not
just the Prime Minister's model for a republic but other possible options
to be voted on by the people at a referendum. The Democrats stated that
Australians wanted a say in nominating a list of Presidential candidates
from which Parliament could choose and suggested that consideration be
given to the petition system under which a candidate could be nominated,
for example, by no less than 25 000 voters.(334)
15 February 1996 Mr Howard said the Labor Party's
proposal for a plebiscite to determine if Australia becomes a republic
'could lead to the "ludicrous" situation where a plebiscite on whether
there should be an Australian head of state was carried, but a referendum
on Australia becoming a republic was defeated.' He added '...I think (in
that situation) we would look foolish and we would be in some sort of
constitutional limbo.'(335)
15 February 1996 The Prime Minister, Paul Keating,
in his policy speech launching the Labor Party's election campaign said
that 'We believe that an Australian head of state should welcome in the
next century, should open the Olympic Games in the year 2000, should represent
us abroad in this nation's second century.' He also said that 'The Government
never suggested that its model was the only one. We want to see the widest
possible discussion and consultation.'(336)
20 February 1996 An AGB McNair Age Poll found
that 76 per cent of voters said they would like an Australian head of
state but that very few people said that Labor's position on an Australian
head of state would make them more likely to vote for the Government.(337)
1 March 1996 About 500 monarchists rallied at
Government House to continue the fight against the decision of New South
Wales Premier Bob Carr's to alter the role of the Governor and to open
Government House to the public. The Leader of the New South Wales Opposition,
Peter Collins, accepted a petition containing 55 000 signatures and
promised to 'submit the petition to Parliament at the first available
opportunity'.(338)
23 March 1996 Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime
Minister, Senator Nick Minchin, told the Western Australian that
decisions would have to be taken quickly so that the convention could
be held, as promised in 1997. As to the Coalition promise that a consensus
view from the convention would be put to the Australian public at a referendum,
Senator Minchin acknowledged that determining at what point a 'consensus'
had been reached would be a 'prerogative for the Government'.(339)
25 March 1996 National Party Leader and Deputy
Prime Minister Tim Fischer said the Federal Government would push on with
a referendum on whether Australia should become a republic despite National
Party members hoping it was just a bad dream.(340)
9 April 1996 Year 12 students at the First National
Schools Constitutional Convention, organised by the Constitutional Centenary
Foundation, supported a republic with a non-political head of state elected
by a two-thirds majority of parliament. The group supported a fixed term
of five to seven years for the position, although some questions were
raised about whether the term should be reviewable. The delegation of
120 students from 104 schools agreed the role of head of state should
remain ceremonial, although they were split on whether a two-thirds majority
of a joint sitting of parliament should have the power to remove the head
of state. There was some backing for removal by referendum or by the High
Court.(341)
29 April 1996 The National Party's deputy leader,
Mr John Anderson, when asked if he thought Australia should become a republic,
stated:
I think so, you know, at some stage down the road
the Australian people will opt to change.(342)
3 May 1996 The Governor of South Australia, Sir
Eric Neal, said republicans had failed to come up with a convincing reason
to discard the constitutional monarchy.(343)
29 May 1996 A special meeting of Federal Liberal
and National MPs was told that the option of extending the franchise to
17 year olds in a national poll on an Australian republic was being seriously
considered because of the enduring impact on young people of changes to
the Constitution.(344)
30 May 1996 The Prime Minister, Mr Howard, received
solid party room endorsement to proceed with planning for a 1997 People's
Convention to canvass the republic issue. However, there was concern expressed
by a number of MPs about the cost of the convention. This was estimated
at $8 million; and if the poll to elect Convention delegates was conducted
like a normal House of Representatives and half-Senate election, it could
cost $50 million.(345)
3 June 1996 Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime
Minister, Senator Nick Minchin, indicated that the Government was keen
to have the constitutional convention explore a wide range of constitutional
issues, as well as the republic. Senator Minchin stated:
The four-year term is a classic one. Both sides agree
there ought to be four-year terms; it is just the means by which we
achieve that, and maybe we achieve that, and maybe the convention
can play a very constructive role in identifying a sensible solution.(346)
10 June 1996 The head of a South Australian committee
examining the State's transition in the event of the country becoming
a republic, Professor Peter Howell, said it would not be a realistic option
for a State to retain a formal association with the monarchy if the Commonwealth
ceased to be a constitutional monarchy. Professor Howell also said that
new machinery for the appointment and dismissal of State governors must
be put in place at the same time as any republican amendments to the Commonwealth
Constitution.(347)
25 June 1996 In his final parliamentary act before
retiring, Liberal Senator Baden Teague introduced a Private Senator's
Bill, the Constitution Alteration (President of the Commonwealth of Australia)
Bill 1997. The Bill proposed removing references to the Queen, the Crown
and the Governor-General and providing for the appointment and tenure
of a President. (348)
9 July 1996 Australian Democrats Senator Natasha
Stott-Despoja told a Western Australian Republican Movement meeting that
a woman would be ideal as president to represent a commitment to the future.
Senator Stott-Despoja stated:
This would symbolise Australia's move into the next
century as committed to equality between the sexes and to endorsing
women in positions of power.(349)
23 July 1996 Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime
Minister, Senator Nick Minchin, said that the 1997 people's convention
would not go ahead if the Senate rejected or sought substantially to amend
legislation setting it up.(350)
31 July 1996 A Newspoll survey found that a total
of 54 per cent of those surveyed supported a president elected by a two-thirds
majority of both Houses of the Parliament. A majority of Coalition supporters
surveyed, or 51 per cent, were in favour of an Australian head of state,
as opposed to 41 per cent who remained in favour of the Queen. The survey
showed increased support for an Australian head of state, with those in
favour rising from 56 per cent in December 1995 to 63 per cent the previous
weekend. Support for an Australian head of state was strongest among 35
to 49 year olds, with 70 per cent in favour, and lowest among 50 years
and over, with 56 per cent in favour. Men were much more in favour of
an Australian head of state than women, with 68 per cent of men in support
compared with 59 per cent of women.(351)
5 August 1996 A national survey of 300 16 and
17 year olds by the Business Council of Australia showed that all respondents
believed Australia would be a republic by 2010.(352)
9 August 1996 Former Governor-General, Sir Zelman
Cowen, and former Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Anthony Mason,
said citizens should be asked a general question on constitutional reform
before the convention considered the wider issues. They were supported
by constitutional law experts Professor Cheryl Saunders of Melbourne University
and Professor Charles Sampford of Griffith University.(353)
20 August 1996 Coalition Budget did not allocate
specific funds to the Convention.
12 September 1996 New Liberal Senator Alan Eggleston
argued for a republic in his maiden speech.
29 September 1996 Prime Minister John Howard,
while conceding that there is latent support among Australians for the
move to a republic, said Australia would not be a republic for the Sydney
2000 Olympic Games. The Prime Minister stated:
The most important thing is that if there is a change,
it is a uniting event, not a dividing event. The worst thing we could
have is a premature vote on the republic which gave a 51-49 result
either way.(354)
24 October 1996 The South Australian Constitutional
Advisory Commission, appointed by the Brown Government in 1995, completed
its first report into how the State would be affected by the move to a
republic and recommended mechanisms for transition. Recommendations included:
- States must relinquish links with the monarchy and State constitutions
must be simultaneously altered
- Premiers should still appoint State heads, prime ministers should
still appoint Commonwealth head
- The head of state should not be elected by popular vote or Parliament,
and
- Individual State referenda should precede a federal referendum.(355)
22-24 November 1996 Bathurst People's Convention
held. The Convention comprised approximately 200 delegates from local
government, youth and community organisations. The Convention was an initiative
of local community organisations, with help from the Constitutional Centenary
Foundation.(356) Convention recommendations included: Australia become
a republic; an Australian head of state should be appointed by Parliament;
and a preamble to the Constitution should enshrine shared values, recognition
of diversity, protection for the environment and civic rights.(357)
1 December 1996 Justice Kenneth Handley of the
New South Wales Court of Appeal, speaking at a seminar hosted by the Constitutional
Centenary Foundation and the Legal Forum on the Proposed Republic, said
it would be 'irresponsible' for Australia to become a republic by transferring
the Governor-General's 'awesome' powers to a president. Father Frank Brennan,
a Jesuit priest, told the seminar a racist section of the Constitution
should be repealed and a new clause inserted to entrench non-discrimination.
Father Brennan also argued for a preamble to the Constitution acknowledging
prior occupation by Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders and dispossession
of their land.(358)
3 December 1996 An AGB McNair Poll had 55 per
cent of voters supporting a republic under which a new head of state would
fulfil the same responsibilities as the Governor-General. Thirty eight
per cent of voters surveyed were opposed to a republic and 7 per cent
undecided. Support was much stronger among men, at 61 per cent, than for
women, at 49 per cent. Western Australia and New South Wales, which both
registered support below 50 per cent in a September 1995 survey, registered
as the strongest pro-republican States, with support running at 57 per
cent. In Tasmania, the pro-republican vote was 46 per cent.(359)
4 December 1996 Leader of the Australian Democrats,
Senator Cheryl Kernot, moved a motion in the Senate urging the Government
to confirm that it will hold a convention with at least half of the delegates
being elected. Senator Kernot's motion also called on the Government to
hold an indicative poll on the question of Australia's head of state in
conjunction with elections for the people's convention.(360)
4 December 1996 The Leader of the Opposition,
Kim Beazley, announced the federal ALP's position. Mr Beazley outlined
a three part process, namely:
- first, a plebiscite to establish whether or not the Australian people
want an Australian head of state and a republic
- second, because the constitutional process will require an act of
parliament for a referendum, the establishment of an all party committee
of the Parliament which will ultimately have to pass the referendum
proposal and ensure that that all party committee listens to the people,
and
- third, go to a referendum.(361)
14 December 1996 The Prime Minister, Mr Howard,
refused to commit himself to giving Australians a vote on the republic
before the next election, and doubted if there would be the momentum for
change by 2000. Mr Howard said he had never said a plebiscite on the republic
would be held before the next election-only that the people would have
a vote before the turn of the century.(362)
25 January 1997 Mr Howard reflected that currently
the main republican concern was timetabling. In an interview with The
Age Mr Howard stated:
I don't believe a republican system would ever be
better than the system we have got, but I do understand why the symbolism
of it is less relevant to a lot of people now than it used to be...I
don't cop this view that you can just have a direct swap of the reserve
powers from a monarch to a president. It's not as simple as that.
It defies 100 years of history...The dilemma that Australia has is
that we have a system which is very good, but Australians, quite a
number of Australians, feel increasingly uncomfortable with the symbolism
of that system. And you have to make absolutely certain that if you
are to change it, you change to a system which is at least as good,
and that is a lot harder than many of the professional republicans
say....The attitude of the most Anglophile Australian towards the
monarchy now is different from what it used to be....some people may
think the symbolism of it is out of date, the actual system itself
works in a remarkable and contemporary fashion. (363)
25 January 1997 The outgoing Governor of Victoria,
The Hon Richard McGarvie, commented on the need for public education on
the present system and proposed republican models, to enable informed
decision-making. He stated:
I think that the general question whether one prefers
a monarchy or one prefers a republic is not difficult for people because
most people who think about it immediately support one side or the
other because it comes from their sentiment, their background, their
views of the future, their loyalties, their aspirations for the country
and its democracy and that sort of thing....But merely to ask whether
you support a monarchy or a republic is to ask a very vague question...there
are so many types of republic.(364)
27 January 1997 It was reported that a
Cabinet meeting to be held on 28 January 1997, could decide to break an
election promise. Suggestions had been made that the cabinet would drop
an election commitment that half the delegates at the Convention for a
republic would be elected popularly. Other issues to be discussed were
the possible delay of the convention to 1998, and the holding of a plebiscite.
An alternative reportedly to be mooted was that delegates would be elected
by State and Territory Governments and local councils.(365)
28 January 1997 Reports of discussions in the
Federal Cabinet of changes to delegate election to the people's convention
and re-timetabling, produced strong statements by the ARM and republicans.
Professor Peter Doherty, the Australian of the Year, stated:
To me the Queen as head of Australia seems to represent
an imperial past that has little relevance to Australia...since the
fall of Singapore.(366)
29 January 1997 The Federal Cabinet confirmed
a commitment to election promises to both hold the Convention and have
half the delegates popularly elected.
Senator Minchin reportedly had put forward several options
to the Cabinet. These options included dropping the Convention, having
all delegates selected by State, Territorial and State Governments, and
foregoing the convention in favour of a plebiscite.(367)
The Chairman of ARM, Mr Malcolm Turnbull, condemned the
Government's model of the People's Convention, seeing it as a 'delaying
tactic', and said:
A people's convention which is not elected by the
people is an exercise in North Korean Political Science-I mean, it's
a joke...A people's convention is the gathering of representatives
of the people, chosen by the people.(368)
5 February 1997 Prime Minister John Howard formally
confirmed his intention to proceed with a constitutional convention late
in 1997. He recognised that a significant percentage of the population
saw the present system as 'no longer relevant as it used to be...'.He
also remarked that '...[M]y plea to the Australian people is that this
issue not be divisive...If people want the thing properly debated, this
is the best way to do it'. He announced that the Convention will be preceded
by a voluntary postal vote for half the delegates. Other delegates would
be nominated by the Government. Delegates would include a fixed representation
of indigenous groups, ten percent young people (18-24 year olds), and
state, territorial and federal government.
With regard to the nomination of a head of state, Mr
Howard said he envisaged the process would be 'dealt with separately and
first and not allowed to be side-tracked or held back by consideration
of other issues'. (369)
In addition, Mr Howard said the Convention could consider
issues such as a four year term for the House of Representatives, the
admission of new states, and the distribution of legislative and executive
power.(370)
10 February 1997 Prime Minister John Howard announced
the possibility of briefing the Queen on the Republican debate during
his forthcoming visit to Britain saying he would:
...as a matter of courtesy and as my predecessor
did, call on the Queen and discuss these matters with her.
He added:
But I promise the Australian people this: if they
want a republic they will have it, and I will not stand in their way.
I will never allow my personal view on this to interfere with the
emergence of a consensus.(371)
12 February 1997 Western Australian Premier Richard
Court argued: that all States should be equally represented at the Convention
and that it would be inappropriate for two States to account for half
of the elected representatives. Also, Queensland Premier Rob Borbidge
called for equal representation between the States. The remarks of the
Premiers Court and Borbidge were in response to Senator Nick Minchin's
announcement that the Convention would consist of:
|
Elected Delegates
|
Appointed Delegates
|
|
21 NSW
|
20 Federal MPs
|
|
17 Victoria
|
18 for State Parliaments
|
|
13 Qld
|
1 ACT
|
|
9 WA
|
1 NT
|
|
8 SA
|
|
|
6 Tas
|
7 youth
|
|
1 ACT
|
29 Other including Aborigines(372)
|
|
1 NT(373)
|
|
13 February 1997 Coalition backbenchers endorsed
the Government's constitutional convention model. The government has taken
a firm stand in relation to State representation, though it flagged a
possible increase in territorial representatives.
Western Australian Federal member for Stirling, Mr E.
Cameron, pushing for the less populous States to have equal representation
stated:
I fear that providing majority representation to
the more populous States will place greater attention on the membership
and biases of the major States, and ignore the real issue of the future
of our nation's constitution.(374)
17 February 1997 Senator Boswell of the National
Party told 'Meet the Press' on Channel 10 that the Nationals would maintain
a stance against changing the system, but he accepted that:
Prime Minister John Howard has made a commitment
to the people and, therefore, I suppose, we're dragged into it...My
assessment from the meetings that I've been to, is that the National
Party won't wish to go down the Republican way.(375)
20 February 1997 Speaking at the National Press
Club yesterday, British High Commissioner, Sir Roger Carrick announced
that:
[Britain was not] straining to hold Australia back
from becoming a Republic.....I am sure you will understand that on
the substance of that debate the British Government has no view at
all except that it has nothing to do with us: the debate is a matter
entirely for the Australian people, not the Brits.
And warned the media:
...don't allow the republic debate to fuel misconceptions
of attitudes in each country...The Republic debate can be represented
in a wrongly coloured and distorted way; the press in each of our
countries can present aspects of the issue in ways which may do harm.
It is a truism to say that with free speech and with freedom of the
press come responsibility.(376)
24 February 1997 A poll by the Daily Telegraph
questioning the stand of Federal politicians on the republican debate
found 41 per cent supported a republic, 21 per cent opposed and the rest
were uncommitted. Seven per cent of Liberals supported a republic, 14
per cent were opposed and the rest were uncommitted. Ninety-five per cent
of Labour Politicians supported a republic, none opposed, the rest were
uncommitted. From the National Party, 4 per cent supported a republic,
20 per cent were opposed and the rest uncommitted. The Greens and Democrats
all supported a republic.(377)
March 2 1997 A special federal council of the
National Party reaffirmed the Party's position supporting the monarchy.
WA Deputy Premier Hendy Cowan was quoted as saying:
There is no doubt the majority of National Party
members want no change...but it represents far more than its members,
and the constituency we represent-regional Australia-is prepared to
debate change...The majority of our members would vote for no change,
our broader constituency would fall halfway between but Australia
as a whole would vote for a republic. We can't hide our head in the
sand.
Federal Senator Grant Tambling stated:
We have to ensure we are representing our electorates,
not just our party membership.(378)
15 March 1997 The Federal Treasurer, Mr Peter
Costello, recognised the republican debate as a long term issue but set
a time limit of 2010 for a plebiscite. He said the Convention would review
current arrangements:
Not because our current arrangements are weak, but
because we have the opportunity to make them stronger.(379)
26 March 1997 Legislation for the election of
half the delegates to the Convention was introduced into Parliament by
the Prime Minister John Howard. Major features of the Bill included: provision
for the election of 76 delegates; the exclusion of certain persons-such
as parliamentarians or those already nominated or appointed as delegates
by the government-from nominating as delegates; a non-refundable nomination
fee of $500; and non-compulsory voting.
Mr Howard described the convention as:
...a forum for all voices in the debate.
Senator Nick Minchin said:
The Government's aim is to ensure that if there is
to be any change it is achieved through a process that unites rather
than divides the community.(380)
5 April 1997 In Sydney yesterday, the Governor-General,
Sir William Deane, said that the debate:
...involves nothing more than the legitimate expression
of a permissible point of view in the course of democratic debate
about what is or is not in our country's best interests...otherwise
the unbearable cost of constitutional deliberations and decisions
could be national divisiveness and disunity....It is to be hoped that
each side of any debate will accept that to support retention of status
quo or to support change is neither un-Australian nor disloyal...it
is always important to bear in mind that the ultimate source of all
government authority in a true democracy such as ours is the people,
all the people.(381)
20-23 April 1997 A three-day Federation Centenary
Convention was held in South Australia. It was sponsored by the Constitutional
Centenary Foundation and the South Australian Government. The Premier
of South Australia, Mr John Olsen, stated:
We are in agreement that much does need to be updated,
and to be reviewed if the Australian Constitution is to be relevant
to the 21st century. It was agreed that the Constitution should incorporate
indigenous rights, including customary laws, protection of human rights,
and recognition of the aspirations of Australians. The Republican
movement attracted 2/3 of votes.(382)
2 May 1997 The Federal Opposition submitted to
the Government 36 suggested nominees for the Convention.(383)
10 June 1997 The Prime Minister, Mr John
Howard, announced the appointment of the Rt Hon. Ian Sinclair as Chairperson
of the Convention and the Hon. Barry Jones as Deputy Chairperson. Mr Howard
said the Convention was an important national milestone and that:
It fulfils commitment to have the issue of whether
or not Australians wish to move to a republic fully debated.(384)
12 June 1997 Federal member for New England (NSW),
the Rt Hon. Ian Sinclair, announced his intention to detail a proposal
to replace the monarchy with a 'governor's council.'(385)
18 June 1997 Doubts arise about the future of
the Convention when the Senate refused acceptance of the Government's
non-compulsory postal ballot legislation. Senator Harradine stated:
If you are going to have an election, and if you
are going to have a popular election for direct appointment or election
of delegates to the convention, you have it by the usual method of
electoral voting-that is compulsory voting, which has stood the test
of time.(386)
21 June 1997 In Britain, Prime Minister Mr Howard
said of the republican debate:
I think the issue will obviously continue to be debated...but
while it will continue to be debated and it is important in a long
term sense, it is not a front of the mind, front-burner issue.(387)
26 June 1997 The Government rejected a joint Australian
Labor Party and Australian Democrat proposal for legislation for a national
vote on a republican constitution and an Australian as head of state.(388)
29 August 1997 Tasmanian Senators, Independent
Brian Harradine and Greens Bob Brown. supported the Governments Convention
legislation. This was after assurances from Mr Howard that he is not seeking
abolition of compulsory voting at general elections.(389)
31 August 1997 Death of Diana, Princess of Wales.
1 September 1997 List released of non-parliamentary
delegates to the Convention on the republic as appointed by the Federal
Government. The list includes 19 men and 17 women from a broad spectrum
of backgrounds.(390)
13 September 1997 Polls showed 59 per cent support
for a republic in the Australian Capital Territory compared to national
support of 54 per cent.(391)
The key Convention related dates are:
29 September 1997-formal notice of election
7 October 1997-close of rolls
8 October 1997-close of nominations
3-14 November 1997-mailing of voter materials
9 December 1997-close of poll
6 January 1998-deadline for election results to be certified
2-6 and 9-13 February 1998-Convention at Old Parliament
House, Canberra. (392)
25 September 1997 Premier of Western Australia
Richard Court reportedly switched from being pro-constitutional monarchy
to supporting a 'minimalist' change to a republic, to occur in 2001. Mr
Courts change of stance is predicated on Australians supporting a change
to a republic.(393)
6 October 1997 Convention nominee for the Australian
Republic Movement, the Hon. Neville Wran, told Labor delegates at the
New South Wales Australian Labor Party State Conference that a decision
on whether Australia would become a republic could be decided for all
practical purposes through voting for Convention delegates. He said Labor
Party faithful should mobilise to secure victory in Australia's only chance
of becoming a republic this century.(394)
7 October 1997 Convention nominee for Australians
for Constitutional Monarchy, the Hon. Don Chipp, predicted that if the
minimal-change model of republicanism were adopted, Australia would find
itself in 'diabolical trouble' because it would give a president the power
to veto bills passed by both houses of Federal Parliament.(395)
9 October 1997 Australian Republican Movement
indicated that it would be recommending to the Convention that the new
head of state should be appointed by a two-thirds majority of Federal
Parliament and that the head of state would require the support of both
the Government and the Opposition.(396)
9 October 1997 Australian Council of Trade Unions
President, Ms Jennie George, urged unions to mobilise their members to
the Australian Republic Movement cause and give financial support.(397)
6 November 1997 'Republic-yes or no?' Explanatory
material issued to aid voters.
8 November 1997 Federal MP, and former executive
director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, Mr Tony Abbott, suggested
a compromise with republicans in which the Governor-General, an Australian,
would be declared head of state, either by an Act of Parliament or changing
the Constitution. Mr Abbott said the Constitution would keep its other
references to the Crown, and the Queen would retain her other powers.
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy executive director, Mrs Kerry
Jones, said Mr Abbott's proposal was worth considering and restated her
group's basic premise that the country already had an Australian head
of state.(398)
9 November 1997 Mr Howard on the Nine Network's
Sunday program, urged convention delegates to aim to:
...reach agreement on the alternative to the present
system...There's no point at the convention in convinced republicans
trying to persuade convinced anti-republicans to change their mind
on the threshold issue...I want it to be constructive because at the
end of the day what is more important than whether we have a republic
or a constitutional monarchy is a united workable system of government...It
is my role as Prime Minister to facilitate an outcome that the overwhelming
majority of the Australian people will feel supportive of-and will
see something that's appropriate to take them into the next millennium.(399)
12 November 1997 Prime Minister Howard defended
the existing constitutional system, or 'crowned republic'. Mr Howard said
that he would not stand in the way of change, however, he would vote for
non-republicans.(400)
3 December 1997 A Newspoll survey indicated that
only half of Australia's teenagers support a republic, but many are still
undecided.(401)
10 December 1997 A Newspoll survey showed changes
in opinion over the last decade in relation to Australia becoming a republic.
In October 1987 the total in favour was 21 per cent and against 64 per
cent. In December 1997 the total in favour was 51 per cent with 35 per
cent against.(402)
23 December 1997 The final count of the polls
for Convention delegate election completed. Of the 76 elected delegates
47 are republicans, 27 from the Australian Republican Movement and 20
other pro-republic candidates. The elected delegates will join 40 politicians
from Federal, State and Territorial Parliaments, and 36 delegates appointed
by the Federal Parliament.
Mr Malcolm Turnbull from the Australian Republican Movement
expressed confidence in the Convention achieving a consensus:
I think the major focus must be to reach consensus...I
think the Australian people will be very unsympathetic with delegates
who go to the convention in a very doctrinaire, narrow-minded way...We
would like to see the convention, before it talks about the mode of
election, actually talk about what it wants its head of state to do.
If your answer is you want someone impartial and above party politics,
then it becomes harder to justify direct election.
Mrs Kerry Jones, the Executive Director of Australians
for a Constitutional Monarchy, expressed the opinion that the Australian
Republican Movement preferred model for the election of a head of state
would be challenged by a two-thirds majority of delegates, including numerous
independent republicans. She also stated:
Any republican must be extremely worried because
the current vote [for monarchist candidates] would have won the no
vote in a referendum-you can't just look at specific areas of the
nation.(403)
24 December 1997 A full list of appointed and
elected Convention delegates is published.(404)
5 January 1998 A convention delegate, Heidi Zwar,
stressed the need for the two main groups to become focus on the key issues,
and stop 'bickering'. She recognised that:
The central issue...is how the new head of state
will be chosen...Like many Australians I remain to be convinced of
the merits of any change-though it will be easier to assess the merits
of a republic once it is agreed what republican model is being proposed...Now
is the time to move the debate from theory to reality.(405)
13 January 1998 Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy (ACM) release a Convention 'Policy Statement'. The Policy states
that:
...We should not risk changing something that works
so well without being unequivocally guaranteed that the safeguards
in our current constitution will be maintained...We believe that there
is no republican system on offer for Australia that will guarantee
leadership above politics, which is the ultimate safeguard the Crown
provides throughout our constitution...Australia is already a proud,
independent, Sovereign nation. We are sensible people. We will not
risk change for change's sake.(406)
22 January 1998 Australian Republican Movement
(ARM) releases its Convention 'Position Statement' which stated:
...A 'republic is a state in which power resides
in the hands of people entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives
chosen directly or indirectly by them. This system of government has
no hereditary monarch....A Republic of Australia would retain the
current separation of roles between the Head of Government and the
Head of State with the latter performing a largely ceremonial role
as in most other republics...The most significant difference would
be in the role of the Head of State representing Australia. Currently,
because the Queen of England is also the Queen of Australia, we have
no full-time representative Head of State. With an Australian Head
of State, we would have a full-time representative who would become
internationally recognised as Australian and would be better able
to reflect the values and aspirations of the nation because they are
one of us, they live here and they owe their first loyalty to Australia.
... .(407)
24 January 1998 Prime Minister John Howard said
he believed there was only one strong argument in favour of an Australian
Republic:
That argument is that the symbolism of Australia
sharing its legal head of state with a number of other nations has
become an anachronism and is no longer appropriate for an Australian
national about to enter the 21st century.(408)
2 February 1998 Commencement of Constitutional
Convention at old Parliament House.
- Ibid.
- The Age, 17 January 1991.
- Constitutional convention discusses the power of the Governor-General,
the prospect of four-year terms and a Bill of Rights, P.M., Wednesday
3 April 1991.
- Transcript of News Conference, Parliament House, Sydney, 5 April 1991.
- Transcript of Doorstop Interview with Dr John Hewson, MP, Leader of
the Opposition, Australia-China Chamber of Commerce and Industry Luncheon,
Queen Victoria Building, Sydney, Tuesday, 25 June 1991.
- Ross Peake, 'Criticism follows ALP's muted yes to a republic', The
Age, 26 June 1991.
- Tony Hewett, 'Queen or country? The answer is a deadlock', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 26 June 1991.
- Ibid.
- Transcript of Dr John Hewson MP, Interview with Paul Barber and John
Hindle on Radio 3AW, Melbourne, 26 June 1991.
- Transcript of News Conference, Wrest Point Hotel, Hobart, 27 June
1991, with the Prime Minister, Paul Keating.
- 'RSL fires salvo over republic aspirations', The Canberra Times,
27 June 1991.
- 'Call for a separate Australian monarchy', The Canberra Times,
28 June 1991.
- Media release, National Party of Australia, Federal Secretariat, Brisbane,
28 June 1991.
- Steven Wilson, 'BHP chief attacks political myopia', The Australian,
4 July 1991.
- Transcript of the Australian Republican Movement by Tom Keneally-President
of the Committee, 7 July 1991.
- 'The royalist reaction', The Sun-Herald, 7 July 1991.
- Margot Date, 'A stroke of the pen, and goodbye Queen', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 8 July 1991.
- ibid.
- Jenna Price, 'Our royalists get a whiff of treason and sedition',
The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 July 1991.
- Midday Show, Channel 9, Wednesday 17 July 1991.
- Senator Bronwyn Bishop, Liberal, NSW, media release, 17 July
1991.
- John Howard, 'Republican soft-soap approach won't wash', The Sunday
Telegraph, 21 July 1991.
- Alex Mitchell, 'Republican? Not me!', The Sun Herald, 21 July
1991.
- 'Republic row "distraction"', The Canberra Times, 24 July 1991.
- 'Federation centenary "realistic" target for republic: Whitlam', The
Canberra Times, 26 July 1991.
- 'Bishop favours debate on republicanism', The Canberra Times,
4 August 1991.
- 'Republic fight', The Sydney Morning Herald, 12 August 1991.
- Rohan Sullivan, 'Republicanism creeps into courts', The Australian,
10 January 1992.
- Ron Hicks, 'Republican Party finally has clout to register', The
Australian, 11 January 1992.
- Sonya Voumard, 'Call for greater clarity in the republic debate',
The Age, 27 January 1992.
- B.C.Ruxton, 'State President, The Returned Services League', Melbourne,
Letter to the editor, The Australian, 31 January 1992.
- Mark Irving and Lenore Taylor, 'PM backs new flag', The Australian,
1 February 1992.
- Geoffrey Barker, 'Colonial cringe needs to change before the flag',
The Age, 4 February 1992.
- 'Queen welcome: republican mockery', The Canberra Times, 10
February 1992.
- News Release, 003/92, John Howard MP, Member for Bennelong,
Shadow Minister for Industrial Relations, Employment and Training.
- Tom Keneally, Republic Debate, 'Queen indeed or simply quaint?', The
Australian, 15 February 1992.
- John Howard, Republic Debate, 'Queen indeed or simply quaint?', The
Australian, 15 February 1992.
- 'Queen welcome: republican mockery', The Canberra Times, 10
February 1992.
- Mark Coultan, 'Boycott by five Labor members', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 19 February 1992.
- Nicole Leedham, 'Australia will be republic: Whitlam', The Canberra
Times, 23 February 1992.
- Robert Garran, 'Anger, applause over Keating's speech to Queen', The
Australian Financial Review, 25 February 1992 and Tom Keneally,
'Our Republic', 1993, William Heinemann Australia, Melbourne, p.129.
- Robert Garran, 'Anger, applause over Keating's speech to Queen', The
Australian Financial Review, 25 February 1992.
- ibid.
- ibid.
- John Hurst, 'Keatings cop a blast from the British media', The
Australian Financial Review, 26 February 1992.
- Hansard, 27 February 1992
- Letter to the editor, John Howard, 'Asian opinion no reason to throw
out monarchy', The Australian, 28 February 1992.
- Tim Fischer MP, media release, 28 February 1992.
- 'Keating cleared - but not in UK media', The Sydney Morning Herald,
28 February 1992.
- 'Sorry, Ma'am, most Australians want a republic', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 29 February 1992.
- The Age, 29 February 1992.
- Marc McEvoy, 'Queen triggers republican rush', The Sunday Telegraph,
1 March 1992.
- Gough Whitlam, 'I've changed my views on the question of the monarchy
in the past 16 years', The Sunday Age, 1 March 1992.
- Bob McMullan, 'Inevitable that nation becomes a republic', The
Canberra Times, 1 March 1992.
- 'Republicans out in front', The Canberra Times, 1 March 1992.
- Press release, Young Liberal Movement of Australia, 1 March
1992.
- Marc McEvoy, 'Queen triggers republican rush', The Sunday Telegraph,
1 March 1992.
- Nicolas Rothwell, 'Hurd ridicules Keating's broadside', The Australian,
2 March 1992.
- Hewson scoffs at republican 'diversion', The Canberra Times,
2 March 1992.
- Glenn Milne, 'Attack on Britain may cost ALP marginal seats', The
Australian, 3 March 1992.
- Peter Hartcher, 'Support for Keating republic; Hawke favours referendum',
The Sydney Morning Herald, 3 March 1992.
- Justine Ferrari and Nick Richardson, '"Stooge" Hayden urged to quit',
The Australian, 6 March 1992.
- Ian Warden, 'Time seems to be running out for Ken', The Canberra
Times, 8 March 1992.
- Reuter, 'Hayden derided as "stooge of the republicans"', The Canberra
Times, 6 March 1992.
- Peter Ward and Richard Sproull, 'Keating sings his republican tune',
The Australian, 7 March 1992/
- Malcolm Fraser, 'The historical facts are clear, but a republic is
not the answer', The Sunday Age, 8 March 1992.
- Andrew Masterson, '"I'll flatten Keating", says bedless Botham',
The Sunday Age, 8 March 1992.
- Brad Crouch, 'MP plans to protest to the Queen', The Sunday Telegraph,
8 March 1992.
- David Kempt, 'Keating must stop fighting past battles', The Canberra
Times, 8 March 1992.
- Geoff Kitney, 'More shots in war of independence', The Australian
Financial Review, 9 March 1992.
- Glenn Milne, 'Howard defies Hewson on Queen', The Australian,
10 March 1992.
- Reuter, London, 'Commonwealth "very relevant"', The Canberra Times,
10 March 1992.
- Dr John Hewson, MP - Leader of the Opposition, Transcript of Doorstop
interview with Dr Hewson at the Assisi Centre, Rosanna, Victoria, 15
March 1992.
- Transcript of the Prime Minister, the Hon P J Keating MP Speech to
the Irish-Australian Chamber of Commerce, St Patrick's Day Breakfast,
Melbourne, 17 March 1992.
- Alexander Downer, Member for Mayo, Shadow Minister for Trade and Trade
Negotiations, media release, 17 March 1992.
- The Hon John Dawkins, Treasurer, press release, Wednesday 18
March 1992.
- Geoff Kitney, 'PM links flag to economy', The Australian Financial
Review, 18 March 1992.
- Nicholas Johnston, 'Griffiths in attack on British links', The
Age, 23 March 1992.
- Tim Fischer MP, Media Release, 24 March 1992.
- Patrick Smithers, 'Royal skit bowls out England stars', The Age,
25 March 1992.
- Michael Gordon, 'Hewson shifts on republic', The Sunday Age,
15 March 1992.
- Australian Republican Movement Inc, GPO Box 5150, Sydney NSW 2001,
Australia.
- 'Republican feeling gathers momentum', The Bulletin, 31 March
1992.
- Matthew Westwood, 'Et tu Ipswich, says bitter Bill', The Australian,
3 April 1992.
- Peter Hartcher, 'Keating the republican delights Indonesia", The
Sydney Morning Herald, 4 April 1992.
- Bob Hawke, 'With dignity to a republic', The Sun-Herald, Sydney,
5 April 1992.
- Tom Burton, Republic: 'Keating not waiting on the Queen', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 7 April 1992.
- Glenn Milne, 'PM considers flag design competition', The Australian,
8 April 1992.
- Michelle Hoffman, 'RSL will bar republicans on Anzac Day', The
Sunday Telegraph, 12 April 1992.
- John Hirst, 'Must the baby go out with the bathwater?', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 23 April 1992.
- Ross Peake, 'Kokoda visit moves Keating', The Canberra Times,
27 April 1992.
- 'History in the eye of the beholder', The Canberra Times, 28
April 1992.
- 'Archbishop Hollingworth enters republican debate', The Canberra
Times, 28 April 1992.
- Lenore Taylor, 'Party wants PM to defer flag vote', The Australian,
30 March 1992.
- Malcolm Turnbull, 'Time to show our true colours', The Australian,
2 May 1992.
- 'Nationals niggly on flag issue', The Canberra Times, 3 May
1992.
- Glenn Milne, 'Voter support for Keating flags over the republic',
The Australian, 5 May 1992.
- Ross Peake, 'Moves for republic "good for foreign policy"', The
Canberra Times, 8 May 1992.
- Denis Muller, 'Support continues for Australian republic', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 11 May 1992.
- 'PM a bigot: RSL head', The West-Australian, 14 May 1992.
- 'Republican movement out to lunch', The Canberra Times, 15
May 1992.
- Steven Wilson, 'Turnbull damns Keating's republican claims as unfair',
The Australian, 15 May 1992.
- Alison Blanksby, 'Liberals raise republican's ire', The West-Australian,
18 May 1992.
- 'Republic a distraction', The Canberra Times, 25 May 1992.
- Geoffrey Partinton, 'Rocky road to the republic', The Bulletin,
2 June 1992.
- D.D.McNicoll, 'Royalists sing in praise of Queen', The Australian,
5 June 1992.
- Etcetera, The Sydney Morning Herald, 4 June 1992.
- Alex Mitchell, 'Aboriginal woman for president call', The Sun-Herald,
7 June 1992.
- Suzanne McDonnell, 'Republicanism plot blooming', The Sunday Age,
7 June 1992.
- Eamonn Fitzpatrick, 'Republicans challenged to "acid test"', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 8 June 1992.
- ibid.
- Glenn Milne, 'Reserve, church lambast Keating', The Australian,
10 June 1992.
- Editorial, 'A divorce from the monarchy', The Australian, 10
June 1992.
- Speech by the Prime Minister, The Hon P.J.Keating MP Australian Book
Publishers Awards, Sydney 26 June 1992.
- Michael Gordon and Suzanne McDonnell, 'Keating's "Irish agenda" rapped',
The Sunday Age, 2 June 1992.
- Michelle Grattan, 'Democrats hint at vote on new oath', The Age,
29 June 1992.
- Editorial, 'Republican loyalties of Mr Keating', The Australian,
30 June 1992.
- Sue Cant and Dennis Shanahan, 'RSL wages war on Keating crusade',
The Australian 2 July 1992.
- Deanie Carbon, 'Queen just window dressing, says Gough', The Australian,
8 July 1992.
- Crispin Hull, 'Republican approval "backs constitution"', The Canberra
Times, 14 July 1992.
- Anne Connolly, 'Education the battle hymn of Duffy's republic', The
Australian, 23 July 1992.
- Tony Stephens, 'Battle royal was more of a civilised skirmish', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 29 July 1992.
- Editorial, 'Royal foibles lead to calmer republic debate', The
Canberra Times 23 August 1992.
- 'Coalition warns of plan for President', The Canberra Times,
30 August 1992.
- Michael Gordon, 'Republic won't be an issue in election', says Keating,
The Sunday Age, 30 August 1992.
- AAP, 'Republic inevitable - Keating', The Australian Financial
Review, 30 August 1992.
- 'Murdoch defends monarchy reports', The Australian, 16 October
1992.
- Crispin Hull, 'Keating gets a serve from Sir David', The Canberra
Times, 29 October 1992.
- Catherine Lambert, 'Poll has republic a winner', The Sunday Herald,
1 November 1992.
- Michael Millett, 'PM urges change to oath of allegiance', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 14 November 1992.
- Greg Craven, 'Constitutional hurdles to abolishing monarchy', The
Canberra Times, 18 November 1992.
- Phillip Derriman, 'Royalty: the equal opportunity argument', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 19 November 1992.
- Martin Daly, 'Debate spurred by separation of the powers-that-would-be',
The Age, 11 December 1992.
- 'New oath abolishes allegiance to Queen', The Canberra Times,
18 December 1992.
- Bob McMullan, 'It's time for us to choose our head of state', The
Canberra Times, 20 December 1992.
- Young Libs back republican poll', The Age, 5 January 1993.
- Australian Labor Party Policy Launch Address 1993 Federal Election
presented by Paul Keating, Prime Minister of Australia at the Bankstown
Town Hall, 24 February 1993.
- Peter Wilson, Jamie Walker, Lenore Taylor and Tim Stevens, 'Right
scorns republic "stunt"', The Australian, 25 February 1993.
- Peter Wilson, Jamie Walker, Lenore Taylor and Tim Stevens, 'Right
scorns republic "stunt"', The Australian, 25 February 1993.
- George Winterton, 'How to create the republic of Australia', The
Australian, 26 February 1993.
- Ross Peake, 'Coalition "would not block" a republic', The Canberra
Times, 4 March 1993.
- Peter Wilson, 'PM plans republic by "at least" 2001', The Australian,
16 March 1993.
- Jamie Walker and Martin Thomas, 'Liberals embrace debate on republic',
The Australian 20 March 1993.
- Cherie Beach, 'Perron backs Lib republic debate', The News,
22 March 1993.
- Transcript of Dr John Hewson MP Doorstop Press Conference, Masonic
Centre, Sydney, 27 March 1993.
- John Synnott, 'Fahey supports push for a republic', The Sun-Herald,
28 March 1993.
- Greg Thomson, 'Republic is on agenda: Perron', The News, 29 March
1993.
- Mark Metherell, 'Pressure on for republic convention', The Age,
29 March 1993.
- Tim Dodd and Peter Gill, 'Conservative opposition cracking', The
Australian Financial Review, 29 March 1993.
- Paola Totari and Bernard Lagan, 'Murray promised a right royal blue',
The Sydney Morning Herald, 29 March 1993.
- Malcolm Quekett and Randal Markey, 'Liberal split opens after republic
call', The West-Australian, 29 March 1993.
- 'Coalition sparks as Libs embrace republic', The Canberra Times,
30 March 1993.
- ibid.
- ibid.
- Andrew Darby and Greg Roberts, 'March to republic gains pace', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 30 March 1993.
- 'Push for republic grows', The Canberra Times, 31 March 1993.
- Matthew Warren, Peter Wilson and Natasha Bita, 'Liberal leader backs
republic', The Australian, 31 March 1993.
- News release, John Howard, MP, Canberra, 1 April 1993.
- Media release, Senator Cheryl Kernot, Widen Republican Debate:
Democrats, 13 April 1993.
- News release, Senator John Coulter, 15 April 1993.
- Anne-Marie McCarthy, 'Hamer breaks ranks and bows to the "inevitable"',
The Age, 27 April 1993.
- P.M., Monday 26 April 1993.
- The Report of the Republic Advisory Committee, Volume 1, Commonwealth
of Australia, 1993, p. iv.
- ibid.
- Michael Millett, 'First step towards a republic, The Sydney Morning
Herald, 29 April 1993.
- Lenore Taylor, Swearing in leaves the Queen out', The Australian,
28 April 1993.
- Transcript of Press Conference, John Hewson MP, Parliament House,
Canberra, 29 April 1993.
- Media release, Tim Fischer MP, Leader of the National Party
of Australia, 29 April 1993.
- Press release, Tim Fischer MP, 30 April 1993.
- Graham Downie, 'Archbishop gives "cautious support"', The Canberra
Times, 30 April 1993.
- Tony Hewett, 'Youth demands a voice', The Sydney Morning Herald,
30 April 1993.
- Jamie Walker, 'Kernot attacks Keating cop-out', The Australian,
1 May 1993.
- Innes Willox, 'Hewson's call for republic report rejected by Sir Ninian',
The Age, 1 May 1993.
- Nicholas Johnston, 'Coalition leaders deny republic rift', The
Age, 5 May 1993.
- Hugo Kelly, 'Premiers face conflict over states' republic committee
member', The Age, 5 April 1993.
- Amanda Hurley, 'Elected president gains popularity, survey finds',
The West Australian, 5 May 1993.
- Ewin Hannan, 'Kennett demands more say for States', The Australian,
5 April 1993.
- Michael Millett, 'Queen and I: Howard explains the attraction', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 7 April 1993.
- D.D.McNicoll, 'Turnbull invites public comment on republic paper',
The Australian, 13 May 1993.
- Frank Alcorta, 'NT scores a first on republic', The News, 21
May 1993.
- Statement by the Prime Minister, the Hon P.J.Keating MP, Republic
Advisory Committee - State Representatives, Canberra, 25 May 1993.
- AAP, 'Truce out, republic becomes a debating bludgeon', The Canberra
Times, 14 May 1995.
- Innes Willox, 'Keating wants to quit Commonwealth, says Hewson', The
Age, 17 May 1993.
- Media release, Dr David Kemp MP, 27 May 1993.
- Republic probable, not inevitable; Libs, The Age, 27 May 1993.
- Richard Macey, "Republic team pads up for the first test', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 28 May 1993.
- Errol Simper, 'Hewson staffer to fight republicans', The Australian,
4 June 1993.
- 'Republic opens door to dictatorship: Gibbs', The Australian,
5 June 1993.
- Press release, Republic Advisory Committee, 7 June 1993.
- Jodie Brough, 'Vow on Commonwealth', The Canberra Times, 9
June 1993.
- Anne Crawford, 'Wattle Day think of to replace royal holiday?', The
Sunday Age, 13 June 1993.
- Madona King, 'Hewson's republic demands, PM challenged to meet strict
criteria', The Australian 15 June 1993.
- Madonna King, 'Church leader rejects republic', The Australian,
18 June 1993.
- Mike Steketee, 'All is well in Greiner's republic', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 19 June 1993.
- 'Better off separate', The Bulletin, 22 June 1993.
- ibid.
- Keith Scott, 'Greiner warns Liberals', The Canberra Times,
23 June 1993.
- Transcript of Interview between John Hewson MP and Peter Couchman
Program, Radio 3LO, 30 June 1993.
- Nick Richardson, 'Monarchist faithful follow the footsteps of history',
The Australian, 3 July 1993.
- Lindsay Tanner, Federal Member for Melbourne, The Left and the
Republic, July 1993.
- The Hon John Howard, MP, Shadow Minister for Industrial Relations,
Address to the 46th Annual council of The Australian Liberal
Students' Federation, Trinity College, University of Melbourne, 8 July
1993.
- Nick Richardson, 'Republicans conscript Blinky', The Australian,
8 July 1993.
- Peter Weeks, 'Greens want broader debate on republic', The Australian,
10 July 1993
- Michael Millet, 'Liberal stand a blow to republic', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 10 July 1993.
- Chris Uhlmann, 'Republican issue "must be matter of conscience"',
The Canberra Times, 11 July 1993.
- Alex Messina, 'Bid to widen republican debate', The Age, 14
July 1993.
- Tim Dodd, 'Monarchists raise doubts on referendum', The Australian
Financial Review, 19 July 1993.
- Glenn Milne, '80pc want popular vote on head of State', The Australian,
19 July 1993.
- Editorial, 'A minimalist fantasy', The Age, 21 July 1993.
- Malcolm Quekett, 'Premier plans republic probe', The West-Australian,
22 July 1993.
- Tracey Aubin, '"Royal" beheaded as a title for new national bodies',
The Canberra Times, 25 July 1993.
- Senator Ron Boswell, media release, 26 July 1993.
- Keith Scott, 'Hewson pushes hard line against republic', The Canberra
Times, 26 July 1993.
- Senator Cheryl Kernot, media release, Sunday 1 August 1993.
- Dennis Muller, 'Push for republic loses some of its momentum', The
Age, 9 August 1993.
- Jim Della-Giacoma and Scott Henry, 'Codify reserve powers; republicans',
The Australian, 16 August 1993.
- Tony Stephens, 'Young Libs for republic', The Sydney Morning Herald,
17 August 1993.
- Natasha Bita, 'Lib Minister ridicules monarchists', The Australian,
28 August 1993.
- Goeffrey Barker, 'Libs gag dissent in republican debate', The Age,
30 August 1993.
- 'Presidency not for me: Keating', The Canberra Times, 30 August
1993.
- 'Republicans lay claim to the wattle', The Canberra Times,
30 August 1993.
- 'Support for republic', The Age, 31 August 1993.
- Ross Peake, 'Republic for Aust to decide: Britain', The Canberra
Times, 7 September 1993.
- Media release, The Hon Lynn M.F.Arnold MP, 9 September 1993.
- Media release, Governor-General Bill Hayden, 13 September 1993.
- Lenore Taylor, 'Survey results boost republic push', The Australian,
15 September 1993.
- Prime Minister Keating, press release, 19 September 1993, Leuchars,
Scotland.
- Lenore Taylor, 'PM to use Olympics in push for republic', The Australian,
27 September 1993.
- 'Republican push will not mar visit by Prince Charles', The Canberra
Times, 29 September 1993.
- 'Voters turn off PM's republic', The Australian, 29 September
1993.
- Amanda Meade, 'Keating stalls on debut of new flag', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 30 September 1993
- Amanda Meade, 'Monarchists see republican plot in new pledge', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 1 October 1993.
- The Report of the Republic Advisory Committee, 'An Australian Republic',
The Options, vol. 1, p. 1.
- John Hewson, Leader of the Opposition, media release, 5 October
1993.
- Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, press release, 5 October
1993.
- 'Opinions on republic are firming: poll', The Canberra Times,
11 October 1993.
- Dennis Shanahan, 'Queen understands republican moves, says PM', The
Australian, 23 October 1993.
- Peter Cole-Adams, 'Good-humoured Queen tells would-be republics: "I
wish you well"', The Canberra Times 23 October 1993.
- Peter Lalor, 'Republic: the people shout no', The Sunday Herald-Sun,
24 October 1993.
- Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, press release, Republic
Report "Wrong" - Gibbs change to a Republic "Shrouded in Doubt", 3 November
1993.
- Address by The Hon. John Howard, MP to the Samuel Griffiths Society
Conference held at The Esplanade Hotel, Freemantle, 6 November 1993.
- Fia Cumming, 'Doubt on republic by 2000', The Sunday Herald-Sun,
14 November 1993.
- Senator Nick Bolkus, Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs,
Multiculturalism and the Republic, 19 November 1993.
- Martin Daly, 'Republican cause near death: monarchists', The Age,
28 December 1993.
- Tony Wright, 'Prince gives republican movement his blessing', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 27 January 1994.
- Keith Gosman, 'Don't panic about the republic - Charles', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 7 February 1994.
- The Hon Kim C Beazley MP, Minister for Finance, 'Identifying National
Interests and the Interest in Identity', Inaugural Sir John Monash Lecture
and Opening of the Graduate School of Government, Monash University,
17 February 1994.
- Danielle Cook, 'Kerry takes crown as queen of the lobby', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 31 March 1994.
- Tony Stephens, 'PM could legislate for a republic, says judge', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 9 April 1994.
- Farah Farouque, 'Rift over monarchy comments', The Age, 15
April 1994.
- Crispin Hull, 'Carnell flags referendum on republic', The Canberra
Times, 16 May 1994.
- Innes Willox, 'Downer takes hardline on plans to switch to a republic',
The Age, 27 May 1994.
- Geoff Kitney, 'Keating signals end to push for a new flag', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 15 June 1994.
- Rebecca Fowler and Tim Rayment of the Sunday Times and Fiona Harari,
'Defender of the Faith not for me: Charles', The Australian,
27 June 1994.
- Jodie Brough, 'Diehard Aussie Royalists give Charles a better deal
than the English', The Canberra Times, 30 June 1994.
- Louise Dodson, 'A secret Libs cell opposes party line', The Australian
Financial Review, 4 July 1994.
- ALSF, Media Information, 6 July 1994.
- Jodie Brough, 'Hewson hits at party's "Gestapo" line', The Canberra
Times, 6 July 1994.
- Geoffrey Barker, 'Liberals soften line on republic', The Age,
6 July 1994.
- Linda Morris, 'Exposed: NSW Liberals closet republicans', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 6 July 1994.
- Geoff Kitney, 'Federal Libs say republic is inevitable', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 7 July 1994.
- Geoff Kitney, 'Federal Libs say republic is inevitable', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 7 July 1994.
- Dennis Shanahan, 'Monarchists in threat tactics against top Tory',
The Australian, 8 July 1994.
- Geoff Kitney and Tony Wright, 'Republic plan up to five years off,'
The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 July 1994.
- Media release, Leader of the Opposition, Keating will hide
republic details, 9 July 1994.
- Sir Rupert Hamer, 'Change inevitable, but largely symbolic', The
Canberra Times, 9 July 1994.
- Peter Cole-Adams, 'Downer sidesteps Royal row', The Canberra Times,
11 July 1994.
- Mark Baker, 'It's not a power grab: Keating', The Age, 12 July
1994.
- Ross Peake, 'Widen republic debate, demand the Democrats', The
Canberra Times, 13 July 1994.
- Rachel Hawes, 'Downer prods PM on republic', The Australian,
18 July 1994.
- 'Republic inevitable: Malcolm Fraser', The Canberra Times,
25 July 1994.
- Media release, The Liberal Party of Australia, NSW Division,
31 July 1994.
- Geoff Kitney and Mark Coultan, 'Back off republic, Howard tells Libs',
The Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August 1994.
- Geoff Kitney, 'Keating renews push for local head of state', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 6 August 1994.
- Sonya Voumard and Geoff Kitney, 'Young Libs ignore gag on republic
debate', The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 August 1994.
- Margo Kingston, 'Downer in for torrid party row', The Canberra
Times, 29 August 1994.
- Ross Peake, 'Teague breaks with policy', The Canberra Times,
30 August 1994.
- David Humphries, 'Jones declares minimalist republic option dead',
The Australian, 1 September 1994.
- Debra Jopson and Bernard Zuel,' Dame Joan shows her True Brit', 7
October 1994.
- Mark Baker, 'Keating defers republican options', The Age, 8
October 1994.
- Milton Cockburn, 'Liberal voters welcome republic', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 3 November 1994.
- Leader of the Opposition Alexander Downer MP, Press Conference, Parliament
House, Canberra, 10 November 1994.
- Tim Fischer MP, media release, 11 November 1994.
- Editorial, Policy is needed, not gimmicks, The Canberra Times,
19 November 1994.
- Malcolm Fraser, 'Royal antics muddy republic debate', The Australian,
24 November 1994.
- 'Young Libs urge support for an Australian republic', The Canberra
Times, 12 January 1995.
- Colleen Egan, 'Group backs States' rights on republic', The Australian,
17 January 1995.
- Kendall Hill, 'Most favour direct vote for president', The Age,
26 January 1995.
- Geoff Kitney, 'Liberals to take softer stand on republic', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 17 February 1995.
- Editorial, 'Options for electing a president', The Australian
10 March 1995.
- 'Fischer backs elected president', The Australian, 11 March
1995.
- Ian Henderson, 'Involve public in list for president: Kernot', The
Canberra Times, 13 March 1995.
- Ross Peake, 'Kennett: chink in the republic armour', The Canberra
Times, 17 March 1995.
- Tim Fischer, 'Republic debate must focus on election of president',
The Australian, 17 March 1995.
- Rachel Gibson, 'Kennett revises republic remarks', The Age,
18 March 1995.
- Michelle Grattan, 'Labor lags on republic policy: Lib', The Age,
25 May 1995.
- Ian Ireland, An Australian Republic-The State of Play, Parliamentary
Research Service, Research Note no. 53, 27 June 1995.
- Michelle Coffey and staff reporters, 'Kennett opposes Howard on convention',
The Australian, 9 June 1995.
- Michelle Grattan, 'Howard to seek unity on republic', The Age,
10 June 1995.
- Bruce Jones, 'Howard left behind in rush to republic', The Sun
Herald, 11 June 1995.
- Bruce Jones, 'Howard left behind in rush to republic', The Sun
Herald, 11 June 1995.
- Ross Peake, 'Fischer, Howard republic conflict', The Canberra Times,
13 June 1995
- Peter Cole-Adams, 'Howard makes republic pledge', The Canberra
Times, 12 June 1995.
- John Kerin, 'Brown vows to hold State referendum on republic', The
Australian, 21 June 1995.
- James Murray, 'Archbishop backs Keating on president', The Australian,
4 July 1995.
- Maurice Byers, 'Presidential poll will lead to chaos', The Australian,
5 July 1995.
- Malcolm Fraser, 'The republic: an idea whose time will come', The
Australian, 30 August 1995.
- Joanne Painter, 'ACTU united in support for republic plans', The
Age, 28 September 1995.
- Geoff Kitney and Michael Millett, 'Hayden lashes PM's republic', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 26 October 1995.
- Brian Toohey, 'Figureheads are pretty expensive', The Australian
Financial Review, 3 November 1995.
- Innes Willox, 'PM links republic to N-tests', The Age, 4 November
1995.
- AAP, 'Republic diversion tactic: Howard', The Canberra Times,
5 November 1995.
- Editorial, The Age, 9 November 1995.
- Michael Gordon and Dennis Shanahan, 'PM's president more powerful
than Kerr Libs', The Australian, 11 November 1995.
- Graham Cooke, 'Examining republic choices', The Canberra Times,
14 November 1995.
- Patrick Lawnham, 'Republican debate tunes out of warring royals' soap
opera', The Australian, 22 November 1995.
- 'Queen's role "bizarre"', The West-Australian, 24 November
1995.
- Sandra McKay, 'Cowen supports a full republic', The Age, 29
November 1995.
- Gabrielle Chan, 'UK envoy warns on republic debate', The Australian,
12 December 1995.
- Michael Gordon, 'Howard offers vision on national identity', The
Australian, 14 December 1995.
- Peter Rees, 'People's President', The Sunday Telegraph, 17
December 1995.
- Rachel Gibson, 'Republic debate is unaffected, rivals agree', The
Age, 22 December 1995.
- Bernard Lane, 'Public urged to debate reforms', The Australian,
1 January 1996.
- Sandra McKay, 'Outrage over queen-sized RSL row', The Age,
17 January 1996.
- Editorial, 'Carr acts to modernise the governor', The Australian,
17 January 1996.
- Amanda Meade, 'Opposition seeks vote on changes', The Australian,
17 January 1996.
- Randal Markey and Tamara Hunter, 'It's a Keating plot: Downer', The
West-Australian, 18 January 1996.
- Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, Press Release, 21
January 1996.
- Helen Pitt, 'A judge's battle hymn for the republic', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 25 January 1996.
- Geoff Kitney and Tony Wright, 'Keating refuses to back down over republic',
The Sydney Morning Herald, 8 February 1996.
- 'Republic for debate', The Canberra Times, 11 February 1996.
- 'Fischer deflects hint of Coalition rift over republic direction',
The Canberra Times, 13 February 1996.
- Cameron Stewart, 'Broaden scope of plebiscite question', The Australian,
15 February 1996.
- Senator Cheryl Kernot, 'Australian Democrats, Press Release
96/107, 14 February 1996.
- Kendall Hill, 'But it's only a toy, Howard tells nation', The Age,
15 February 1996.
- Ross Peake, 'Now it's a soft republic push', The Canberra Times,
15 February 1996.
- Michelle Grattan, 'Majority favours Australian head of state, poll
finds', The Age, 20 February 1996.
- Stephen Lunn, 'Monarchists decry Carr's "republic by stealth"', The
Australian, 1 March 1996.
- Lenore Taylor, 'Coalition plans early action over republic', The
Australian, 23 March 1996.
- AAP, 'Coalition will honour republic promise: Fisher', The Canberra
Times, 25 March 1996.
- Ben Huchings, 'Students support republic', The Australian,
9 April 1996.
- 'Republic inevitable: Anderson', The Sydney Morning Herald,
29 April 1996.
- John Kerin, 'Governor gives republic short shrift', The Australian,
3 May 1996.
- Ross Peake, The Canberra Times, 29 May 1996
- Niki Savva, 'Republic plan wins support', The Age, 30 May 1996
- Michael Millett, 'Senate key to vote on republic', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 3 June 1996.
- John Kerin, 'States unable to retain monarchy in defiance of federal
republic', The Australian, 10 June 1996.
- 'Liberal moves for a republic', The West-Australian, 26 June
1996.
- 'Senator wants a woman president', The West Australian, 9 July
1996.
- Michael Millett, 'Senate warned: hands off republic talks', The
Sydney Morning Herald, 23 July 1996.
- Gabrielle Chan and Dennis Shanahan, 'Republic plebiscite would succeed',
The Australian, 31 July 1996.
- Michael Gordon, 'Teens unanimous: We'll be a republic', The Australian,
5 August 1996.
- David Fagan, 'Cown, Mason back call for pre-convention poll on republic',
The Australian, 9 August 1996.
- Peter Rees, 'Australian's don't want a republic', The Sunday Telegraph,
29 September 1996.
- John Kerin, 'Republic inquiry calls for referendums', The Australian,
24 October 1996.
- ny Stephens, 'Carr urges Senate reform', The Sydney Morning Herald,
23 November 1996, p. 10.
- Mary Delahunty, 'Power to the people as the century ends', The
Australian, 25 November 1996, p. 13.
- Mike Steketee, 'Judge fears awesome powers of president', The Australian,
2 December 1999, p. 5.
- Michael Millett, 'Majority now want a republic', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 3 December 1996.
- Senator Cheryl Kernot, Media Release, 4 December 1996.
- Leader of the Opposition, 'Transcript of Joint Press Conference with
Gareth Evans, Shadow Treasurer and Senator Nick Bolkus, Shadow Attorney-General',
4 December 1996.
- Michael Gordon, 'Howard stalls on republic vote', The Weekend Australian,
14 December 1996.
- 'Monarchy less relevant but republic no better, says PM', The Age,
25 January 1997, p. A1.
- Niki Savva, 'Not enough knowledge for republic choice: McGarvie',
The Age, 25 January 1997, p. A7.
- John Short, 'Cabinet to Cut Voters' Voice on Republic', The Australian,
27 January 1997, p. 1.
- Ross Peake., 'Cabinet may talk republic today', The Canberra Times,
28 January, p. 1.
- Niki Sava, 'Promise of republic convention reaffirmed', The Age,
29 January 1997, p. 2.
- 'Republican movement turns up heat on delaying tactic', The Canberra
Times, 29 January 1997, p. 3.
- 'People win republic forum vote', The Australian, 5 February
1997, pp. 1-2.
- Niki Sava, 'Rivals get showdown on republic', The Age, 5 February
1997, p. 1.
- Ben Mitchell and Lindsay Murdoch, 'PM may brief Queen on republic
moves', The Age, 10 February 1997, p. 4.
- Michael Gordon, 'Republic Ballot plan under fire', The Australian,
12 February 1997, p. 1
- Randal Markey, 'Republic plan not fair on WA: Court', The Western
Australian, 12 February 1997, p. 1.
- Michelle Gratton, 'Coalition push for more detail on convention',
The Australian Financial Review, 13 February 1997, p. 4.
- Mike Secombe, 'Nats take republic fight to the wire', The Sydney
Morning Herald, 17 February 1997, p. 5.
- Don Greenlees, 'Britain bows out of republic debate', The Australian,
20 February 1997, p. 4.
- David Luff, 'Coalition backs off from burning issue', The Daily
Telegraph, 24 February 1997, p. 17.
- 'Nats warned on republic debate', The Sunday Canberra Times,
2 March 1997, p. 2.
- Manika Naidoo, 'Republic decision needed by 2010, says Treasurer',
The Age, 15 March 1997.
- Gervase Green, 'Howard changes tack on convention', The Age,
27 March 1997, p. A3.
- Scott Emerson, 'Deane in call for republic tolerance', The Weekend
Australian, 5 April 1997, p. 1.
- Carolyn Collins, 'Republic wins vote at centenary convention', The
Australian, 24 April 1997, p. 3.
- Gervase Greene, 'Opposition nominates 36 for people's convention',
The Australian, 1 May 1997, p. A5.
- Michelle Gratton, 'Sinclair, Jones to lead republic talks', The
Financial Review, 11 June 1997, p. 12
- Michael Gordon, 'Sinclair's republic stance riles royalists', The
Australian, 12 June 1997, p. 3.
- Gervase Green, 'Senate vote puts convention on republic in doubt',
The Age, 19 June 1997, p. A7.
- Randal Markey, 'Republic low key: Howard', The Western Australian,
21 June 1997, p. 6.
- John Short, 'Green to derail Labor-Democrats on plebiscite', The
Australian, 26 June 1997, p. 6.
- Ross Peake, 'Senate switch: republic hope up', The Canberra Times,
August 29 1997, pp. 1-2.
- Ian Henderson and Jennifer Foreshaw, 'Howard gives youth a chance
but Turnbull turns him down', 1 September 1997, The Australian,
p. 11.
- 'Republic push: Canberra leads nation: Opinion Poll', The Canberra
Times, September 13 1997, p. 1.
- Peter Cole-Adams, 'PM denies he has snap poll in mind', The Canberra
Times, 13 September 1997, p. 1.
- Roger Martin, 'Court backs minimal switch to a republic', The Western
Australian, 25 September 1997, p. 4.
- Stuart Washington, 'Wran rallies party troops for the republic', The
Financial Review, 7 October 1997, p. 13.
- Mike Seccombe and Shaun Carney, 'Big names stand up for republican
cause', The Sydney Morning Herald, 8 October 1997, p. 4.
- Tony Stephens, Leonie Lamont and Honey Webb, 'Elected president favoured
by ARM', The Sydney Morning Herald, 10 October 1997, p. 9.
- Leonie Lamont, 'ACTU launches republic campaign', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 11 October 1997, p. 11.
- Miranda Korzy, 'Monarchists dump Crown: republicans', The Sunday
Canberra Times, 9 November 1997, p. 1.
- Michael Gordon, 'PM pledge gives boost to republic', The Australian,
10 November 1997.
- 'Stick with crowned republic: Howard', The Sydney Morning Herald,
12 November 1997, p. 3.
- Mike Steketee, 'News Poll: Towns divided on republic', The Australian,
3 December 1997, p. 4.
- 'News Poll: Are you in favour of Australia becoming a republic?, The
Australian, 3 December 1997, p. 4.
- Kendall Hill, 'Republicans sweep the poll', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 23 December 1997, p. 1.
- Adrian Rollins, 'Delegates start the fighting early', The Age,
24 December 1997, p. 2.
- 'Convention delegate calls for truce in war of words', The Canberra
Times, 5 January 1998.
- Australian's for Constitutional Monarchy, Convention Policy,
13 January 1998, [http://www.abc.net.au/concon/position/acm.htm].
- Australian Republican Movement, Position Statement, 22 January
1998, [http://www.abc.net.au/concon/position/arm.htm].
- Michael Millett, 'PM questions shared monarch', The Sydney Morning
Herald, 24 January 1998, p. 1.
|
 |