The most vocal arguments for an Australian Republic have been those of national identity. The argument of the Australian Republican Movement, and its supporters like Paul Keating and Tom Keneally, is that as an independent nation with our own distinct identity we should have an Australian as our Head of State (Abbott 1995:30). Their approach consists of removing any reference to the Queen and Governor-General in the Constitution, replacing them with a President elected by a two-thirds majority of a joint parliamentary sitting.

In essence mainstream Australian Republicanism desires the removal of the crown for the sake of nationalism. Michael Kirby (1992:72) argues that this nationalism, this quest for independence, is a legacy from the last century and hopelessly out-dated.

The drive for independence, and the perception of dependence, was entrenched in the Australian Labor Party. The ALP, particularly in the sixties and seventies, claimed to be the party of Australian nationalism² . The desire for independence was largely the result of what Hiram Caton (1992:39) describes as 'the unquenchable Gaelic resentment of the English yoke.' This desire went hand in hand with White Australia, Protectionism, and the belief in a fairer society where honest men earn honest wages.

Old ALP nationalism has coupled with a desire in the educated middle-classes, particularly the in the arts community, for 'independence.' It was the same community who once believed, Tom Keanelly writes, that it was 'every writers' sacred duty to be alienated by Australia- to be a European soul descended into this terrible place.' (Abbott 1995:66) Now they argue, in the words of the General Manager of the Australia Council, that we must become a republic ' for artists to express themselves fully as artists,' for he ' cannot believe that we could go into the new millennium still tied to England..' (Abbott 1995:68).

Hal Colebatch (1987:7) summed up this nationalism when he wrote;

'The search for, and invocation of the mythical "National Identity" has become reminiscent in its absurdity of the pre-occupations of the Court of Gullivers Lilliput. Junk pseudo-nationalism, generally thought of elsewhere as belonging to right wing and reactionary thought, in Australia infests the progressive side of politics'.

Nationalism, not republicanism, is the cornerstone of Australian Republicanism.

For opponents of the Republican Movement (Abott 1995, Kirby 1992 & Smith) the common theme is that if the office of Head of State ' ain't broke, don't fix it.' Michael Kirby (1992:71) expresses the fear that ill-judged constitutional changes may drastically affect the nature and role of the office. Abbott (1995:21) reiterates this view arguing that changing the office of Governor-General will drastically transform the authority and nature of the Head of State. For Abbott (1995:32);

'a Head of State still appointed by politicians in the Parliament but no longer insulated from the political process is unlikely to have the same subsequent detachment.'

Essentially both Kirby and Abbott seem to fear that the proposed changes in essence represent a fusing of powers. Both appear to adhere to the view that Australia is a Crowned Republic, and by removing the Crown from the equation we delete an important part of the balance. In the event of a Republic sovereignty passes from the Crown to parliament, who will in turn elect the head of state. Without the symbolic, and sometimes real³ , check or balance of the Crown, the legislature and executive are fused even more.

David Smith (1992:36) observes that;

'..There is much that could be done to improve the way this country is governed and administrated. However these improvements could be bought about by politicians and bureaucrats of integrity and goodwill, without the need to change one word of the constitution.'

Abbott (1995:30) expresses a similar sentiment lamenting that if;

'the advocates of constitutional change were talking about overlap and duplication between the different tiers of Government, the tendency for Cabinet Government to degenerate into Prime Ministerial dictatorship thanks to party discipline, creeping centralism via the Federal Government's financial power, or misuse of the foreign affairs power, they would at least be addressing practical problems.'

Republicans talk of Australia becoming a Republic as an assertion of our independence and maturity. Surely maturity would be better illustrated by constitutional change for real reasons, the modification of a system that needs fine turning, to redress an imbalance, not for flatulent reasons of national identity.

---

 

References.

Abbott , T (1995) The Minimal Monarchy: And why it still makes sense for Australians. Kent Town: Wakefield Press.

Caton, H ' Farewell to Republics and Monarchies ,' in Legislative Studies, vol 7 Spring 1992.

Colebatch,H 'Western Australia, Australia and the World,' in The Burke Ambush: Corporatism and Society in WA. ed O'Brien, P (1986) Nedlands: Apollo Press.

Dahl, R (1989) Democracy and its Critics New Haven: Yale University Press.

Fraser, A 'Strong Republicanism and a Citizens Constitution,' in The Republican Debate. eds Carter, D & Hudson, W (1993). Sydney: NSW Uni Press.

Keating, P (1995) An Australian Republic: The Way Forward Canberra: Commonwealth Printing Service.

Kirby,M 'Reflections on a Constitutional Monarchy,' in The Republican Debate. eds Carter, D & Hudson, W (1993). Sydney: NSW Uni Press.

O'Brien, P (1993) ' 20 Minimal Principles for getting a democratic Constitution and fair and Open Government in Australia.' Unpublished.

Pettit, P ' Republican Themes' Legislative Studies, Vol 6, Summer 1992.

Smith, D ' A Republic- Who needs it ?' Legislative Studies, Vol 6, Summer 1992.

1 One need only to look at the work of the painter Jacques Louis David, like 'The Oath of the Horatii', to see the strong influence of Roman Republicanism on the French Revolution.

2 It is an irony of Australian political history that the first all Australian born cabinet was formed under S.M. Bruce, later Viscount Bruce of Melbourne, one of the last great Anglo-Australians (Edwards 1965:135).

3 Sir John Kerr , during the crisis of 1975, endeavoured to act as a representative of the Crown-the Queen's Man.

T