With the death of the Queen there's a lot of talk about whether now is the time for Australia to become a republic. When this came up years ago and we had a referendum, I was enthusiastic but now I'm not so sure. The way the referendum was nobbled then shows that nothing is as clear cut as it might seem.
Some of my concerns are: how would our Head of State be identified? Who would be eligible? Would he/she be appointed or elected? If so, who would come up with the final list for consideration? Would we have to live with another retired Chief Justice or Army General? I hope we haven't forgotten the infamous John Kerr, who was a lawyer and there are still some questions about the current GG's involvement in Mr Morrison's recent power grab. Why didn't he advise against what was clearly outside the normal procedures? If all he thought he was able to do was sign whatever the PM put in front of him, what use was he?
I would only be interested in the notion of a republic if all politicians were banned from all aspects of the process. The position mustn't become a retirement option for someone the Government owes a favour.
And why would we think we'd be any better at choosing a President than the US, or Brazil, or the Philippines, or any body else for that matter. I don't think there's any doubt that most of the settled, successful countries in the world are constitutional monarchies: the Netherlands, Japan, Canada, the Scandinavian countries and so on.
Maybe there's something to be said for having a figurehead from a family on the other side of the world.
I
No comments:
Post a Comment