ARM MEDIA RELEASE - 12 January 2006

ARM slams sexist decision

The Australian Republican Movement's (ARM) national Chair, Mr Ted O'Brien, today criticised a decision by the British House of Lords to deny women the same rights of succession as men as "discriminatory and archaic".

The British Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, yesterday dismissed suggestions that the British Government abolish primogeniture in succession to the throne - which has preserved the existing right of succession in Britain, whereby male heirs will always take precedence over female heirs, and the older male takes precedence over the younger male - on the basis that there was "no groundswell for change".

While acknowledging that it was "not right to have gender discrimination" in relation to succession, His Lordship argued that it was "not the time to embark on change" as "The heir to the throne is a man, the heir to the throne's son is a man and his second son is a man."

Mr O'Brien declared that "This decision underscores the absurdity of Australia's continuing links to the British monarchy. It upholds a system which supports the notion that a woman can only be trusted for the top job when there are no men available."

"Australia first granted women the vote and the right to stand in elections as early as 1894, but over one hundred years later we can only have a woman as our Head of State if she lacks a brother - as is the case with Queen Elizabeth II", he said.

Mr O'Brien asked how monarchists can continue to justify this embarrassing decision. "Monarchists support the retention of constitutional monarchy in Australia. Do they also support propping up this absurd fiction that women are only suitable for our top job when there are no men available?"

The ARM's National Director, Allison Henry, stated that "The system of succession would not comply with Australia's Sex Discrimination Act, yet under our constitutional system Australians - and Australian law - has no say in the matter. This decision - which impacts upon the rules determining Australia's Head of State - has been made in Britain, by a British politician, with no consultation with Australia."

"This decision reinforces, once again, that its time that we had one of our own as Head of State. One determined on merit, not gender and birthright," said Mr O'Brien.