A Mate for a Head of State: Renovate Don't Detonate

Speech by Kathy Bail at The Sydney Institute launch of A Mate for Head of State
Museum of Sydney, Wednesday 18 January 2006

These days the republic isn't exactly a barbeque stopper. Or perhaps it is - mention it and everyone will suddenly realise they need to head to the kitchen for another beer or go home to count their socks.

But it doesn't have to be this way. When talking with a small gathering of your fellow Australians, it's best to drop the R-word and start with the one thing about which we all have an opinion - houses. One house, in particular: a large property that, despite the attractions of a formal driveway and lake views, changes owner regularly.

See - now you're all interested. Yes, I'm talking about Yarralumla - a grand residence in dire need of a makeover.

It's got one of those old-style kitchens that you can't see into from the living area, rooms full of antique furniture in various shades of dark brown, and despite the great prices you can get these days on plasma screens, no home theatre.

Some people say detonate, I say renovate.

Once everyone's cooing over your proposal for new decking with floating glass balustrades, you might also propose changes to an aspect of the place needing more than a scrub and a lick of paint - the job of the current resident, the governor-general, the English Queen's local rep.

We've been grappling with this franchise arrangement for the past 125 years and often getting the emphasis wrong.

In 1891 JF Archibald, founding editor of The Bulletin and maverick republican, said in the magazine that "Federation under the Crown" meant "tinsel titles for the vulgar and the vain [and] irritating surveillance by distant and foreign officials who never saw, nor wished to see, the great southern land…."

One hundred years later cartoonist Reg Lynch drew a Queen Elizabeth stamp for the cover of The Independent Monthly, another publication with a republican bent. Across the image, he wrote RETURN TO SENDER.

Both Archibald in the nineteenth century and the republicans in the twentieth century eventually realised there was no mileage in attacking the Queen.

In fact, the best thing may well be to enlist her as she may already be on our side. It's highly likely the royals are wondering why we're dragging the chain. I'm told a couple of keen observers, who talk to them occasionally, claim the Queen and especially Charles are amazed that Australia isn't already a republic.

Anyway, the Queen is not really the issue. This time the campaign pitch can't leave out those people who aren't yet convinced. We have to stop the wishful thinking and stop talking only to the converted.

During the summer break I did attend a few barbeques. I tried to find out what people thought about the issue of a republic and realised the "it's time" argument isn't enough.

Australians need to be persuaded that a change in the head of state would make a practical difference - that it's not just a formality in a bit of legislation they'll never read.

The 1999 referendum proved that Australians would reject a model imposed from above. We need to focus on giving people a vote, letting them - not politicians - determine who gets to be chauffeured down that leafy drive in the back of the old vice-regal roller (recently re-upholstered of course).

The healthy scepticism about politicians in this country is fertile ground. Australians generally think they've got a pretty good system of government. But ask them if they're well governed and you get a different response. Remember back in 1991 when Kerry Packer had most of the country punching the air after he told a bunch of senators that they weren't doing such a good job that we should be donating extra in tax.

The change to an Australian head of state must be a change to a representative of the people. People must feel they have a say in the outcome. They also need to be involved in the process by which we arrive at this change.

A Mate-for-a-Head-of-State movement has the potential to shift perceptions of the republican movement. This new push can't be so easily dismissed if it provides those communities and individuals who become active and involved with an opportunity to make politicians answerable to them.

One of the main problems with the 1999 republican campaign was that it seemed to split broadly along party lines. This is less likely if we give it another go, given that the future of the Liberal Party lies with the likes of Peter Costello and that shy new boy in Canberra, Malcolm Turnbull.

However, one specific suggestion for the legislators: we'll tell politicians they can apply for the job only when they've been out of parliament for at least 10 years. No jobs for the boys when it comes to this significant appointment.

I know Australians tend to avoid lengthy and formal discussion of political issues, but we do talk easily and confidently about Australian values. Wave an Australian flag in front of us and we'll say it symbolises an egalitarian nation and a fair go for all. Ask us to stage the Olympics and in the opening ceremony we'll present a confident and distinctive image of contemporary multicultural Australia. On the global political stage, we expect the prime minister to act independently and in our interest -- not the Queen's.

Of course it makes sense to start imagining an Australian head of state, one who embodies these shared values. Yet the republican movement in the nineties made the mistake of assuming that because the country had changed it was logically time for the symbols of governance to catch up.

Later it became clear that some Australians don't perceive a contradiction between a defiant nationalism and continuance of imperial symbols, like the monarch or the Union Jack. This may be because there is some comfort in the tradition they reflect. Decades of change in contemporary culture provoked not a desire for more change but an emotional attachment to the established symbols of our past. Never mind that we fought under the Union Jack at Gallipoli - for those waving the Australian flag today, it has come to symbolise the sentiment associated with Aussies on that dusty foreshore.

There's nothing to be gained by attacking any of this. Far better to propose a Mate for Head of State as not so much a change to something new as a link with tradition: that is, the egalitarianism we like to think of as Australian. This campaign embodies the idea of giving everyone an opportunity to have a crack at it - the chance to be their country's head of state.

If you find this sort of talk has everyone at the barbie fiddling with their plastic wine glass, then you can just drop the political terminology and say, "This is the chance for any one of us to be the celebrity riding in the limo and getting out on the red carpet." Then watch their eyes light up.

If we're going to succeed with a campaign for an Australian head of state we have to get past the arguments we've been making for the past decade. What we have to face is that politics today is primarily about the economy and not society. To get a social issue such as the republic back on the agenda, we need to inspire Australians with a new position that reflects contemporary views and reinforces shared values.

So here's our slogan: Renovate don't detonate.

With thanks to Simon Barney.