|
The
Australian republic is an issue of demographics.
It is moving steadily from probability to certainty.
Older Australians are less likely to support the
Republic, not merely out of fear of change but
because they see it as some how diminishing their
contribution to the Australia they know, they
helped build and which they still love.
It is with this older age group in our community
that the most mischief is made by those seeking
to delay the course of history. It is to my own
parents age group, those who fought in or who
remember World War II, that the greatest disinformation
is spread.
It is to this substantial and influential demographic
slab of Australia that the Republican Movement
must give its attention. The nation which fought
under the Australian flag in the 1939-45 war must
be reassured that the heritage they protected
is not at risk.
Older Australians want and need to hear from those
who seek constitutional change that the values
and traditions they so rightly cherish will not
be swept away by the tides of change. And I think
they are right.
The Republican issue is not about scrapping Australia
and starting all over again. It is not about rewriting
history and denying the past. It is a step best
kept simple, a step the nation can take in unison.
A number of supporters of the Republic have sought
to embellish the simple Republican concept by
wrongly seeing it as an opportunity to change
a lot of things about Australia. In doing so,
they have fed the inherent suspicion of a society
which is naturally conservative on the issue of
constitutional change.
Proposals to Americanise our political system
with political nominees for President; suggestions
that the States will be rendered obsolete; changing
the role of the Senate all serve as confusing
side roads of the highway of history.
The biggest distraction though is the hitching
of the new flag proposal to that of constitutional
change. While debate about a modified national
symbol would legitimately follow Australia finally
severing links with the British Monarchy it must
be a separate process in the sequence.
Australians are far more divided on be question
of a new flag than on the idea of a Republic.
While there might one day be a new flag after
Australia becomes a Republic, there is no way
there will be a new flag before the constitutional
issue is resolved.
First things first: let Australians resolve the
issue of constitutional change by referendum;
then later, let there be a debate and separate
referendum about the Australian flag. Those who
propose a package deal are delaying both proposals
for change, the more important of which is constitutional
change.
Opponents of change to a Republic use the flag
issue to great effect, especially with older Australians
to overload be otherwise unstoppable case for
the final steps towards national identity. Republicans
must understand and respect the feelings of those
who "fought under the existing Australian flag"
and themselves recognise a separate sequence of
debate and decision regarding the Australian flag.
In being asked to endorse an Australian Head of
State, other threats can and should be removed.
Apart from the flag, what be call ourselves is
an important element in persuasion. When we adopt
the proposal for an Australian Head of State we
should call ourselves `The Commonwealth of Australia'
not the `Republic of Australia'.
Australians have some preconceived notions about
republics. South American Dictatorships. Banana
Republics. The Commonwealth of Australia was another
thing our forebears got right a century ago -
the commonwealth embodies a sense of mateship,
egalitarianism - and above all - a fair go. Not
only does it reflect Australian values, it is
our name already.
Nor do we need to change our national anthem Advance
Australia Fair which celebrates `this Commonwealth
of ours'. Those who, like the NSW Premier Bob
Carr attack words like `girt by sea', might be
a little clearer about their meaning after the
heroic rescue of stranded yachtsmen from the mighty
Southern Ocean in the last month after their location
by Adelaide based air crews.
Advance
Australia Fair will serve the nation under
an Australian Head of State just as well.
The Australian Coat of Arms - the Commonwealth
crest - will require no change whatsoever, embodying,
as it does, the Commonwealth Star and the States'
Coats of Arms. Less re-badging would be required
than when a major government department or corporation
undergoes a name change. In the Republic I see
there would be no name change and no re-badging.
True it is that the Commonwealth Star may well
take over crowns in many places where they currently
appear but this flows from the pre-Republic preeminence
of the existing Commonwealth Coat of Arms. The
custodians of discipline in the Australian Defence
Force, those holding the rank of Warrant Officer
First Class, replaced the Royal Cipher with the
Australian coat of arms years ago.
The same name, the same symbols, the same anthem,
the same system of government, an Australian Head
of State exercising the same powers as the Governor
General but to be called President - these are
the reassurances that need to be given. Not much
change at all. Those who seek radical change will
be disappointed, but they would be anyway with
a nation rightly proud of its achievements and
its renowned tolerance.
These are the sorts of messages that we supporters
of the new Commonwealth must get across to the
Australian people. Like you, with the new millennium
nearly upon us, I feel a sense of urgency. Like
you, I sense a growing excitement and anticipation
as history's page is about to turn.
Complacency and indecision do our nation little
credit. The Australian people will respond well
to a resolute, consensus driven approach and expect
the Howard Government to set a timetable for debate
and decision as soon as possible after Federal
Cabinet resumes tomorrow for the year.
Finally, today I want to propose what might be
a circuit breaker in the continuing constitutional
debate. It affects particularly those older Australians
who are the most skeptical group in our community.
Despite every indication from the Queen that she
respects our right to determine our future as
a nation, many older Australians put the view
that becoming a republic should be delayed until
Queen Elizabeth II either steps town or dies.
Queen Elizabeth is the only British monarch to
have enjoyed the particular title `Queen of Australia'.
Some feel that becoming a Republic, though ultimately
inevitable, would strip Queen Elizabeth of the
title `Queen of Australia' and therefore might
insult a well liked person who has given over
four decades to public service.
The Royal family, most of all the Queen herself,
are totally reconciled to Australia's imminent
evolution towards total constitutional independence
from the United Kingdom.
One friendly gesture the Australian people could
make at the same time the Commonwealth of Australia
endorses its own Head of State would be to include
in legislation a parting and personal compliment
to Queen Elizabeth: the right to retain the title
`Queen of Australia' until her death, an honour
in recognition of her service to Australia.
Such a gesture, although honorary in nature, would
provide a sense of transition and importantly
personal recognition to a well liked public figure
respected by all Australians, Monarchists and
Republicans alike.
Importantly, it would also signal that the Republic
we seek is not about denigration of personal effort,
denial of history or the abandonment of previous
values and tradition.
|
