Why Is Australia Nonetheless A part of the British Monarchy?

The Australia Letter is a weekly newsletter from our Australian office. Sign up to receive it by email. This week’s issue was written by Yan Zhuang, a reporter from the Australian bureau.

Former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke certainly never called the Queen “a pig” dressed “in two sets and pearls”. There’s no evidence that Princess Diana ever called Uluru “Ayers Dock,” and no, Brisbane doesn’t look like Spain.

These are just some of the things Australians who watched “The Crown” thought after the sixth episode of the popular series that featured Charles and Diana’s visit to Australia in 1983 to counter a growing republican movement in the country. have quickly pointed out spearheaded by Mr. Hawke. The more complicated question in remembering the visit is: why did a country proud of its egalitarianism and giving everyone a “fair start” decided to maintain a formal link with the British monarchy, and why is that still the case today?

Formally, Australia is a constitutional monarchy, which means that the queen is the head of state. According to the Royal Family website, when the Queen visits Australia she speaks and acts as the Queen of Australia rather than the Queen of the United Kingdom.

Other former English colonies have a similar configuration (Jamaica, for example), but Australia is the Queen’s largest and most distant realm, and for some reason seems to hold it that way.

The last major push to make Australia a republic was more than 20 years ago. A referendum that gave the Australian Parliament the power to elect the Australian head of state was narrowly rejected in a 1999 referendum. 45 percent of Australians voted for and 55 percent against.

“Australia is a Republican country,” said Mark McKenna, historian and Republican at the University of Sydney. “It is egalitarian, democratic, it believes in merit against background, status, class. But it was not possible for its constitutional rules to reflect the tenor and values ​​of his society. “

What’s stopping it?

In the real-life interview that this is based on in The Crown, Hawke says, “I think we’d be better off as a republic, but I don’t think it’s a matter of major concern.”

He was more concerned about the problems common Australians face, “and if we were to become a republic tomorrow it would not improve their condition an iota.”

And that seems to be the position of most Republican proponents in Australia: let’s keep it updated as we delve into more immediate issues.

Even when I was a member of my university’s Republican club (out of wanting free pizza rather than a burning desire to move things forward) the feeling was, why talk about republicanism when we could talk about students, for example? Welfare or Inequality?

Louis Devine, the former president of our club who now sits on the Victorian Committee of the Australian Republic Movement, agrees that this is part of it – although he argues that people can multitask and that symbols still carry weight.

The other reason “why there is this interest but not passion is that most people think it’s inevitable,” he says. And inevitability leads to inaction.

Lack of passion could also have something to do with the fact that the question of republicanism has historically been framed as something outside of us, a question of what we don’t want to be, said Professor McKenna. This is not a particularly inspiring message.

“The republic must mean more than just a severance payment,” he said. “It has to be a bigger question about our relationship with the land, with the land, with each other and with the position of indigenous Australians.”

He added that constitutional recognition of indigenous Australians should be the focus of the conversation.

Another challenge is to convince Australians to give more importance to the Constitution than it is now. In the United States, the constitution and its language play a central role in national identity, and phrases like “the second amendment” and “constitutional rights” are regularly tossed around.

“Australia is the opposite,” said Professor McKenna. “Australia is a country that doesn’t tie its identity to its constitution in any really powerful way.”

Sandy Biar, the national director of the Australian Republic Movement, also noted a more personal reason why many Australians prefer to cling to the monarchy. You have a thing for Queen Elizabeth.

“For a lot of people, she’s been there all their lives,” he said. “They have a strong personal bond and, for the most part, feel that they hold office with dignity and have managed to embody the virtues of a head of state they would like to see.”

In “The Crown”, Bob Hawke expresses the hope that Charles and Diana’s journey, which goes badly, will be the focus Australia needs to shake off the monarchy. The hope now is that if Charles takes over it will create another focal point that “will remind people that we are not as constitutionally independent as we think we are,” Biar said.

What do you think of an Australian republic? Let us know at [email protected].

Comments are closed.