I agree with this article . The tired old cliche that the British crown symbolises national unity was never true . If it symbolised anything , in the early years of Federation , it symbolised , to some of the dominant group , the British , that Irish Australians [ the outsiders at that time ] were disloyal . Now , it symbolises nothing .
The only remaining significance of the British crown is that whenever a Governor General , or State Governor , needs to be appointed , the British monarch signs a piece of paper [ presented by the Prime Minister or Premier ] to appoint the recommended appointee .

The real reason the constitution was not changed, and never mind the author's muddled reasoning, is that there was no pressing need to do so. The bits left over from another era - the Queen technically appointing governor generals - may be anachronisms but they are harmless ones.

The only ones really keen on the change were activists who think in terms of ideological gestures.

As for Xenophobic, the author is recyling material from the Hanson campaigns of a decade and more ago. Did immigration get much play in the last Federal election? I don't recall so. In any case, our levels of immigration are the highest they have been since the 1950s. Perhaps the author should find some other bandwagon.

What stuff’n- nonsense, and weaker than water diatribe proffered in this article, as support to overthrow a perfectly stable and working model of Democracy and Royalist Government, that Australia displays to the world as example.

And, what lack of fact as truth. A typical “Hysteron Proteron” declaring peace at the pronouncement of a Republic, when we have peace already under the Royalist flag of Australia. so pathetically wrong and irrelevant in detail the argument continues: Calling on, as a primary argument for a republic, Aboriginal dislike to Australia day and all it stands for: Calling on a flawed view of American history, implying the genocide of the North American Aboriginal was entirely due to British expansionism on the American Continent, as an assumed truth; drawing an impossible correlation between the Genocide of Aboriginals, co-incidentally under the Royalist flag of England in Australia, to the genocide of North American Aboriginals, co-incidentally in the hey-day of a murderous pogrom, under the American republican banner of the era, and not actually the flag of England, on the American Continent.

The truth of the matter is, Genocide continues under whatever banner flutters over the bloodbath of death of native cultural destruction at the time, irrespective of the politic of the Nation. Republics are historically and notoriously unstable and inclined to advance the interest of dictators well before the citizens. Are more inclined to be ruled by military regimes and to use military muscle against its people, than has been proved to happen under Royalist rule; especially one, as example, ruled over for such period as ours. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, most definitely no republican instability for Australia thank you

Dear David, or should I say Oh dear David?

Your assertion that somehow all the problems you mention will be fixed by a republic is really, really silly. Secondly, if it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it. Thirdly, you conveniently confuse the “Crown” with the “royal family”, naughty, naughty. And finally, we live in a democracy and the Australian people have twice said NO THANKS. What part of this don’t you understand and what part of our democracy do you represent?
.

It is my view that only one profession would benefit from an Australian Republic that is the legal profession. Oh boy! Oh boy! How the dollars will roll in as one set of lawyers squabble with another set over all the problems mentioned by the author and many more. For instance, there is the almost impossible problem of reconciling the six state legal systems with the great new republic? Then there is the perennial question of how the president will be appointed?
More and more material to boost legal incomes

The current state of politics, should tell you there needs to be big changes. I think we can have a republic without any over the top expenditure. There does not have to be a revolution, just get rid of the monarchy stamp, and be identified as Australians. Long overdue referendum. [Does AU want to be a republic.]