It would have to be agreed that the Australian Federation that was Sir Henry Parkes' lifetime goal is more than symbolised, it is epitomised, in the Constitution that was adopted. No international visitor, were they but to read the opening paragraph of that Constitution's preamble, would have the slightest excuse for thinking this country still to be colonially beholden to any outside prescription as to its status. Its words:

"Whereas the people ... have agreed to unite
... under the Crown of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, and under the
Constitution hereby established:"

The possibly tongue-in-cheek ambiguity implicit within the earlier suggestion of in turn renaming that part of the intended 'Parkes Place East' that skirts the High Court of Australia as 'Henry Parkes Court' is excusable inasmuch as, in a way, that Court could be seen as Henry's own creation. It could symbolise the way, left to themselves by the purveyors of political 'correction', Australians tend to, not entirely irreverently, name things.

The other side of the symbolic coin constituted by the status of the Australian polity in that freely adopted position under the Crown is the power of veto given it under the provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 over any proposed UK legislation of a type specified in that statute's first two paragraphs. To wit:

"Whereas .....:

And Whereas ... any alteration in the law
[of the UK] touching the Succession to the
Throne or the Royal Style and Titles shall
hereafter require the assent as well of the
Parliaments of all the Dominions as of the
Parliament of the United Kingdom:"

In its own symbolic way, the renaming of that section of the present Parkes Place as 'Queen Elizabeth Terrace' is not only consistent with the streetscape planning protocols of the national capital, but serves to underscore the legislative and political status of the Australian Commonwealth as one that long ago progressed from colonial dependency to that of joint custodian of British heritage.

That power is Parkes' legacy, too. Highlight it!

Meanwhile, look at what has been happening in Parkes, NSW: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/07/04/3538590.htm

Its probably a little late in the day to bring up another little streetscape naming issue that has seemingly escaped notice, but better late than never.

If one looks at this part of the map of the suburb of Parkes, ACT, http://twitpic.com/bbj538 , it will be seen that on the western side of the National Rose Garden the roadway is presently named 'Parkes Place', to become under tomorrow's renaming proposal part of 'Parkes Place West'.

The roadway at the eastern end of the National Rose Garden is un-named on the map, but, by less than fully clear inference because of its displacement along King Edward Terrace, is presumably also presently part of Parkes Place, the road. This section of roadway to become, under tomorrow's renaming intention, part of Parkes Place East. That little bit of displacement along King Edward Terrace could provide the opportunity to yet more fully memorialise Sir Henry Parkes, for there needs to be found a way around the seeming necessity of having to otherwise identify this section of roadway as 'Parkes Place East South', once tomorrow's renaming goes into effect. See this part of the map for clarification: http://twitpic.com/bbj4jt

Whilst in crafting the Federation proposals that effectively married all the States as one, Henry Parkes never promised us a rose garden, we nevertheless got one, and its existence may just provide a way out of this apparent nomenclatural and memorialization bind. This seemingly orphan section of roadway could be named 'Parkes Garden Place', avoiding any chance of confusion with the intended 'Parkes Place East', the suggested 'Henry Parkes Court', or indeed that part of King Edward Terrace that provides the displacement that creates a basis for confusion in the first place. That would give old Henry Parkes a net gain of four memorializations over that of the somewhat amorphous 'Parkes Place' (the vicinity) with which we all started.

Whatever the outcome of Ben Jones' petition, I am confident the NCA will be grateful for his outrage in helping reveal the extent to which its proposal has been thought through. I'm Parkest right out now.

It seems just a trifle incongruous that the monarch having had the shortest reign of those reigning since Federation, Edward VII, should be memorialized with the longest terrace in the Parliamentary Triangle, whilst at the same time HM Queen Elizabeth II, the longest-reigning, is being memorialized with the shortest. Maybe thats just the way things are likely to turn out in Canberra, but I wonder.

I mention it only because one way out of the otherwise seeming necessity of having to identify, as things today stand, a part of the newly-created Parkes Place East as 'Parkes Place East South' (or some such other ambiguous name as 'Parkes Garden Place', with or without an apostrophe), would be to excise that small section of King Edward Terrace that creates the displacement between the two distinguishable parts of the new Parkes Place East and formally make it part thereof*. Parkes Place East, that is.

That would leave the NCA with the necessity of having a 'King Edward Terrace East' and a 'King Edward Terrace West' as a consequence of such a fix.

If, as we are from time to time exhorted, we keep looking on the bright side of life, this apparent no-nett-nomenclatural-gain solution could instead be modified to provide a template for Parliamentary Triangle monarchical memorializations into the future. The short section of the present King Edward Terrace to the east of the easternmost intersection with Parkes Place East could remain as, simply, King Edward Terrace, a memorialization perhaps more proportional to the length of his reign. The longer section of the present King Edward Terrace to the west of the westernmost intersection with the new Parkes Place East could be held in nomenclatural reserve for future monarchical memorialization(s). It could renamed in the interim as King Edward's Terrace to distinguish it from the permanent memorialization to the east, with but the addition of an apostrophe and an 's'.

So there you go, NCA. Named and shamed!

`

*Sentence lengths are in memorialization of PM John Gorton, whose memorial building now sits in Parkes Place East.

I trust supporters for 'Queen Elizabeth Terrace' don't rub salt into the wounded pride of its opponents by erecting 'No Parking' signs.

Having succumbed to the seductions of cross-promotion in tweeting a link to a post in this comments thread to the Canberra Times on Twitter, with the effect of that tweet as of this morning having moved up to feature in the very top of its @mentions 'top tweets', http://twitpic.com/bcfmdx , I feel obliged to contribute a little more to this (regrettably) increasingly monological discussion.

It would be nice to be able to pass over my reference to Edward VII in my post of Saturday, 10 November 2012 at 8:28:57 AM, as a typo in which I really meant to refer to Edward VIII as having had the shortest reign (20 January to 11 December 1936) during the life of the Federation, but the truth is that I had momentarily forgotten that reign. All of which requires amendment to suggestions toward resolution of such nomenclatural mayhem as exists in the Parliamentary Triangle in the vicinity of Parkes' various Places.

An alternative to the excision of a small portion of the present King Edward Terrace for purposes of creation of continuity between the offset, and therefore discontinuous, parts of the new (since Saturday) Parkes Place East, could be to construct an over(or under)pass that would connect the two (or three) sections of Parkes Place East roadway. If it was to be an overpass it could, for example, be named 'Faulconbridge Bridge' in memorialization of Clarinda Parkes (nee Faulconbridge), Sir Henry's wife.

The present King Edward Terrace would thus remain continuous, as it indeed is, and could be made to serve double memorialization duty with but the addition of an 's' to 'King', making it the Kings Edward Terrace, given that there have been during the life of the Federation two kings Edward. A like amendment to King George Terrace could memorialize the two kings George. An absolutely capital resolution of nomenclatural difficulties in tune with the ethos of the place. Canberra, that is.

Moving forward, more terraces could be constructed as required for future memorializations, unless some other structure comes into vogue to take their place.

So you don't think, Forrest, that my minor aside wasn't merely an attempt to be part of a latebreaking 'top tweet' I too "feel obliged to contribute a little more…"

I like all your nomenclature options as presented. Especially as they offer opportunities for action at two further stages.

"Moving forward" (as you say), when the next Republican debate/argument flares up in Canberra the Queen Elizabeth, Kings Edward and Kings George roadways should all be renamed – replacing the descriptor Terrace with Row.

Further, upon the achievement of independent republic status, Row can be changed to Close.