response to David Latimer:

I am surprised in your latest list of constitutions that you have included Great Britain, which has never had a written constitution, and Massachusetts and New Hampshire, which have never been independent states, unless you want to include their status under the Articles of Confederation. You may as well have included New South Wales and South Australia.

If you think that monarchists would be at all mollified by retention of the Queen as Head of the Commonwealth then my opinion of your abilities would take a severe battering. Most monarchists don't give a rats about the Commonwealth, but would love to keep a representative of Her Majesty who could do a bit of sacking now and then.

The only kind of reform I would really love to see would be one which prohibited the GG from giving reasons when sacking the PM. He would be restricted to an announcement that "the PM holds his office during my pleasure; he has displeased me and therefore I have dismissed him".

Always remember that at the end of the day any republican proposal has to be approved by the PEOPLE in four states. Extensive expansion of their powers over the elite would be necessary, with the kind of citizen initiated referendum enjoyed by the Swiss for over 125 years an ideal example.

Remember however that if citizen initiated referendum ever got up the first one would be on bring back hanging. Many other anti-PC ideas would shortly follow, with Pauline Hanson being consulted on other populist ideas, and that is why I cannot see it ever being achieved. So we stay with the status quo. Long live the Queen!

plerdsus,
Please continue but whatever you do don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

David Latimer has provided you with everything you could possibly need to know, and still you will not see.

You go on worshipping your old queen, while the more progressive of us fight to cut the apron strings and mature as a nation. The queen is an old parasite, she sails in costing us as taxpayers $3 million for a few days, then she is off after performing the most difficult of duties, talking, cutting a ribbon and pigging out on the best Australia has to offer, not bad work if you can get it, and she's not even an Aussie.

Response to Plerdsus:

Indeed, I do consider the US Articles of Confederation which stated that "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence [and do] enter into a firm league of friendship with each other." The only Australian candidate would be the constitution of WA (1889), but WA was a colony, not an independent state. The United Kingdom has a constitution, but it is not written neatly into one document. Nevertheless, those documents have existed for a long, long time.

Are you saying that monarchists don't care about the commonwealth? That does not make sense. Anyway, I care about it.

Thanks for the various reminders. I'm actually aiming for all six states to support a republican referendum.

There is a new website: http://www.copernican.info, which explains the various 'elect-the-HOS' proposals.

The thought of Australia becoming a republic frightens me.
Republics are what they have in North, Central and South America;
and are characterised by revolutions, civil wars, assasinations
and coups d'etat.
Is it simply a coincidence that Australia and Canada avoided such
nonsense?
In other parts of the world, even more grisly, are "People's
Republics" and "Democratic Repulics"

Under our present system politicians acknowledge a higher authority:
The Crown. It is a symbol of constitutional inegrity; a guarontor
of our rights and freedoms accrued over hundreds of years.

Response to Gulliver:

Are you really that frightened of your fellow Australians?

Monarchies are also associated with revolution and civil war: Russia, Turkey, Austria, Portugal, Germany, Italy, Romania and France. Are there not protests in Thailand this week?

This argument about monarchies offering stability is full of holes. The monarchy is not a stabilising force in Australia. We effectively run our own affairs anyway.

The reason Australia has avoided civil war and revolution is because of the good sense of the Australian people.

Well said Gulliver. I thought you might like the polish joke I have posted on another article on this subject:

Question: What is the difference between a republic and a people's republic?

Answer: It's the same as the difference between a chair and an electric chair.

response to David Latimer:

I am impressed to see you are aiming for all six states to support your proposal on a republic. This would create history, for as far as I know since Federation no referendum proposal which has been rejected has passed on a second or subsequent attempt. It would be even more impressive considering that in three states more than 58% of the electors opposed the proposal. The referendum that should be studied by republicans would be the Federation one itself, and that passed because a coalition was formed of different groups supporting it for entirely different reasons. Since federation no referendum has been approved that has had any sort of serious opposition. That means that you would have to convert someone like myself or Gulliver from an opponent to an active supporter. This means that people who are happy with the current system, who enjoy watching all the Federal politicians swearing allegiance to the Queen, have to achieve some other benefit, which they currently don't have, or they will just stick with the status quo with which they are happy