CONT'D...

Thirdly, Australia's multiculturalism-the recognition of the equal worth of its diverse people-is contradcited by privileging its British component through the office of head of state. Moreover, its method of selection, involving hereditary succession, the exclusion of Roman Catholics, and preference for male heirs, all run counter to the fundamental Australian values of equality and a "fair go" for all, regardless of race, religion, or sex.

Republican government is founded on popular sovereignty. All public officers derive their authority from the people either directly through election or indirectly through appointment by those elected by the people. Australian government is already essentially republican in that its constitution was approved by the electors before enactment at Westminster and can be amended only with their consent in a referendum. Public officers are chosen directly or indirectly by the people, with one significant excpetion: the office at the apex of the system, the head of state.

The principle of hereditary succession to public office contradicts not only the core republican principle of popular sovereignty, but also its more fundamental corollary: the equal dignity and worth of every human being. In a hereditary monarchy, some people are born superior to others.

Republican government also connotes compliance with the rule of law,
implementation of the separation of powers, and protection of individual rights and freedoms. Australian government is already republican in this respect; once the monarchy is abolished and the office of head of state is reconstituted on republican principles, Australia will truly be a republic.

Foxy, what makes you think we won't agree on very much at all?

Like you, I would prefer Australia to be a republic. I’m certainly no monarchist. It's just that there's no-one here capable of becoming a true head of state, as I’ve already stated. That's why I wasn't too fazed about us being seen as (unrealistically) a British colony. Mind you, our majority is still of Brit/Irish descent.

Right now, if the public was asked to nominate for an Aussie President, who do you think would be named? Favourite footy stars, cricket 'legends', 'You Think You Can Dance' contestants or 'Big Brother' characters? An Aussie actor? If you think I exaggerate, just look at some of the ‘participants’ of the 2020 summit.

I disagree that we are 'dependent on another country'. Most of this thinking comes from a collective inferiority complex that has no basis. Also, how does this perceived dependence affect our relations with our Asian neighbours?

You think that Australia's multiculturalism is contradicted by privileging its British component. Britain is even more multi-cultural than Australia so what do you mean here?

I note that you never commented on the fact that our links to the USA are now stronger than those to ‘the old country’. We don’t fight Brit wars anymore but are always there for the Yanks.

Who would you like for president?

Dear Austin,

Who would I like for President?

Not Barry Humphries.

Seriously though, let's become a republic first.

Cheers.

Seriously, Foxy, we can't consider becoming a republic and then root around for a leader.

Both must come at the same time. Otherwise we'll be likened to a headless chicken.

Dear Austin,

I'm sure that there will be quite a few suitable people who will be
nominated for the position.

Along the lines of Malcolm Fraser for example.

He was the first PM to seriously address the issues of Indigenous Australians, and after leaving office has become very much an elder statesman, focusing much on human rights and poverty.

Anyway, as I said - let's wait and see whose name comes up.

I'm sure there will be quite a competent choice.

Australia is after all no longer the cultural backwater of the 1950s.