O
verwhelmingly, Australians want an Australian head of state, someone who is chosen on merit. They do not want to continue with a head of state who lives in Britain, who is chosen on hereditary principles, who cannot be a Catholic or married to a Catholic and who is chosen in a way that discriminates against females.
These things are unAustralian. They grate against modern Australian ideals an aspirations.
This is the cental matter in tomorrow’s referendum — to get an Australian head of state. This is why The Canberra Times supports a Yes vote for the proposal to establish Australia as a republic.
Acknowledgment of our British heritage can be retained through continued membership of the Commonwealth of Nations, along with 33 other republics.
True, many Australians have expressed reservations about the republican model on offer. But that is not a reason for voting No. It would not matter what model were put forward, some would still have reservations: that the model was too radical, too minimal, directly elected the president, did not directly elect the president, and so on.
Are we to condemn ourselves to endless alliances between the remaining monarchists and republicans who object to whatever model happens to be put up (and presumably more will be put up)?
The essential point is to vote Yes to get an Australian head of state. If the model on offer does not fulfil the aspirations of a significant number of Australians further change can be considered later.
This model, though, is a very good start. It is safe. It is very close to the present system. But it removes the monarchy.
The proposal is a fair one. It keeps the present system of government and puts the onus on those republicans who want significant further change to argue their case positively in detail on its merits without the disingenuous support of monarchist allies. Support for further change may well be there, but it needs to be tested after the threshold question is resolved. A direct election may work with codified reserve powers and some way to ensure it does not become a purely political Liberal vs Labor contest.
And Australia will get a chance to look at further change much sooner if they vote Yes tomorrow than if they vote No.
If you want the Queen vote No. If you want an Australian head of state vote Yes, whether you want that head of state directly elected or chosen by parliamentarians. Surely, a president selected by our elected parliamentarians is better than a monarch chosen by accident of birth — especially as the method of choosing the Australian head of state can be changed later, in the same way that we have changed the method of electing our parliamentarians many times since federation.
The proposed model requires the president be approved by both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting of Federal Parliament. True the Prime Minister can dismiss the President, but the President is replaced by the longest-serving state governor until a new President is selected. That has to be safer and better than the present system under which the Governor-General can be chosen, sacked or replaced by the Prime Minister alone.
A No vote tomorrow is a vote for the Kings and Queens of England to remain at the head of the Australian system. A No says Australians are not good enough to be the head of state of their own country.