In 1901 Australia's most important founding document and symbol of our national life, The Australian Constitution was enacted, establishing the Commonwealth of Australia as the world's fifth federation.

Authors Avatar

In 1901 Australia’s most important founding document and symbol of our national life, The Australian Constitution was enacted, establishing the Commonwealth of Australia as the world’s fifth federation. Our founding fathers devised a constitution for a democratic and independent nation. The constitution they gave us serves to provide, and give protection to, the framework of our system of government and it remains relevant as the heart of Australia’s identity. However, pro-republicans frequently denounce its relevance in Australian society. They argue that a Constitutional Monarchy cannot be distinctively Australian and debate the relevance of the monarch within the Australian Constitutional framework. The very framework in which Australia’s system of government and politics is structured. The proceeding discussion will explore the importance of the Constitutional Monarchy and the stability, safety, and freedom it provides, from which this nation continues to benefit. This essay will argue that The Australian Constitution, the way it stands, remains uniquely and distinctively Australian and enjoys continued relevance, contrary to republican’s claims that it is outdated and no longer significant.

Of the many sides to the republican cause, the notion that our head of state should be an Australian and positioned democratically appears most senior among them. With the introduction of The Royal Style and Titles Act 1953, the Australian parliament legislated, under Prime Minister Menzies, to provide Australia with a monarch who is distinctively Australian, the Queen of Australia. An act of parliament to which the Queen gave her consent. But is the Queen really our head of state? In addressing the Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) National Conference in 2000, Sir David Smith noted that our head of state is the Queen appointed, Governor General (Smith n.d.). According to Gibson (n.d.), civic educator with the ACM, the notion that the Queen is Australia’s head of state is totally untrue and the Federal Attorney General’s office cannot produce ‘…a single document where the Queen is recognised officially as the Head of State.’ Further, Gibson stated that the same was true of the Constitution and noted that the Queen’s role in Australia’s government is fundamentally ceremonial only. When our constitution was adopted by popular vote in 1900, powers were vested in the Queen but were to be exercised by the Governor General. An example of this was seen in 1975 when Prime Minister Gough Whitlam was sacked by the Governor General, Sir John Kerr. The Queen played no part in his dismissal. It was a Constitutional issue, not an issue of the crown.

Join now!

Having a Governor General provides stability and impartiality in that the executive power is held by a non-political representative of the Queen and is used to keep the political system functioning in accordance with the constitution. One example of the power and responsibility vested in the Governor General includes the powers of Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s defence force, thus ensuring that any government or political group cannot use the armed forces against the people. If the constitution was altered to remove our impartial Head of State, who would assume such responsibility? A President with a mandate and power? A ...

This is a preview of the whole essay