The 'royal' coin controversies

THE design for an official commemorative coin marking Prince William and Kate Middleton’s engagement was unveiled just before Christmas 2010, but many royal fans have reported trouble recognising the couple.

In 1963, another royal coin controversy happened in Australia when the staunch royalist Prime Minister Menzies recommended calling the new Australian decimal currency ‘royals’. In this instance the Australian people were not troubled, they were outraged.

The Royal Mint’s unveiling of the design of its new £5 coin to commemorate the engagement of Prince William and Kate Middleton has led to a torrent of complaints that the couple are barely recognisable on its face.

A Royal Mint spokesman said:

“The inspiration for the design came from photographs of the couple at a sporting event – the play on the traditional portrait is that Prince William is seen in profile, alluding to his royal status.”

Kate Middleton is displayed looking at him face-on in a more informal pose.

The profile image of William engraved on the collector’s piece bears a passable resemblance to the second in line to the throne, but Middleton – who is face on beside him – appears to have aged and gained some weight. Critics appalled at the chipmunk cheeks on the likeness of Kate Middleton have taken aim at the coin issued to commemorate Britain’s upcoming royal wedding. In fact, several critics have compared William’s pic to Al Gore.

The Royal Mint has created many commemorative medals and coins to mark special occasions, including the 2012 London Olympics as well as other royal events, but this is the first time it has created a commemorative royal engagement coin.

Controversies over currency and the Royals have also occurred in Australia. The Australian dollar was first introduced in 1966 when it replaced the Australian pound and introduced a decimal system to the nation. Although investigated as an alternative as early as 1901, the decimal currency system was initially introduced to Australia as an election promise by then Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies in 1958. There was much discussion about the name of the new currency, with several specifically Australian names such as the ‘Kanga’, ‘Austral’, ‘Merino’, and ‘Dinkum’ bandied around. A public naming competition seeking suggestions with an Australian flavour added nearly 1000 names to this list including such exotic suggestions as ‘Oz’, ‘Boomer’, ‘Roo’, ‘Kanga’, ‘Emu’, ‘Koala’, ‘Digger’, ‘Zac’, ‘Kwid’, and ‘Ming’ (the nickname of Prime Minister Menzies).

In June 1963, with no clear consensus having emerged on a name, the Government decided to name the new currency the ‘Royal’. Treasurer Harold Holt explained that the Government saw this name as “emphasising our link with the Crown” and as being “a dignified word with a pleasing sound”.

Between June and September 1963, the Bank’s Note Printing Branch developed a variety of design concepts for the Royal notes.

Design concept for the 10 "royal" note

While the name ‘Royal’ was settled upon initially, it proved extremely unpopular with the Australian people. Just three months after announcing the ‘Royal’ decision the Government conceded on 19 September 1963 that the name of the currency unit would be the ‘Dollar’. This decision won quick and general public approval.

The official conversion to decimal currency took place on 14 February 1966. The jingle below became well known to many Australians in the lead-up to the conversion date.

Decimal Change Over Song

In come the dollars and in come the cents
To replace the pounds and the shillings and the pence
Be prepared for change when the coins begin to mix
On the fourteenth of February 1966.

Chorus:
Clink go the coins, clink, clink, clink
Change over day is closer than you think
Learn the value of the coins and the way that they appear
And things will be much smoother when the decimal point is here.

In come the dollars and in come the cents
To replace the pounds and the shillings and the pence
Be prepared folks when the coins begin to mix
On the fourteenth of February 1966.

Thankfully the 1960s Menzies government finally saw sense in not pushing the ‘Royal’ onto the Australian people. It was a term not recognised as remotely appropriate by Australians. It appears the people of Britain today are bemused with the difficulty in recognising their own royalty on their coins. Maybe they need to modernise and replace the ‘Royal’ for the ‘Dollar’.

Bread or Blood?

120 years ago today F.C.B. Vosper would have been putting the finishing touches on his "Bread or Blood?" editorial for the Charters Towers Australian Republican. In this editorial he called for the establishment of an Australian republic at any cost. Written in support of the striking shearers the editorial was to land Vosper with a charge of seditious libel. As the editor of the Australasian Republican Association’s (ARA) weekly journal he strongly advocated a revolutionary approach as opposed to the ARA’s evolutionary approach to the creation of an Australian republic. It is within this tension that the nature of nineteenth-century radical republicanism can be seen.

"Bread or Blood?" editorial, Australian Republican, 21 February 1891:

The situation at Clermont has reached a crisis hitherto totally unprecedented in the annals of labor struggles throughout the world. Tired of the partial and menacing attitudes of a Government which should be impartial, and of the action of the capitalists who, flushed with victory, wish to exercise the grinding prerogatives of the conqueror, the misrepresentation of the Press and politicians, the shearers have at last risen in open rebellion, and are making an armed march on Clermont fully determined to do or die in defence of their rights. And we commend them. If we were in their place we should do likewise, and needless to say we wish them all success, even should their action precipitate revolution throughout Australasia and lead to bloodshed. The men are placed in this position – they must either have BREAD or BLOOD – WOOL or HEADS – and if the Government be not careful they will have BOTH. It is high time that something besides property should have the protection of the Government – every person should be considered as much if not more. The action of the Government is as despotic and tyrannical as any on the face of the earth. By their present action they are depriving the men of their bread, and by means of armed force they are preventing the men from using those natural opportunities which are necessary to all for subsistence and to which all are equally entitled, and with the money contributed by the very men whom they oppress they are introducing blacklegs and immigrants to a labor market already admittedly overstocked, and while starving their own subjects they back up Victorian crawlers with bayonet and rifle. It is time this sort of thing should cease, and the sooner the better. For our part, we frankly confess that we believe the shearers to be in the right in answering coercive policy with armed resistance, but not only do we so approve but counsel other Republicans and Unionists to follow their example. The Government ought to know that in no country is revolution so easy as here; and once let the masses be roused, then good-bye to capitalistic domination and the sham royalty which is inflicted on us now, and hurrah for the Republic! The time is coming fat, and we should like to see every Democrat able and willing to use his rifle in defence of his rights, whether invaded by Government or by anyone else. We are getting very tired of the present oppression; the election seems a long way off, and the Government are determined to use the utmost of their shortlived power as long as they possess it. We can stand it no longer, and would be glad to see the revolutionary movement spread far and wide, and Australia become at one bound a nation. It is evident that the Government are as despicable tyrants and heartless robbers as could be elected by any people in the world, and they must be overthrown whether by constitutional means or by force of arms matters not one iota. The prostitution of the police force to the capitalistic needs is the last straw on the camel’s back, and if he does not buck he ought to. We believe that the men of Barcaldine, the hardy shearers of the West, will never yield as did their brethren on the coast, but will, with every man his horse and every man his rifle, fight to the bitter end for manhood and Independence. Another defeat would be crushing, but it shall be dearly given, and we warn the squatters and the Government that they are raising such a flame as shall not leave one station unburned nor one town in their possession. Beware! Imperialists! for the doom of your party is at hand, and the day of Independence already dawns – it rests with you whether it shall rise in blood or in peace. At the present juncture, when the forces of Capital and Monopoly on the one hand, and the forces of Labor on the other, are arrayed in bitter conflict, we issue the appeal to all Australia. The liberty which you enjoy today, the rich heritage of citizenship, of which you could take possession; these things have, in the past, been bought for you with great price. The rights which to you may seem so natural and so simple were fought for and won step by step and the price of which was paid by your heroic ancestors was an ocean of blood and a river of tears. With their great bequest of Liberty, which will have its fullest development in Australia, they bequeathed to you the sacred responsibility of guarding those liberties and in doing so, not to hold dear, if needs be, even life itself. We believe that the time has arrived in the history of our commonwealth when its liberties are in danger; we believe a great struggle is imminent, and, therefore, we appeal to you men of Australia to prove that you are not unworthy of your ancestors. We appeal to you to equip yourselves, to bear arms in the coming fray. Your country expects this from you; it is included in the patriotic duty you owe to her. If we thought you would decline to obey her call, we would speak of the maledictions which posterity will heap upon your memories; for the heritage of tarnished liberty and disaster which your apathy would bequeath to them. But we know that you will bow in allegiance to her call and when the time comes carve the way to those greater heights of liberty which lie before you; heights which are grander and fairer than any which your ancestors ever dreamed of. Australians, laborers, MEN; with the fullest knowledge of the consequences: with a knowledge of the horrors of civil war, we call upon you to up and strike for your rights, your manhood, your country and your lives. Exhaust all peaceable means; let no one say that you have wantonly precipitated bloodshed, but if all else fails, strike boldly, mercilessly, fearlessly for your freedom. Do not unto others as they have done until you! If your oppressors will not listen to reason, let them feel cold lead and steel: as they have starved you, so do you shoot them; and allow them not to destroy your liberties and deprive you of your bread without a fight. Better to see the last squatter and the last member of this hateful Government butchered than to see one jot or one tittle of the sacred rights of the people lost.

The Real Australia Day

The forgotten day in Australian history is 9 May 1901, the first sitting day of our Commonwealth Government.

The independent colonies became states and put aside differences to send elected representatives to the new parliament.

9 May is the real Australia Day if we want to recognise our unity, our history and our culture, as well as the actions of the many heroes whose efforts lead to creation of the Commonwealth.

Australia's status as a nation was reached on 9 May when the first Commonwealth parliament sat. That should be our national day.

The tradition of republican journalism

On Christmas Day, 1890, the republican editor F.C.B. Vosper penned a letter from the Charters Towers goldfields office of the Australian Republican to his father in England describing his efforts over the past year to bring about an Australian republic. 120 years later the Independent Australia eJournal continues the tradition of republican journalism.

The republican flowering in the 1880s was aided by the founding of republican newspapers and journals all over the country. By the 1880s, Australians had become a more mobile people. In addition a majority were native-born and most were literate. These two factors helped in providing an audience for the many nationalist writers who were active in the last three decades of the century. By the 1880s and 1890s, radical journals such as the Bulletin, Louisa Lawson’s The Dawn and the short-lived Republican in Sydney, the Clipper in Hobart, the Tocsin in Melbourne, the Worker and Boomerang in Brisbane and the Charters Towers Australian Republican reflected the radical, intellectual and political energies emerging in Australian life. During the depression years of the 1890s, John Norton’s Truth also kept up its republican flag. For these journals, Australian nationalism was closely interwoven with republicanism. These editors possessed a brash self-confident nationalism, were fiercely patriotic about Australia and just as fiercely opposed to any Australian government that included the Crown. It was a reaction against imperialist attitudes combined with the radical hope of being able to create a new society in Australia. It is within the columns of journals such as these that the oppositional politics of anti-monarchical republicanism can be seen.

The radical bookshop was the heartland of nineteenth-century radicalism. In the back rooms of radical bookstores and newspaper printeries sprinkled throughout the colonies, republicanism was a topic of heated discussion. The main source for radical readings was newspapers. The purpose of these newspapers was to provide a commentary on public issues. Indeed, radical literature provided an oppositional culture. In 1880, there appeared in Sydney an eight-page, shabby little weekly paper called the Bulletin. The journalists John Haynes and J.F. Archibald published the first edition with a print run of 3,000. The edition quickly sold on the streets of Sydney and within 18 months the circulation had reached 15,000. However, a libel case put them both in jail. It was William Henry Traill then who rescued the paper and who developed the Bulletin’s anti-British, nationalist and republican themes. Traill was then editor of the Bulletin from 1881 to 1887. Haynes soon left and Archibald went overseas where he helped to recruit the American cartoonist Livingstone ‘Hop’ Hopkins and the British cartoonist Phil May. The satirical republican commentary by the Bulletin on Australian life was highly popular. It was Archibald who excelled as a destructive critic for the Bulletin. His republican voice was to guide editorial policy from 1887 until 1901. Indeed, ridicule of the reverence for all things British was a favourite topic for Archibald. He had a ready audience in the Australian native-born colonists, who had a vague sense of resentment towards British attitudes.

The columns of the Bulletin gave a great deal of attention to republicanism and the Imperial connection, expressing hostility towards the monarchy and aristocracy. This was reflected in the Bulletin’s attitude towards Imperial titles that it considered “inconsistent with the spirit of our democratic institutions.”(Bulletin, 26 January 1883) The Bulletin also reported republican activity in Britain. Its position was that both monarchy and aristocracy were “absurd in principle and pernicious in practice.”(Bulletin, 21 November 1885) For the republican Bulletin the ability to govern was not hereditary. However, it was not until 1884 that the Bulletin espoused a consistent anti-British, republican attitude.(See Bulletin, 22 November 1884) This became evident within the Bulletin’s commentary on the Soudan campaign when Imperialist sentiment at home and abroad was considered the enemy of republicanism.(See Bulletin, 21 February and 28 March 1885) The base of the paper’s attitude to foreign affairs lay within the contradiction between Empire and national defence. Its position was that without the British connection Australia would have no foreign enemies. Although the Bulletin’s republicanism had been founded initially on colonial defence, by 1887 it had shifted to focus on issues of constitutional and social reform. In 1887, the Bulletin argued that to be Australian was synonymous with being a republican:

By the term Australian we mean not those who have been merely born in Australia. All white men who come to these shores - with a clean record - and who can leave behind them the memory of the class-distinction and the religious differences of the old world; all men who place the happiness, the prosperity, the advancement of their adopted country before the interests of Imperialism, are Australian. In this regard all men who leave the tyrant-ridden lands of Europe for freedom of speech and right of personal liberty are Australians before they set foot on the ship which brings them hither. Those ... who leave their fatherland because they cannot swallow the worm-eaten lie of the divine right of kings to murder peasants, are Australian by instinct - Australian and Republican are synonymous. (Bulletin, 2 July 1887)

This was one of the strongest assertions of both Australian nationalism and republicanism the Bulletin ever printed. Linked to the Bulletin’s nationalism was the xenophobia of White Australia. (See Bulletin, 23 April and 30 June 1887) But the Bulletin’s major target was nativism, in particular the Australian Natives’ Association. It considered,

An Australian Association which would sink the ‘Native’ phase of the present organisation, and which would deny membership to those who would not solemnly promise to help in stamping out all sectarian-cum-politico movements – Orangeism or Hibernianism – while advocating the Australian Republican sentiment, would be an extraordinary power in the land. All Australians could then take part in the shaping of a National development, and the accident of birth would not count to a man’s disadvantage. (Bulletin, 7 April 1888)

The Bulletin equated republicanism with nationalist sentiment, reasoning that a true Australian nationalist could not be loyal to the British monarch.

In the 1880s and 1890s, the consistent opponents of Britain were men like George Black and E.W. O’Sullivan, both journalists and politicians, who rejected the British monarchy and aristocracy on principle. Reacting against the views of those who supported the Imperial Federation League, they were strongly in favour of immediate separation and a republican form of government, so that Australia could create a new and better society, for which there was already considerable potential. The Bulletin and other less permanent radical papers, such as the Sydney Republican and the Charters Towers Australian Republican, provided space for such views. As a result, republican newspapers and journals were used as mouthpieces for individual politicians. Arthur Rae was elected to the New South Wales parliament in 1891 and founded the radical republican Hummer in Wagga; the Cairns Advocate was founded by Irish-born Thomas Givens; Ted Findley, publisher of Tocsin, was expelled from the Victorian parliament for seditious libel when he published an article reporting the extra-marital adventures of the Prince of Wales; the Hobart Clipper provided a medium for republican sentiments; and in John Norton’s Truth, although he never directly espoused a republic, his quasi-republican views led him to describe Queen Victoria as “flabby, fat and flatulent”, and her son, the future Edward VII, as a “turf swindling, card sharping, wife debauching rascal”. As a result he was charged with sedition. The jury failed to agree and Norton became a republican hero overnight.

The world of republican journalists and writers was not so much the bush as the sleazy urban frontier of inner-city boarding houses. These young journalists and self-educated intellectuals of the 1880s were described by George Black as “a debating-society, hard-reading crowd.” (Black, 1926: p.22.) In Sydney, in the mid-1880s, there was a lively counter-culture of socialists, republicans, freethinkers and land nationalisers. Prior to 1887, active Australian republicanism was concentrated in a variety of persons, journals and small groups of a radical character which gave expression to republican views. The groups included the Australian Republican Union, Australian Socialist League, Anti-Chinese League, Bellamy Clubs, Henry George and Single Tax Leagues, and the Land Nationalisation Leagues. (Republican, 15 October 1887, p.4, 8 February 1888, p.5, and 4 April 1888, p.4.) There were lectures delivered on almost every radical cause of the late nineteenth-century at Sydney School of Arts Debating Club, in Sydney’s public halls and in the theatres on Sundays when there were no stage shows. These discussions were fuelled by comment in the Bulletin.

Queensland has a long tradition of republican journalism from the Australian Republican on the Charters Towers goldfields in the early 1890s under the editorship of F.C.B. Vosper, though to the long-running Armlet (1994-2005), quarterly newsletter of the Queensland branch of the Australian Republican Movement under the editorship of Rod Kendall. In 2007 Armlet was resurrected by David Donovan who went on to edit the national Republican Roundup. In 2010 Armlet became an eNewsletter. Today the Independent Australia eJournal is the only national publication that continues the republican heritage laid down by the republican journalists of the late nineteenth century.

Bibliography
The Bulletin
The Republican
G. Black, A History of the N.S.W. Political Labour Party (Sydney, 1926), p.22.

Second National Republican Short Story Competition winners announced

Helen Bersten and Sean Oliver Ness were each awarded today a ‘Highly Commended’ in the Second National Republican Short Story Competition for their short stories Double Lives and Inauguration Day.

The 2010 theme was ‘Life and Death in an Australian Republic’. Australia’s speculative fiction writers were challenged to speculate on the possible futures of the Australian republic.

The Judging Panel comprising Professor Brian Matthews, Professor John Warhurst and Professor George Williams decided not to award a 2010 First Prize. Instead they have awarded two ‘Highly Commended’ prizes and recommended the prize be jackpotted for 2011. This is not an unusual outcome for literary competitions. Winners will receive $50 each.

Winner of a ‘Highly Commended’ in the Second National Republican Short Story Competition is Helen Bersten. Mrs Bersten is a librarian, who has been working for the last 32 years as Honorary Archivist for the Australian Jewish Historical Society in Sydney. In 2005 she received an OAM for her voluntary service to the historical society. She has also been a voluntary reader on Radio 2RPH (Radio for the Print Handicapped) for the last 6 and a half years. She is an avid writer of letters to newspapers and an amateur poet, who proof-reads others' works and dreams of writing her own magnum opus. She is a wife, mother of 3 and grandmother of 5.

In Double Lives, Mrs Bersten tells dual stories: one set during a Presidential meet’n greet where his new team of advisers, Team PC (People’s Choice), are getting to know each other. At the same time a fictional crime story is being told about the night the Dunbar sank at South Head in Sydney Harbour.

The Judges commented that Double Lives is both imaginative and innovative. The attempt at a dual narrative – one commenting on the other, the past intruding into the present – is ambitious and difficult. They felt the complicated structure, though at times flawed, makes a genuinely ambitious and credible effort to produce a fiction. It is a story that has the required republican provenance but which tries to do other things and go to other places, both physically and psychologically.

Winner of a ‘Highly Commended’ in the Second National Republican Short Story Competition is Sean Oliver Ness. Mr Ness was born in North Queensland but his family moved to Hong Kong when he was young. He lived there until he was 12 returning to Brisbane and later study in Psychology and Information Technology at university. He works in the public service in Canberra. His interests include travelling, participating in Volunteer Emergency Services, following politics and, of course, reading and writing a lot.

In Inauguration Day, Mr Ness tells the story of James Hapeta, an Australian Federal Police Lieutenant assigned to Presidential protection detail with the Inauguration Day Presidential parade. As the Presidential motorcade travels through the streets of Canberra, Hapeta and his security colleagues attention to security is at fever pitch due to a discovered credible threat.

Ness’ sense of humour is evident in his reference to ‘Billies’. As the Presidential motorcade passes through Ainslie "an elderly couple: grey hair, plain clothes, a stiffness that stood out from the happy families [are holding] a poster-size portrait of the Queen [and] a sign that said "THE SECOND RUM REBELLION IS HERE – GOD SAVE US ALL!" Ness explains that in the early days, monarchists took the Rum Rebellion analogy and ran with it; in response, they were uniformly nicknamed Billy Blighs, or just Billies.

The Judges noted as nicely managed the following paragraph in Inauguration Day where Hapeta observes the scene around him:

The big houses faded as they turned a sharp corner onto Antill. On the left, they passed schools and public swimming pools and clusters of shops; on the right, rows of small homes and low-rise apartment blocks. State Policemen were on either side of the street, controlling the crowds. As the motorcade swept down the street, the low murmurs turned into a loud cheer that echoed off the apartment blocks. Streamers were tossed into the air, and confetti rained down like pink snowflakes.

When Hapeta breaks protocol and leaves his post to assist a ‘Statie’ the theme of ‘Life and Death in the Australian Republic’ emerges. The final scene is captured by a bystander with the photo becoming the defining memory of the day.

The two ‘Highly Commended’ entries were published on the Australian Republican Movement website on 6 November 2010

The Hug a Monarchist (HaM) competition

A Hug a Monarchist (HaM) competition will run from now until the Friday of the week before the June 2011 Queen's birthday holiday. The winners will be announced on that Queen's birthday.
We will be looking at sponsors for prizes, but at the minimum, the ARM will be offering two gold class cinema tickets plus $50 spending money to the person who hugs the highest profile monarchist and captures this event photographically with the ARM logo being also included somewhere in the frame.
We will determine the list of high profile monarchist. More details will follow.
Please note, and this is the MOST important point, we want people to be aware that hugging people who don't want to be hugged is assault, so please don't be over-zealous. The ARM does not endorse assault or threatening behaviour and will NOT accept any responsibility for this sort of behaviour.
The underlying message of HaM is one of fun and togetherness as Australians, because the Australian Republic is for ALL Australians, monarchists as well. Let's face it, monarchists are cranky only because they are scared and worried. Give them a hug and tell them it will be alright. It's the only decent thing to do! If they don't want a hug, a handshake or a high-five or a good friendly double thumbs up is better than nothing (though it won't get you any prizes in this competition).
Happy hugging.

The Commonwealth of Nations, Games, and the republic

 The recent Commonwealth Games has been a great spectacle and many of us have enjoyed watching Australia win so many events and dominate the medal tally, as we seem to do at every Commonwealth Games these days.

It reminds us that during the lead up to the 1999 referendum on the Australian Republic, monarchists established a particular myth firmly in many Australians minds. It’s the one that pretends that as a republic we won’t be able to continue to participate in the Commonwealth Games. David Donovan and Mike Keating wrote on 12 October 2010 about this in ‘The Myth of the disappearing Commonwealth” at http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/40010.html

The irony is that the term ‘Commonwealth’ has a strong republican ancestry. Essentially, the name ‘Commonwealth of Australia’ would suit an Australian republic.

The period from the late 1880s to 1891 was a strong republican moment with fifteen republican organisations and twenty radical republican newspapers or journals widely spread through the Australian colonies. At a national level, republican dimensions emerged when Henry Parkes, the Premier of New South Wales advocated the name ‘Commonwealth of Australia’ at the 1891 National Australasian Convention. The ‘Commonwealth of Australia’ was the title chosen for the new nation by the delegates to the 1891 National Australasian Convention and, despite some controversy in the intervening years, it was the title agreed to, with little fuss, at the People’s Convention in 1897 and 1898. Australians today are used to the term ‘Commonwealth’ which runs parallel to republican traditions without bearing the explicit connotations or implying the essential institution of republicanism. Continue reading →

Independent Australia. The online journal of Australian identity and democracy

On 24 June 2010, David Donovan, Queensland ARM State Convenor and National Media Director began publishing the new e-journal of Australian identity and democracy Independent Australia at http://www.independentaustralia.net 

Independent Australia is updated daily with new and exciting writing on Australian politics, history, democracy and satire.

Independent Australia is quickly becoming the national voice for republican and nationalist activists. Regular contributors also include the national republican leaders of New Zealand and the United Kingdom, as well as well-known Australian commentators such as Mungo McCallum and Barry Everingham.

Independent Australia is a modern day version of The Bulletin in its heyday of the 1880s and 1890s.

It can get quite feisty.

Like in this article from David Donovan, where he says:

Much to my chagrin, I have given that pompous permatanned prevaricator, David Flint, the attention that he and his grubby articles do not deserve.”

It gives a different perspective.

Like this article from historian Brad Webb, which says that:

“…the early push for an Australian republic stalled because Federation was the easier and more palatable option for most Australians”.

It wants the best for Australia.

And all Australians. Like in this article by Rodger Hills, where he says:

“Indigenous people are not a minority in the community they are a vital part of our society, the original occupants of this land, and they need to be recognized in the Australian Constitution.”

Check it out. If you’re not, you’re missing out.

Queensland has a long tradition of republican journalism from the Australian Republican on the Charters Towers goldfields in the early 1890s under the editorship of F.C.B. Vosper, though to the long-running ARMLET of the 1990s and early 2000s under the editorship of Rod Kendall. In 2007 ARMLET was resurrected by David Donovan who went on to edit the national Republican Roundup. In 2010 ARMLET was reformatted into an eNewsletter and represents the culmination of a long republican lineage.

Anyone wishing to question, contribute or support Independent Australia e-journal, please feel free to contact the editor.

Brisbane’s Republican Bridge Opens

The Ted Smout Memorial Bridge has been claimed as Brisbane’s new republican bridge.

Thousands of people are expected to attend the opening celebrations on Sunday, 11 July at the Sandgate and Redcliffe ends of the 2.7km bridge. Queenslanders are being encouraged to walk the distance across the bridge, with tickets for the opening ceremony in the centre of the bridge sold out weeks in advance. But it is the selection of Ted Smout as the name to honour the new bridge that has created a symbol for Brisbane’s republican movement.

The former Sandgate man was Queensland’s last surviving World War I veteran, who died in 2004 at the age of 106. Edward David Smout was older than the Australian nation, having been born at Brisbane in the colony of Queensland on January 5 1898, three years before the Australian colonies federated. For the first century of his life he witnessed Australia's journey from being a colony to a Federation and a nation. He had fought for king and country in World War I but became a staunch republican. The change in view was underpinned by a direct understanding of the appalling cost of life that Australia, as a colonial attachment to the United Kingdom, suffered in World War I.

At first he was angered by the disregard he believed the British forces held for the Australian diggers in World War I and later by the brusqueness of a British Customs officer. In 1998 he was treated with great appreciation when he was invited to France to be endowed with France's highest decoration, the French Legion of Honour. Upon returning home through Heathrow Airport with three other World War I veterans – in the aliens queue - all four were treated appallingly by an officious British airport guard. His medals had activated the alarm on the metal detectors and, in his words, "some bearded idiot insisted on frisking us despite the protest of our carers". There were 300 passengers on the plane and they were the only four searched. Ted was disgusted because they had been treated with honour in France but like criminals in Britain. "When the French honour our heroes more highly than the British, the formal severing of our lingering links to the Empire cannot be far away", he said at the time.

Ted Smout was an active campaigner for an Australian republic. In 1999, at 101 years of age, he was the first person to sign the Australian Republican Movement’s Founders Book. "I think it is an absurdity to have the Queen as head of state. The Crown has served its purpose but it has outlived its usefulness and that`s not being disrespectful", he said. In 2002, he was honoured as an ARM Life Member.

Ted’s younger brother Arthur, and his wife Betty both continue to be active republican supporters. At 102 years of age Arthur displays the longevity of the Smout clan. “Ted was so active in the local community. He would see it as a ‘People’s Bridge’, as everyone’s bridge, as a ‘republican bridge’ ”, said Mrs Smout.

The 2.7km bridge will be the longest bridge in Australia. The republic has also been a long time coming. Perhaps as drivers are glancing at the expanse of Bramble Bay, or considering whether the pelicans sitting above will hit their targets, they can reflect upon the memory of Ted Smout and his staunch desire for an Australian republic.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

Republic Upstairs with Nick Earls

The Republic Upstairs welcomes as its next guest speaker, Nick Earls.

The Republic Upstairs has a proud history and over the past decade has hosted some of the leading figures in sports, finance, journalism, the arts and politics. This tradition continues with Nick Earls, speaking at the 12 Lounge at the Melbourne Hotel in West End next month.

Date: Sunday 20th June 2010
Time: 2:00pm
Location: 12 Lounge, The Melbourne Hotel
Address: 10 Browning Street, West End, 4101
Admisson Charges: $30
RSVP: by 15th June email qld@republic.org.au

Nick Earls is an award winning and highly successful Queensland writer, as well as a long-standing member of the Queensland branch of the Australian Republican movement. Nick was born in Northern Ireland and emigrated to Australia when he was eight. His family settled in Brisbane and he went to school at ‘Churchie’ before completing a medical degree at the University of Queensland. Nick’s father was a GP and he worked for a time in the same profession before turning to writing full-time in his mid-20s. This decision proved to be an almost immediate success when his first adult novel, Zigzag Street, won the Betty Trask award in 1998. Then in 2000, his young-adult novel 48 Shades of Brown won the Children's Book Council of Australia Book of the Year Award for older readers.

Most of Nick’s writing is humorous and fun and almost all of it is set in Brisbane. Many of his novels have been adapted for stage, film and television. His first work written specifically for the stage, The True Story of Butterfish, was shown at the Brisbane Powerhouse as part of the Brisbane Festival in October 2009.

The admission charges will cover a modest bar tab as well as a selection of finger food. The Melbourne hotel offers $5 parking and is close to many public transport options.

Republican challenge to Australian writers

The 2010 Second National Republican Short Story Competition opens today, 1 May 2010 and will close on 31 August 2010. The winner will be announced on 6 November 2010.

The Second National Republican Short Story Competition continues the momentum built from the successful 2009 First National Republican Short Story Competition. 2009 was a milestone as it was 10 years on 6 November 2009 since the republican referendum was lost. To commemorate this event and to remind Australians what they still didn’t have the Australian Republican Movement ran the First National Republican Short Story Competition.

The theme for the Second National Republican Short Story Competition is 'Life and Death in an Australian Republic'. Short stories will speculate on Australian republican futures.

It seems strange there is no tradition of republican speculative fiction in Australia. In colonial times there were republican poets such as Charles Harpur writing in the 1840s and 1850s, and republican writers such as John Dunmore Lang and Daniel Deniehy in the 1850s and William Lane, Henry Lawson and John Norton in the 1880s and 1890s. But where have been the republican stories for the past century? There have certainly been many republican writers during this time but almost no examples where republican settings or arguments have been explored in Australian fiction. Republican arguments and explorations of the past and imaginations of the future are always written within the framework of constitutional debates.

Where do the people of Australia fit into this? Where are their myths and stories to tell and retell and remember about Australia’s emerging republican identity?

This Second National Republican Short Story Competition challenges Australia’s fiction writers to speculate on the possible futures of the Australian republic.

Speculative fiction writers deal with possibilities.

They speculate.

They make the future seem real.

However, we can’t achieve anything unless we imagine it first. Before every great invention and before every great journey is the idea. Without ideas and imagination, we are all trapped in the past.

So, the ARM (Q) would like to point the way forward through Australian stories with a republican backdrop. They don’t have to be political thrillers or constitutional whodunits as long as they are an exploration of our future, our republican future.

More information at http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/

God Save the Queen?
The Victorian RSL’s decision to no longer play the ‘royal anthem’ at this year’s Anzac Day Dawn Service was long overdue and the RSL is to be congratulated

On 15 April 2010, the monarchist leader Professor David Flint made the following comment on the issue - http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2872124.htm It was very misleading for David Flint to claim that the National Anthem was changed in 1984 "without any vote by the people". The vote had been in 1977, when the Fraser government asked the people to vote on which song should be played on "other than Regal or Vice-Regal occasions". The results were:

Advance Australia Fair 43.3%
Waltzing Matilda 28.3%
God Save the Queen 18.8%
Song of Australia 9.6%

Flint is fond of telling Australians that we had our chance to vote for a Republic in 1999, but we lost (in a highly manipulated referendum) and we should get over it. The vote in 1977 was far more emphatic than the vote against the "politicians' republic" in 1999. Flint should take his own advice.

Barry Everingham's reply to Flint is published on the Drum - http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2872905.htm

Three cheers for the coming republic!

Preamble to the Queensland Constitution

On 23 February 2010, the Queensland Parliament adopted a Preamble to the Queensland Constitution. The Preamble starts:

The people of Queensland, free and equal citizens of Australia, subject to no law or authority but that sanctioned by this Constitution and the Constitution of Australia;

and the second point states.

adopt the principle of the sovereignty of the people, under the rule of law, and the system of representative and responsible government, prescribed by this Constitution

It seems the republican cause has had another win with reference to the people of Queensland and the principle of the sovereignty of the people in the proposed preamble to the Queensland Constitution.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

Australia Day 2010 'Postcode Parties'

All around Australia small groups of republicans met and raised a glass to a future republic.


A big thank you to those Queensland members who co-ordinated a postcode party in their area.

Australia Day is one of those days when Aussies honour the great and good. Some members attended Australia Day award ceremonies on Australia Day. Nick Pippos, Queensland State Council member (left in picture below) was there at the Australia Day Awards Ceremony on the Brisbane Southside, and says that he questioned many of the attendees about their position and most replied they were republicans, including Queensland Government Minister Phil Reeves, Leader of The House Judy Spence, MP Graham Perret, Police Officers and many others.

Maureen and Graham Curtis held a gathering of 16 people at their place in Auchenflower. Maureen says they “were honoured to have the ARM Chairman Michael Keating and Mrs Keating attend. Also attending were Monica and Terry Heinemann, Annie Kimpton and Steve Fowler, Rick and Helen Jones, Tom Curtis, Anthony Curtis, Katherine Hanline, Gavin and Myra Keating”. “The group included some new members and it was great for them to be able to speak first hand to Michael Keating about the plans of the movement. Each guest was given some merchandise to take home and some special items were given to the winners of a quiz on Australian history at the end of the night. “Drinks and savouries were served and it was a jolly event.”

The ARM’s Gold Coast forum held their celebration at the iconic Pink Poodle. About 18 members attended and a good time was had by all, beers flowing and a pleasant meal enjoyed. Enjoyed, that is, until they decided to launch perhaps the most fiendishly difficult trivia contest ever seen on the Gold Coast with the theme being the developing history of Australian sovereignty. You had to know your Statute of Westminster, Australia Act, first Australian born Governor General, last foreign born Governor General to expect points. In the end the prize was won by forum treasurer and stalwart Joe Cotta with a respectable 5 out of 10.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

The Shadow King

The second in line to the title 'King of Australia', Prince William, is in Australia for only the second time, the other being when he was 10 months old.

After a week in New Zealand representing his grandmother, William will be three days in Australia to "get to know Australia", although he will visit only Sydney and Melbourne.

Last year, William launched England's bid to host the 2018 World Cup football tournament, and since that time has been lobbying extensively for the English bid. Australia also has an excellent bid for the 2018 hosting rights but, to date, William has not issued a word of support or even acknowledged Australia's bid. To have a future head of state who lobbies against Australian interests in favour of his own country is unacceptable for any sovereign nation. It offends the independence and aspirations of the Australian people.

The most recent polling shows that 59% of Australians are republicans and want an Aussie as head of state. The monarchy has little relevance to Australia because it no longer represents the nation's values or sense of itself.

If William wants to develop a belated meaningful relationship with us, he could start with acknowledging the aspirations of the majority of Australians.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

More links at:
David Donovan, 19 January 2010 at http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/prince-williams-australia-tour-who-cares/
Rory Gibson, 'What does the Queen have against Queensland?", 19 January 2010 at http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26603940-3102,00.html

2009 First National Republican Short Story Competition Winner Announced

Kel Robertson is the winner of the 2009 First National Republican Short Story Competition.

2009 is a milestone as it will be 10 years today since the republican referendum was lost. To commemorate this event and to remind Australians what they still don’t have the Australian Republican Movement held the First National Republican Short Story Competition.

Short stories were required to portray an Australian republican future in a positive light and demonstrate the absurdity of a hereditary monarch as the Australian Head of State in twenty-first century Australian society.

The First National Republican Short Story Competition challenged Australia’s fiction writers to speculate on the possible futures of the Australian republic. Speculative fiction writers deal with possibilities. They speculate. They make the future seem real.

Mr Robertson’s winning short story was titled Rook Feast and tells the story of the final meeting between the King of England who is under house arrest and a Minister of the British government. The Minister (who is also a relative) has come to inform the last King of England “on a perfect English spring day” what is to be his fate. Set in the future where a post-tourism-age appears to have killed the monarchy, Mr Robertson’s story explores concepts of the hidden costs of monarchy through a ‘security expenditure issue’, and the theme of the inevitability of the popular will of the people. The plot is written around a discussion of what will be the individual future of the last King of England.

Rook Feast won the First National Republican Short Story Competition on the strength of the writing. The judges agreed Rook Feast was a fine, well-written short story that successfully managed to take in and make much of the required republican theme. He wins $611.99, and his short story will be published on the Australian Republican Movement website at http://www.republic.org.au/

Kel Robertson, 52 lives in Canberra, and is the author of two critically lauded crime novels featuring the Chinese-Australian Federal Police investigator, Brad Chen. On learning of his win, he commented:

“I am truly delighted to win this competition. I enjoyed myself immensely writing this story; the whole experience was entertaining. As a young man I was very much of my time and had great sympathy for the royal family whereas now I find myself bemused by their activities. It was great fun being able to have some gentle pleasure at their expense.”

The First National Republican Short Story Competition has helped to foster the emerging Australian republican speculative fiction genre. A daily blog was run in conjunction with the First National Republican Short Story Competition as creative stimulus material for writers – see http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/ Each blog detailed an example of Australian republican speculative fiction writing.

Before every great invention and before every great journey is the idea. Without ideas and imagination, we are all trapped in the past. Mr Robertson’s Rook Feast is an exercise in imagination and helps to lead the way into a possible republican future. The Australian Republican Movement congratulates the winner of this year’s competition and extends its thanks to all entrants.

The First National Republican Short Story Competition presentation ceremony will be held on Wednesday evening, 18 November 2009 during the National Republican Lecture, Southern Cross Club, Canberra.

The Republican Short Story Competition will be run again in 2010.

'To Australia' and 'Australia's Head of State'

It appears all my letter writing to MPs before and after the last State election, constant pestering letters to the Premiers Department, and parliamentary committee submission has paid off.

On 3 September 2009 the ‘Law, Justice and Safety Committee’ (formerly LCARC), Queensland Parliament, tabled in Parliament the report ‘Options for modernising the oaths and affirmations of allegiance in the Constitution of Queensland 2001’. The report can be accessed at http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/ljsc

The Committee recommended that the Constitution of Queensland 2001 be amended so that:

All oaths (and affirmations) of allegiance currently contained in the Act be worded so that allegiance is to be sworn (or affirmed) to Australia AND to EITHER (at the option of the person taking the oath (or making the affirmation):

· Her (or His) Majesty … (name of Sovereign) … as lawful Sovereign of Australia and to Her (or His) Heirs and Successors; or

· Australia’s Head of State and to his or her successors in office.

The Committee noted a divergence of views as expressed in submissions as to whether it is appropriate that it be mandatory to swear an oath of allegiance to the Sovereign. The Committee believes that making it optional to take an oath of allegiance to the Sovereign best caters for these differences of opinion. This allows each individual to make a decision that reflects their own beliefs. Such a decision mirrors the current choice available to all those who are about to take office to either take an oath or make an affirmation, based on their personal beliefs.

At the same time, the Committee sees it as important that there be an oath (or affirmation) of allegiance. The Committee therefore proposes that, where an election is made to not swear (or affirm) allegiance to the Sovereign, there be a requirement to swear allegiance in terms ‘to Australia’ and to Australia’s ‘Head of State’.

This is more than we could have hoped for! Now we have to keep our fingers crossed to see if Parliament will enact the report.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

Republican challenge to Australian writers

2009 is a milestone as it will be 10 years on 6 November 2009 since the republican referendum was lost. To commemorate this event and to remind Australians what they still don’t have the Australian Republican Movement is running the First National Republican Short Story Competition.

Short stories will be required to portray an Australian republican future in a positive light and demonstrate the absurdity of a hereditary monarch as the Australian Head of State in twenty-first century Australian society.

It seems strange there is no tradition of republican speculative fiction in Australia. In colonial times there were republican poets such as Charles Harpur writing in the 1840s and 1850s, and republican writers such as John Dunmore Lang and Daniel Deniehy in the 1850s and William Lane, Henry Lawson and John Norton in the 1880s and 1890s. But where have been the republican stories for the past century? There have certainly been many republican writers during this time but almost no examples where republican settings or arguments have been explored in Australian fiction. Republican arguments and explorations of the past and imaginations of the future are always written within the framework of constitutional debates.

Where do the people of Australia fit into this? Where are their myths and stories to tell and retell and remember about Australia’s emerging republican identity?

This First National Republican Short Story Competition challenges Australia’s fiction writers to speculate on the possible futures of the Australian republic.

Speculative fiction writers deal with possibilities.

They speculate.

They make the future seem real.

However, we can’t achieve anything unless we imagine it first. Before every great invention and before every great journey is the idea. Without ideas and imagination, we are all trapped in the past.

So, the Australian Republican Movement (Q) would like to point the way forward through Australian stories with a republican backdrop. They don’t have to be political thrillers or constitutional whodunits as long as they are an exploration of our future, our republican future.

Entry Form.

The Australian Republican Movement invites submissions of original short stories to be considered for the First National Republican Short Story Competition.

How to enter

Simply fill in the entry form and send together with a cheque for $11.99 and your republican speculative fiction short story to:

Australian Republican Movement
PO Box 87
Geebung QLD 4034

Entries must be the original work of the entrant and must not have won another competition.

First prize is $611.99

Personal Details

Given Name(s) / Surname__________________________________________________
Postal address______________________________________________
Email address______________________________________________
Story title_________________________________________________

Please write the title of your story on each page of your submission.By submitting my entry into the competition I agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the competition. (posted at http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/ )

Signature _______________________ Date _________

Entries will be accepted until close of business on 31 August 2009.

Further information contact qld@republic.org.au or go to http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/

Competition Terms and Conditions.

1. Entry is open to all Australian residents. Entry forms can be downloaded from http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/

2. The purpose of the short story competition is to promote non-constitutional change towards an Australian republic and to remind Australians what they still do not have.

3. Short stories will be required to portray an Australian republican future in a positive light and demonstrate the absurdity of a hereditary monarch as Australian Head of State in twenty-first century Australian society.

4. First prize is $611.99. The First Prize and Short Listed stories are eligible for publication in Republican Roundup and on the ARM website. Copyright of each short story will remain with the author.

5. Entry fee is $11.99 (incl GST). Each additional submission fee is $6.11 (incl GST) Entry fees are to be paid by money order or cheque to Australian Republican Movement. Please do not send cash.

6. Entries must be unpublished and not have won any other awards. Each manuscript entered must meet all of the following requirements:
* Length -- 2000 to 4000 words
* Typed -- double spaced on one side of the paper
* Title Page -- must include your name, address, phone number, story title, length, and email
* Do not submit originals. Manuscripts will not be returned.
* While appropriate colourful language might be accepted (within moderation), entries must not contain extreme foul language, racial or sexually explicit content that would render the entry unsuitable for publication.
* Electronic copies will be accepted at qld@republic.org.au
* Deadline -- postmarked on or before 31 August 2009 (Advice: enter early -- avoid deadline crush)

7. The competition will be judged by Nick Earls, Professor Brian Matthews, Professor John Warhurst, and Dr Glenn Davies. The judging committee will select the best short stories from the qualified entries and determine the winners. The decision of the judging committee is final.8. The prize money will be awarded by Australian Republican Movement in accordance with the decision of the judging committee. First Prize will be publicised on 6 November 2009. Each contestant after 6 November 2009 will receive the following information: Name of the competition winner / Name and background of the judges / The 2009 competition statistics9. Mail signed official entry form and your manuscript (s) on or before 31 August 2009 to: Australian Republican Movement (Qld), PO Box 87, Geebung Q 403410. If you have any questions, please feel free to email qld@republic.org.au or post a blog query at http://republicanfiction.blogspot.com/

Best of luck!

Judging Panel announced.

The judging panel was announced on 1 May 2009 for the First National Republican Short Story Competition.

Nick Earls is the author of twelve books, including bestselling novels such as Zig Zag Street, Bachelor Kisses, Perfect Skin and World of Chickens. His contribution to writing in Queensland led to him being awarded the Queensland Writers Centre’s inaugural Johnno award in 2001 and a Centenary Medal in 2003.

Professor Brian Matthews is Honorary Professor of English at Flinders University. He has won the Victorian, New South Wales and Queensland Premiers' awards for literature and the Gold Medal of the Australian Literature Society. His most recent book is Manning Clark A Life.

Professor John Warhurst recently concluded fifteen years as Professor of Political Science at the Australian National University. He is Adjunct Professor at both ANU and Flinders University, Senior Deputy Chair, Australian Republican Movement and was ARM Chair from 2002 to 2005.

Dr Glenn Davies is Queensland State Secretary, Australian Republican Movement, a republican historian and author, and a 2008-2009 Aurealis Awards Speculative Fiction judge.

The Battle of the Major-General's

Until March 2009 the Australian Governor General was Major General (ret) Michael Jeffrey, the National President of the RSL was Major General (ret) Bill Crews, and the National Convenor of the Australian Republican Movement was Major General (ret) Mike Keating.

It was interesting to watch the Canberra Major General's Club fighting amongst themselves.

See Mike Keating's Queen's Birthday interview on 'Sunrise' at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwnPri9bASw

The Republican’s begin to gather

Australia’s leading republican groups joined forces on the 2009 Queen’s Birthday weekend for a renewed push to cut the nation’s ties to the monarchy.

Divisions between the organisations over whether a president should be elected or appointed were blames for helping to defeat the republican campaign at the referendum in 1999.

A Republican Gathering of republican groups in Melbourne on 30 – 31 May 2009 decided they should unite in an active coalition to urge the Government to conduct a national plebiscite to give the Australian people a say in the future republic of Australia. The meeting was convened by Women for an Australian Republic and included the Australian Republican Movement, Real Republic Limited, the Copernican Republicans, the Foundation for Constitutional Renewal, Patriots for the Australian Republic, Republic Now!, and the Republican Party of Australia.

This is an historic first and unites previously opposed groups under the name Coalition of Australian Republicans (CAR) with a common commitment to the sovereignty of the Australian people and shows the determination of the broader republican movement to unite to give support to the Australian people’s determination to be central to any change to their Constitution.

The Coalition of Australian Republicans agreed on the following principles:
1. The Australian people must own the process leading to a republic – including the selection of the republican model to be put to the required referendum.
2. One or more non-binding plebiscites should be part of the process of moving towards the final referendum.
3. We should not wait until the death or abdication of the Queen but should determine our own timetable to discuss our own future.
4. Our elected representatives, whether state or federal, should swear allegiance to Australia and her people - not the British crown.

On a broader scale Common Cause was formed in early 2005 as an Alliance of the four Commonwealth Republican Movements: the Australian Republican Movement (ARM); Citizens for a Canadian Republic (CCR); the Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand; and Republic in the UK. Sharing a Commonwealth heritage, the four republican organisations joined forces to pursue their common cause... to bring about four new Commonwealth republics across the globe. Common Cause provides a framework for the member organisations to share information, resources and ideas to bring about their common goal.

In five of the remaining Commonwealth members with Queen Elizabeth II as Head of State, republican movements are gaining ground - a recent poll by Angus Reid Strategies in Canada indicates that 53% of Canadians support ending the monarchy, while only 35% support the status quo. Citizens for a Canadian Republic leader Tom Freda added "Republican support jumps to 55% versus 31% when respondents are asked about retaining the monarchy with Prince Charles as the successor to Queen Elizabeth II".

In light of growing republican sentiment in New Zealand, the race to become the newest republic within the Commonwealth is definitely on. Australia had better move or we'll find ourselves the last of the colonial monarchies.

How about a Head of State that supports Australia at sport

Prince William, despite being Australia's future monarch, has thrown his support wholly and solely behind England's 2018 World Cup bid. This is despite another of his future dominions, Australia, also bidding for hosting rights to the event. Clearly, he regards himself as English, and perhaps a little bit Welsh, but not at all Australian. See Link

Kevin Rudd was at the launch for Australia’s bid for the 2018 World Cup. So was Malcolm Turnbull. It seemed many Australians had thrown their support behind the bid.

Australia’s future king, Prince William, supported the bid – but of Australia’s main rival to host the tournament, England. Of course he is head of England’s Football Federation. How about we have a Head of State that cares enough to support Australians at sport and doesn’t barrack for our opponents.

Australia’s World Cup bid, 2018. Australian Republic ASAP!

The sovereign people of Queensland

As far as a republic is concerned there is never a better time than now. It is an exciting time with the federal leaders of both major political parties being supporters of an Australian republic, the Greens leader Bob Brown introducing a bill into the Senate that will allow a plebiscite to be held at the next election on support for an Australian republic, and the Governor General announcing earlier this month while on tour in Africa she agrees with Prime Minister Rudd that Australia will become a republic.

Recent public opinion polls and the 2020 Summit show there is a groundswell of support for an Australian republic. Indeed, the majority of the Year 11 and 12 student delegates to the School’s Constitutional Conventions held from Townsville to Brisbane in late February 2009 voted in favour of the creation of an Australian republic. On 18 March 2009, 122 Year 11 and 12 students from across the country came together for the 14th National Schools Constitutional Convention in Canberra to debate the topic A new Constitutional preamble for Australia? This is an important debate for Australia's up and coming generation to engage in as it goes to the heart of how we identify ourselves as Australians.

In February 2009 the Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee (LCARC), Queensland Parliament called for submissions to assist with the developing of the text of a draft preamble for the Queensland Constitution. The preamble to any Queensland Constitution needs to include a statement on the sovereignty of the people of Queensland.

By letter dated 17 May 2001, the then Premier asked the LCARC of the 50th Parliament to consider Recommendation 7 of the Members’ Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee report No.44, namely:

That the Oath of Allegiance taken by members of the Legislative Assembly be reviewed, within current constitutional arrangements, as part of the consolidation of the Queensland Constitution and that such review take into account the aspirational statements contained in the previous Members’ Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee’s Statement of Commitment.

The members’ Oath of Allegiance was then contained in Section 4 of the Constitution Act 1867 (Qld). In its report on the issue, the committee recommended that the Queensland Constitution should be amended so that members of the Queensland Legislative Assembly should be provided with the option as to whether to swear or affirm allegiance to the Crown, or only to the people of Queensland. During the previous term of the Queensland Parliament, the then Premier announced that the Government would change the legislation requiring Parliamentarians to take an Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen, and instead allow Members to elect to swear or affirm their allegiance to the Parliament and People of Queensland. In August 2005 the Constitutional and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2005 was introduced into Parliament by the then Premier which contained amendments in this regard. Similar reforms have been enacted in New South Wales, Western Australian and the ACT.

In November 2004 the LCARC report A Preamble for the Queensland Constitution? recommended against the adoption of a preamble due to “the possible need to modify any preamble if Australia moved to a republican system of government”. On 19 May 2005 the Queensland Government’s response to the report A Preamble for the Queensland Constitution? supported the LCARC recommendation. It appeared the main justification for not adopting a preamble to the Queensland Constitution was the concern over the community debate regarding a republican system of government in Australia and yet in August 2005 the Queensland Government introduced the Constitutional and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2005 that allowed members of parliament the opportunity to swear or affirm allegiance only to the people of Queensland. This Bill was not debated or passed prior to the 2006 State election an as a result the Bill lapsed.

It appears the LCARC is strongly convinced a change to an Australian republican system of government will occur in a relatively short timeframe. The LCARC sense of inevitability is impressive. Referring to the sovereignty of the people of Queensland in a preamble to the Queensland Constitution is in keeping with public sentiment. If the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen is considered such an archaic and outdated procedure that is not in keeping with modern parliamentary practice or with public opinion that the Queensland Government would adopt a position that is grounded in republican sentiment then why would the inclusion of reference to the sovereignty of the Queensland people in a preamble result in the removal of support and development for a preamble?

Amending the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen is in keeping with public sentiment and is an action the Queensland Government is bound to by its promise to alter the legislation requiring an Oath to the Monarch. The current Oath is outdated and has little meaning to the majority of Queenslanders.

Advice from the previous Chief of Staff, Office of the Premier was that a decision about whether to re-introduce the Bill into the House would be made in due course. In early 2008 it was advised that should it be determined that the proposed legislative amendments are supported a Bill would be introduced into Parliament as soon as practical after that time.

It has been over a year now since the Rudd Federal Ministry took an Oath to Australia, its land and its people rather than to Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors. There has been no public outcry or sense of disappointment about the change. It has been overwhelmingly positively received throughout Australia. This constitutes evidence of support for the required Queensland legislative amendments.

One of the first activities for members of the 53rd Queensland Parliament will be swearing an Oath of Allegiance to the Queen. The question is whether Queensland's elected representatives should have an allegiance to the monarch of a foreign country or to the people who elected them. All members of parliament need to support the amendment of the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen through the enactment of legislation to implement the parliamentary committee’s recommendations and the intent of Constitutional and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2005. The Oath of Allegiance to the Queen is an archaic and outdated procedure that is not in keeping with modern parliamentary practice or with public opinion.

What is needed is reform of the Queensland Oath of Allegiance to give members of parliament an additional choice of oath - one that does not include the Queen. Members of the Queensland Parliament will be required to swear or affirm to be "faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty and her heirs and successors according to law". They need to consider adding when swearing or affirming - ”and I will acknowledge the will of the people of Queensland in all deliberations”. This is not an Oath and therefore does not conflict with the constitutional requirements of members of parliament.

With reference to the text of a draft preamble for the Queensland Constitution the Queensland Government needs to lead by example and implement a preamble that begins with “We, the People of Queensland“ and includes a statement on the “sovereignty of the people of Queensland”.

Three cheers to the coming republic!

A Fond Farewell to dear Liz
In his first 2008 Boyer Lecture, Rupert Murdoch urged Australians to declare their independence from Britain. "The establishment of a republic of Australia will not slight the Queen, nor will it deny the British traditions, values and structures that have served us so well" he said. As usual, Murdoch got straight to the heart of the matter. He is right when he says it would be a mistake to rush into a republic without acknowledging the role Britain played in defining our national character. Whether we like it or not, Britain made us what we are today. And I suspect there can be no harmonious transition to a republic without acknowledging the civilising effect of the monarchy on our history.

However, don't imagine Her Majesty will take offence at Australian's cutting the apron-string. She won't. In 1999 the rejection of the republic referendum was more an expression of popular mistrust of politicians than an indication of royalist sentiment. When told of the result the Queen said she would continue to serve as Queen of Australia under the Constitution. But she made it clear she would not stand in the way of a republic. "I have always made it clear that the future of the monarchy in Australia is an issue for the Australian people and them alone to decide, by democratic and constitutional means", she said.

The National Chair of the Australian Republican Movement, Michael Keating says it would be wrong to wait until the Queen dies before acting. "Philosophically it is wrong for us to link our national future to the health of a dear old lady living in England", Keating said. "People who say, 'I love Elizabeth but don't like Charles' are not putting their belief in any system".

It will no doubt take a couple of years to 'go through the process' of cutting ties with Britain. Perhaps Australia had better hurry up. A poll on Prince Charles's 60th birthday found 72% of Britons did not want Camilla to be Queen. Britain may be a republic before us.

Three cheers to the coming republic!

Australia Day 2009

One of the reasons Australians want a republic is because we feel embarassed to hear that in official functions our foreign diplomats stand to their feet and toast the Queen as our legitimate leader. Also we feel disappointed for our kids when we have to tell them they can't aspire to be the Australian head of state. We cringe when we hear the Barmy Army mockingly sing 'God Save Your Queen' at the Ashes. In essence, we are patriots. We want Australia to be completely sovereign and independent. That's wahy Australia Day is a special day for republicans. It's a day we like to celebrate and honour with fervour and passion.

On Australia Day 2009 dozens of Postcode Parties were held around Australia in parks and at beaches where a glass was raised to the coming republic. It is this involvement of the Australian community at a grassroots level that bodes well for future change.

The republic is about national identity. It's about having pride and confidence in us as Australians. It's about the future of our country and Australia's place in the world in the twentyfirst century. It is something that is well worth fighting for and the process that will allow us to reach the goal is a potentially unifying national experience.

Three cheers for the coming republic!

This (republican) life

It's been twenty years this month since I submitted my political history honours thesis at James Cook University on the history of an Australian republican moment. The thesis was an analysis of the Charters Towers-based Australasian Republican Association between 1890 and 1891. I've spent the twenty years since then exploring Australia's republican past and publishing many academic articles, newspaper articles, and book chapters on the topic.

Twenty years later I find myself an active member within the current Australian Republican Movement. In September 2005 I was returned at the top of the poll during the ARM election for the 12 member Queensland State Council, and was awarded a PhD from University of New England on the middle class dimesion to Australia's republican past. In 2006 I negotiated the affiliation of Queensland's largest trade union, the Queensland Teachers' Union, with the ARM (the first union ever to do so), and in 2007 was elected ARM Queensland State Secretary.

My family on my maternal grandfather's side have lived in Charters Towers since the 1890s with each generation involved in the mining industry. Growing up in Charters Towers in the 1970s my political outlook drew upon my large extended family's working-class mining heritage and deep personal roots within the gold mining town. In particular it was my grandfather's stories of life working the Charters Towers gold mines, and his memories of his father working the goldfield in the 1890s that moulded the way I saw the world. It was obvious that I would approach life with a strong commitment to support the Australian labour movement.

Charters Towers was a country town of conflicting and clashing ideas. Townies and bushies. Small businessmen and workers. Rural conservative and Labor. A Marxist scholar could have a field day defining class lines and divisions. Class lines in western Queensland have not changed much. There is still a tacit division between old establishment figures and non-land owners. To marry into the landed gentry is still viewed by many mothers of the brides as a step into a better world.

But it was the egalitarianism of the goldfield that seemed to absorb me growing up in Charters Towers. I always had the strong feeling that 'jack is as good as his master'. As a result my view of republicanism was initially grounded in class conflict.

In 1977 I remember seeing for the first time Star Wars. For me it was the Empire verse the Republic - with the rebels being the good guys fighting against the evil Empire. My first republican moment was played out within the confines of the aptly named Regent Theatre with a working-class community cheering on the successful overthrow of the Empire by the rebels within the grand flourish of a space opera.

By 1983 I was reading Russel Ward's, Australia since the coming of man and listening to Australian music such as Goanna's Spirit of Place. This was time when Redgum was lampooning the federal Liberal government, People for Nuclear Disarmament were active within the community, and many Queenslander's were sick and tired of the Bjelke-Petersen government. For me the radical nationalist approach to Australian history constituted Australia's real past.

It was during the 1940s and 1950s that radical nationalist historians wrote histories that retrieved the radical temper of the workers of the past. The radical nationalist view of the 1880s and 1890s reinforced the belief that it was a peiod of intense interest in ideas, in being Australian and in working out solutions to society's problems of poverty and inequality, and drew its support from the popular beliefs founded in mateship, egalitarianism and socialism.

This was best codifed in Russel Ward's 1958 The Australian Legend. In this book, Ward used as his conceptual basis radical distinctiveness. Wards set out to reshape historical thinking about the origins of Australian nationalism. He argued that national identity or the 'Australian spirit' was "intimately connected with the bush and that it derived rather from the common folk than from the more respectable and cultivated sections of society". For Ward, mateship was forged in the hostile environment of the bush and was adopted by the rural unions of the shearers and miners in their famous struggles against the pastoralists during the 1890s. Ward's 'bush legend' was collectivist and democratic in politics. It was the labour historians of the 1950s and 1960s who showed how the organised working-class were the heirs and custodians of the radical nationalist tradition. It was within the radical nationalist historical tradition that I wrote the history of Charters Towers based Australasian Republican Association.

Three cheers for the coming republic!