Sat, Nov 06, 1999 page1

• Australia to vote on retaining Commonwealth ties

  NATIONAL IDENTITY Although proposed constitutional amendments which would make Australia a republic look likely to fail when they are put to voters today, the debate they have generated will likely continue long into the future

  • By Tim Culpan / STAFF REPORTER
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  After a long and parochial campaign, Australians go the polls today to decide whether to cut ties with the British monarchy, which still holds token sovereignty over the country.

  Two questions will be asked of voters, both of which involve essentially cosmetic changes to the Australian constitution. The first, and most important, seeks approval "to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President." The second asks "to alter the Constitution to insert a preamble."

  Both pro and anti-republicans admit that the changes will have little practical bearing on the mechanisms of government, but the issue is being fought hard on the grounds of principle and identity.

  The push for independence and national identity remains at the heart of the campaign. Former prime minister Paul Keating first got the ball rolling when he was in office in 1991, saying that the nation needs to find its own identity and prove to the world that it is no longer a leftover of British colonial power.

  Running alongside his republican push was Keating's argument that Australia needed to reassess its position in the world and let go of Britain and Europe. Asia, he said, was where Australia's future lay.

  Much of the debate since then has surrounded perceptions of Australia's place in the world. A common thread to the argument involves promoting Australia as a fresh, dynamic and independent nation in the Asian region, an image tainted by ties to Britain.

  Media billionaire Rupert Murdoch, whose fortune grew from a family newspaper in Adelaide, was quoted as saying this week that Australia's self-confidence is at the heart of the vote.

  Murdoch said it would be shameful for Australia to vote "no" and that it would lose self-respect if it voted against becoming a republic, Reuters reported.

  Opposition leader Kim Beazley agreed in part, saying he didn't think voters would lose respect, but "I think Australians would feel diminished. I'd put it a different way -- I think they'd be saddened," The Age newspaper reported him as saying.

  The republicans have pulled out all the stops to win over voters, recruiting an array of sportsmen, politicians and entertainment celebrities in a campaign aimed at appearing youthful and vibrant.

  Siding with the republicans has been former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, who is in a better position than any other person to understand the foibles of the governor-general; in 1975 he was sacked by then Governor-General John Kerr in a move that shocked Australians, who were outraged that an unelected official could fire a democratically elected representative.

  At one of the final public gatherings of the campaign, Whitlam delivered a send-up of the British monarchy. "The monarchs have appointed more dictators than Hindenburg did," The Age reported him as saying.

  Leading the largely conservative monarchist campaign has been Prime Minister John Howard, who has made no secret of his intentions.

  "I will vote `no' to Australia becoming a republic because I do not believe in changing a constitutional system which works so well and has helped bring such stability to our nation," he wrote in a widely published article outlining his position.

  According to opinion polls, however, both the "republic" and "preamble" votes look set to lose.

  An opinion poll published in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday showed 47 percent are likely to vote "no" for the key "republic" question while the "yes" vote garnered 41 percent support. The undecided vote has fallen to 12 percent, from 26 percent a week ago, as voters start to make their decisions.

  The key debate over Australia becoming a republic has been split three ways. Monarchists argue that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," while the republican camp is divided on the process of electing the president, a largely ceremonial position with no executive powers.

  More radical republicans argue, however, that the president should be elected directly by the people and they have rejected the proposed amendment, leaving only the moderates, who favor parliamentary appointment for the president, to push the cause.

  The Sydney Morning Herald poll indicated that it is those who favor direct election that hold the key, with about a third of those voting "no" wishing to have a direct say in who will be president. The daily reported that a shift to "yes" by those voters would increase support by 15 percent, enough to pass.

  Electoral rules require a double-majority for a constitutional amendment to pass, with a simple majority of all voters as well as a majority of voters in four of the country's six states. Only eight of 42 amendment proposals have ever passed a referendum.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Napoli’s title hopes shaken by late Genoa equalizer

  • 2

    Privately owned city in Kenya taking on corrupt officials

  • 3

    MOE to encourage foreigners to work in Taiwan

  • 4

    Kane tastes first title as Bayern bid farewell to Mueller

  • 5

    Taiwan celebrates V-E Day for first time