AUSTRALIAN republicans have been described as “clueless” as political war breaks out over their preferred constitutional model.
Peter Fitzsimons’ Australian Republican Movements’ proposal has been immediately criticised as dangerous by Labor heavyweight Bob Carr – who claimed it invited conflict between a prime minister and a popularly elected president.
- Fitzsimons’ model could lead to political warfare between the prime minister and the head of state vying for “populist supremacy”.
- Former PM warns the ARM proposal would undermine Australia’s democracy.
- “We have more than enough to worry about right now without this unnecessary distraction.”
The Fitzsimons model would see 11 candidates nominated for a popular vote – one each from State & territory parliaments and up to three from Federal parliament.
Pro-republican constitutional lawyer Peter Craven described the proposal as unconstitutional – saying it could lead to political warfare between the prime minister and the head of state vying for “populist supremacy”.
DIFFERENT
“Why would State parliaments have a role in preparing a list for a head of state of a completely different constitutional entity?”
Mr Carr, a former foreign minister and NSW premier, agrees.
“I don’t know how you can avoid a new head of state, elected by a drawn-out selection process at a nation ballot, thinking they’ve got a mandate of their own and superior to that of the prime minister,” he said.
“It’s plain impossible to stop candidates from creating product differentiation by taking stands on policy.
“And then, once elected, they naturally have a claim on a mandate.”
Former prime minister and leader of Australia’s 1999 “No” campaign Tony Abbott warned the proposal would undermine Australia’s democracy.
“A president accountable to the people would be a rival to the prime minister accountable to the parliament and government would become unworkable,” he said.
“My general view is that we have more than enough to worry about right now without this unnecessary distraction.”
Liberal senator Dean Smith, who supports Australia’s current system of constitutional monarchy, said the latest ARM proposal demonstrated the organisers’ “cluelessness”.
“Until republicans can end their internal divisions and land on a single preferred model, constitutional monarchy will remain Australia’s preferred option for years to come,” he said.PC
I used to be supportive of the idea of Australia becoming a republic even though as a Brit I am pro-monarchy in relation to the UK, but seeing revolting individuals like Turnbull and Fitzsimons involved in the republican movement has turned me off the idea completely.
Moreover, now that Charles has had to keep his stupid climate ideas to himself he’s doing okay as a figurehead monarch, so why change a system that works moderately well to one that would likely become a disaster?
The land of most of our forebears the United Kingdom and from which our Australian democratic system is derived once toyed with a Republic a Cwth Republic between 1649 and 1660, and what a fiasco that turned out to be. This period would be the worst government that has ever existed in the United Kingdom and one which has never been repeated. The lesson was well and truly learned. So why are these Republican lunatics still toying with the idea that such a system would be a paradise in Australia. Despatch these wokers to the dustbin of history for they obviously have learned nothing from history.
Most people know the left are severely brain damaged. They are victims of their own madness. If only they had a healthy childhood.