AUSTRALIA
and I am sure many of us, representing our local communities as we do, have been touched in some way by that fact.” Ms Roland commented that “today, through the advent of social media, many of our children are enduring relentless harassment and anguish in the supposed sanctuary of their own homes. According to research led by the University of New South Wales Social Policy Research Centre, which I note the government has quoted, one in five of our nation’s children aged between 10 and 17 have experienced some sort of cyberbullying.”
Succession to the Crown Act 2015
The Succession to the Crown Act will provide the Parliament of Australia’s assent to three important reforms to modernise the law relating to royal succession.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, Hon. Christian Porter MP commented that “these changes are consistent with changes being made to the law in the United Kingdom. They will align the royal succession laws with modern values and ensure that the same person is the Sovereign of Australia and of the United Kingdom.” The first reform will end the system of male preference primogeniture so that in future the order of succession will be determined simply by the order of birth. Female heirs will no longer be displaced by their younger brothers.
The second reform removes the bar on succession for an heir and successor of the Sovereign who marries a Catholic.
The third reform is to limit the requirement that the Sovereign consent to the marriage of a descendant of His Late Majesty King George II to the first six persons in line to the Crown. Mr Porter noted that “the reforms were enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom on 22 April 2013 and will come into force on the commencement of the UK legislation, as soon as all 16 realms, including Australia, implement the reforms in their jurisdictions.” Mr Porter concluded that “this modernisation of the laws of succession ensures the continued relevance of the monarchy to Australia and her people and reflects the commitment that all Australians have to equality and to non-discrimination.” The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Bill Shorten MP noted that the opposition supports the measures in the legislation but took the
opportunity to comment on the question of an Australian republic. Mr Shorten stated that “I believe that Australians are ready for a discussion about an Australian head of state. Our aim has to be a respectful national conversation between equals, not an insider A-list celebrity debate between politicians, constitutional pedants and the same old faces. Reigniting the republic debate will be a test of our national spirit and our national imagination. It is a moment that we are equal to.” Mr Shorten noted that “none of this should be taken as criticism of Queen Elizabeth II or of the House of Windsor. The Queen has given decades of committed service to our nation. She has earned the affection of many and the admiration of us all. But the simple fact is that our nation, our place in the world, has changed and our Constitution should change with it. The sun has long since set on an empire that we once bound ourselves to, to the last shilling and the last man.” The Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Christine Milne, also noted that the Greens support the legislation but made broader comments about Australia’s head of state. Senator Milne commented that “Australia is a modern country. I am really proud of this nation and we should have our own head of state. It is a complete nonsense that we are still deferring to the British royal family. The British royal family themselves think it is ridiculous. At the end of her Diamond Jubilee year, the Queen said she understands where Australia sits in relation to the end of the British Empire.
It would be an enormous relief to her if we finally stood up for ourselves, I am sure. How ridiculous would we have looked had the referendum for Scotland had succeeded? We would have looked so stupid. There was Scotland, an independent country, and Australia still with its apron strings attached to the monarchy. It would have looked utterly ridiculous. Where would we have been with our flag and everything else at that point? It all would have had to have been changed if Scotland had to be taken off.” Senator Milne concluded that “at some point we need to stand up. At some point, Australia must affirm itself as a modern, independent nation that can have its own national identity and values and our own head of state. Times have changed. Australia has changed. The Queen realises Australia has changed. That does not mean that Australians do not have enormous affection for the royal family. They do. That is not the point. The point is we should be a republic. We should have our own head of state.”
The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Two | 137
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76