The King, the Royal Family and the Commonwealth

[An Ard Ri]

There seems to have been an increased support for the Monarchy in Canada following the start of the current US Tensions.
King Charles’s visit to Canada shows the monarchy’s quiet diplomatic strength

 

[Curryong]

I don’t know whether this is the correct thread to put this in but I thought it may be of interest. Please remove if it is in the wrong thread.
Recent polling (notably in the Sydney Morning Herald) in the wake of the Andrew saga has renewed support for an Australian republic. It was considered enough to be included in this morning breakfast show here in Australia. The discussion did raise several points and shows that the Andrew scandal has somewhat damaged the monarchy’s reputation.

However, there is some sympathy here for King Charles, and elderly man battling cancer. Whether that is enough to stop the flow remains to be seen, however.

 

[Asteria12]

Its still well under 50% and most Australians continue to see the cost and effort required to convert to a republic as too high to bother about anytime soon. I don't think the King and Prince William need to be concerned, and on that point, both have openly acknowledged that it will happen at some point. To be honest, the ongoing disaster in the USA is what consumes most Australians paying attention to overseas events concerning that now-deceased pedophile and his connections.

"I would imagine the Australian republican movement would see this as an opportunity to remind Australians of the disadvantages of our current system," she said. Altman said if a referendum were to go ahead, it's more likely that the campaign for a republic would be damaged by the overseas actions Trump, more than the monarchist movement would be damaged by former Prince Andrew. "The monarchists would have a very easy time pointing to Trump," he said. "Although nobody is suggesting an American-style presidency, the whole concept of a politician being elected as head of state would be enough to put people off," he said."

Why some Australians stand by the royal family despite the Prince Andrew scandal

Polls show Australians have little sympathy for Prince Andrew — yet backing for the royal family and constitutional monarchy remains steady. Why?

www.sbs.com.au

 

[TLLK]

Thank you for sharing this information Asteria12. I was previously under the impression that Australia was moving towards a republic in the near future, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
I am aware that of course, public sentiment can definitely change from month to month or year to year, but I am surprised by the poll results.

 

[Asteria12]

At some point in the future it probably will happen, but the thing is, in Australia there are republicans and there are monarchists, but above all of them there are far more Australians who just won't vote for us to become a republic unless there are clear economic and strategic reasons to do so. Popularity contests are not a good enough reason. This has been the consistent message from the voting population since the 1999 referendum. Public sentiment waxes and wanes easily whenever some new scandal bubbles up, but when it comes down to it, there has to be a clear reason for change and it has to be a model that will be acceptable to us. So far that hasn't been provided so most people continue to consistently say no.

 

[TLLK]

At some point in the future it probably will happen, but the thing is, in Australia there are republicans and there are monarchists, but above all of them there are far more Australians who just won't vote for us to become a republic unless there are clear economic and strategic reasons to do so. Popularity contests are not a good enough reason. This has been the consistent message from the voting population since the 1999 referendum. Public sentiment waxes and wanes easily whenever some new scandal bubbles up, but when it comes down to it, there has to be a clear reason for change and it has to be a model that will be acceptable to us. So far that hasn't been provided so most people continue to consistently say no.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this matter.

 

[Curryong]

One thing is that at the moment there are many other things besides a future republic occupying the minds of the Australian public, economic and otherwise. There is also no appetite for one now from the Labor Party which won an overwhelming election victory earlier this year. There are many republicans in Parliament however and also Governors General for many years have stated they are republicans.

A different model is certainly needed before many people will vote for a republic. My own preference is for the Irish model, certainly not an elected President as in the US. That is incompatible with the Westminster system I believe, along with the example across the Pacific at the moment.

What is undeniable however is that polls show each time there are surveys taken her on the subject is that there is a great difference in younger people’s views, those under thirty for instance, from those Australians who are sixty plus, and that will be a large factor in the decades to come. History in the 21st century is not on the side of Heads of State who are royalty, primarily based halfway across the world.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

At some point in the future it probably will happen, but the thing is, in Australia there are republicans and there are monarchists, but above all of them there are far more Australians who just won't vote for us to become a republic unless there are clear economic and strategic reasons to do so. Popularity contests are not a good enough reason. This has been the consistent message from the voting population since the 1999 referendum. Public sentiment waxes and wanes easily whenever some new scandal bubbles up, but when it comes down to it, there has to be a clear reason for change and it has to be a model that will be acceptable to us. So far that hasn't been provided so most people continue to consistently say no.

It's the same situation here in Canada. The popularity of the monarch ebbs and flows with various events, just as in Australia, but the process to remove the Crown would be long, complex, expensive and arduous. So sensible Canadians, whether they agree with the concept monarchy or not, agree that the whole thing is best left well alone, unless something happens that is so horrendous, the change simply must be made.

 

[Bubbly]

What is undeniable however is that polls show each time there are surveys taken her on the subject is that there is a great difference in younger people’s views, those under thirty for instance, from those Australians who are sixty plus, and that will be a large factor in the decades to come.

I do think that it would make sense to abolish the monarchy at some point but IMO it's more complex. Young people will get older too and might change their views. Also, they might prefer a republic but think "William is nice enough, I am going to vote for a republic later". Then George might be "nice enough" too and so on. I also think that questions about the Governor General should be considered in polls. If they do a good job, then people might think twice about changing anything about it. They could want to have the Governor General as their president, but still, it's easier not to change anything about it, if they happen to be happy with them now.

 

[Curryong]

The Governor General is appointed by the PM (Government) of the day however, to act as the monarch’s representative in Australia, so it is in no sense an independent position.

I certainly cant see Aussies who wish to abolish the monarchy in Australia considering the Governor General of the time for the position. GG’s are hardly prominent (the 1975 constitutional crisis notwithstanding.) Indeed many Australians wouldn't be able name the one we have at the moment.

Under 40 year old Australians have consistently shown in polling to be less enthusiastic about the monarchy for the last twenty years at least than those who are sixty plus.

And whether a Prince or King is ‘nice’ or not particularly nice is hardly relevant when choosing a Head of State. It’s not a popularity contest.
(William may well not be ceremonial Head of the Commonwealth either, when the time comes. Charles was only given the position due to respect by Commonwealth leaders for an elderly Queen who stated her wishes. That is hardly likely to happen next time.)

It really comes down to whether Australians wish to have an Australian occupying the role of Head of State, or a royal who comes to visit for a couple of weeks every three years or so.

 

[Bubbly]

That people in the realms might want to have an actual head of state, that is from their country, is the only reason I think that a republic might be a realistic option in the medium-term. But when I as an outsider think about who is representing Australia, then for me it's the Governor General, who is actually Australian, with the additional connection to the royal family, that might be a good thing for some. So I still think the decision is not as easy.

 

[Hallo girl]

When I think of the Scottish referendum to be a separate country, from the uk. It was a close call, but in some cases it came down to what was the alternative. Some people did not like the idea of the alternative.

 

[Curryong]

Well, I’m sorry but when the majority of Australians think of who is representing them overseas then I’m afraid that for most the GG doesn’t come to mind.
When the Prime Minister of the day travels overseas then he/she would, I suggest, be considered by most Australians to be representing our country.

 

[Curryong]

When I think of the Scottish referendum to be a separate country, from the uk. It was a close call, but in some cases it came down to what was the alternative. Some people did not like the idea of the alternative.

It was indeed a close call, and Scotland is not halfway across the world from the rest of the UK. Some of the decision at least was economics; fear of what would happen with over the border trade between two independent neighbouring countries. It is blindingly obvious that Australia is not in that position.

Scots can see the monarch if they wish when he visits over the border every summer to attend various engagements and others, like the Princess Royal, visit quite often as well. That’s not the case with Australia (or NZ.) A visit every three or so years is OK for us, apparently.

 

[Bubbly]

Well, I’m sorry but when the majority of Australians think of who is representing them overseas then I’m afraid that for most the GG doesn’t come to mind.

I think that would be a shame, because IMO Sam Mostyn comes across as very personable from her online presence, and she seems to do lots of activities, visiting things and welcoming visitors.

 

[Curryong]

It's the same situation here in Canada. The popularity of the monarch ebbs and flows with various events, just as in Australia, but the process to remove the Crown would be long, complex, expensive and arduous. So sensible Canadians, whether they agree with the concept monarchy or not, agree that the whole thing is best left well alone, unless something happens that is so horrendous, the change simply must be made.

Yes, voting in referenda here also means jumping through many many hoops in order to change the Constitution. And it all seems too hard, too expensive etc.
Voting No to such changes always been called in Australia the ‘if it ain’t broke why fix it’ version. The trouble with that mode of thinking is that it feeds on apathy. And with apathy comes indifference. There are many in Australia who are indifferent to the monarchy but well, ‘yawn, we’ll fix it in the not too distant future I expect, in another twenty or so years’.

The danger there is that indifference, especially among the newer migrant populations and young Australians and Canadians is that indifference doesn’t equate to any real enthusiasm for monarchy. And that’s unlikely to change.

 

[Curryong]

I think that would be a shame, because IMO Sam Mostyn comes across as very personable from her online presence, and she seems to do lots of activities, visiting things and welcoming visitors.

Last saw her presenting the Melbourne Cup. She appears to be a nice woman but she doesn’t figure hugely in many Australians’ thoughts.

 

[Hallo girl]

It was indeed a close call, and Scotland is not halfway across the world from the rest of the UK. Some of the decision at least was economics; fear of what would happen with over the border trade between two independent neighbouring countries. It is blindingly obvious that Australia is not in that position.

Scots can see the monarch if they wish when he visits over the border every summer to attend various engagements and others, like the Princess Royal, visit quite often as well. That’s not the case with Australia (or NZ.) A visit every three or so years is OK for us, apparently.

I never said it was, no need to be aggressive in your response. I was trying to have conversation , our referendum was not about monarchy but separation.
I am going to log off now, it is impossible to have debate or discussion on this forum.

 

[Toledo]

I have questions.

I don't understand the Commonwealth system in terms of citizens of a specific area that live abroad. As in if there's a referendum in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland and people from these locations live somewhere else like Canada, New Zeeland and/or Australia, do you vote overseas?

And I mean if you are living overseas due to work or other nature but you still have a home back in, let's say Scotland.
Here in the USA, citizens that live abroad for work or retired can still vote to the State and Federal elections as persons who are still considered living within a state.

 

[Curryong]

As far as Australian citizens living overseas in say the UK or US for work or studies etc are concerned, yes you can vote in Federal elections and referenda. Below is the criteria. It is for six years and you have to be registered with our (completely independent) Australian Electoral Commission.

Enrol to vote for federal elections from outside Australia

If you are overseas and are intending to return to Australia within six years you can register as an overseas elector

www.aec.gov.au

 

[Asteria12]

I have questions.

I don't understand the Commonwealth system in terms of citizens of a specific area that live abroad. As in if there's a referendum in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland and people from these locations live somewhere else like Canada, New Zeeland and/or Australia, do you vote overseas?

And I mean if you are living overseas due to work or other nature but you still have a home back in, let's say Scotland.
Here in the USA, citizens that live abroad for work or retired can still vote to the State and Federal elections as persons who are still considered living within a state.

As Curryong said, Aussie expats can still vote and just need to make sure they are still enrolled with the AEC. Many expats do make the effort to vote too, possibly because we are just used to doing it as voting is compulsory here in Australia.

 

[Alison H]

UK expats can vote in UK elections, but have to renew their registration every three years.

 

[Hallo girl]

As Curryong said, Aussie expats can still vote and just need to make sure they are still enrolled with the AEC. Many expats do make the effort to vote too, possibly because we are just used to doing it as voting is compulsory here in Australia.

I didn’t realise voting is compulsory, which I full agree with. IMO it should be brought in here. Regardless of which party you vote for, it gives a true reflection of the views of the people.
We had a by election for 1 ward for our local authority recently, only 26% of the voters cast a vote, as a result the party that won changed the balance of the council.
Our last general election was a low turnout but an overwhelming majority for one party,
I agree with compulsory voting.