What's a Republic?

On Facebook, Richard Marles, MP, on 19 May 2018 had this from Paul Keating, ex PM. No date on this. So I looked it up. I could not find the exact quote from Paul Keating, but I don’t disbelieve it. In fact I absolutely believe it!

In April this year Paul Keating and Tony Abbott had a ‘right royal stoush’ about the suggested Republic, which Paul Keating has been recommending every year since he was the PM. In this SMH article, the writer said that Keating “claimed the heir to the British throne supports Australia becoming a republic and would welcome not having to "pretend" one day to be the country's head of state.” But Abbott replied with a Twitter comment: “Prince Charles would just want to do his duty and he shouldn't be verballed by an ex-PM.” Who was right – what do you believe or what don’t you believe?

On the Australian Government Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, PM Transcripts, I found this:

Statement by the Prime Minister, the Hon P J Keating, MP Canberra, 13 July 1994

I welcome the Democrats' contribution to the Republic debate. Like the Government, they have recognised the importance of this issue to the aspirations of the current generation of Australians, and to the legacy of appropriate democratic and independent institutions we want to leave for our children. We are committed to the course of action on the Republic debate we announced to the Australian public some time ago that the Australian people should be in a position to decide by referendum later in the decade whether Australia should become a republic.

…and…

Transcript of the Prime Minister, the Hon P. J. Keating, MP, Interview with Lyndal Curtis, ABC Monday, 11 July 1994 E& OE Proof Copy
Well, I think, Mr Downer is trying to tell people that the royal family isn't our head of state or as he said yesterday, the Queen is irrelevant. I think these comments reveal Mr Downer as weak and vacillating. He wants two bob each way. He wants to say to the republicans look, don't worry, the Queen isn't our head of state and it doesn't matter and we won't need to shift to a republic. And, to the monarchists he says don't worry, we'll keep the monarchy, we'll hide it and pretend it isn't relevant.

…and…

I don't believe we can have the full expression of Australian sovereignty, of Australian identity, of Australian aspirations while ever our head of state is borrowed from another country.

From this country’s last election too many politicians have been kicked out because they have a dual citizenship – with Australian and with a ‘foreign power’. If you support this monarchist, and the Queen as Head of State, then just what is a ‘foreign power’? 

Is it Britain? Is it New Zealand? Is it Canada? Is it Papua New Guinea? Vanuatu? Bangladesh? Malaysia? Grenada? Jamaica? Botswana? Kenya? South Africa? Or any of the other 43 Commonwealth countries which belong to the Commonwealth Foundation. According to the Commonwealth Foundation, “Eight governments came together in 1949 to form the modern Commonwealth. Australia, Canada, Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon), India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa and the United Kingdom declared themselves to be ‘united as free and equal members’ co-operating together in the pursuit of peace, liberty and progress.”  

 

Really? Do we know about that? What does the Commonwealth Head of State do? Is that Commonwealth – under the Queen – different than the Commonwealth Foundation? Why? Read the Commonwealth Foundation background page to see why and how that was set up. Did it name anyone in the Commonwealth as a ‘foreign power’?? 

 

At the Perth CHOGM in 2011, the Commonwealth Foundation set the following:

To promote the future of the Commonwealth through the strong and important voice of its people by … re-launching the Commonwealth Foundation in 2012, while retaining its fundamental intergovernmental nature and maintaining its accountability to member states, with a revised mandate and Memorandum of Understanding so that it can more effectively deliver the objectives of strengthening and mobilising Civil Society in support of Commonwealth principles and priorities.

Why call it ‘Commonwealth’? Isn’t ‘Commonwealth’ the group that Australia belonged to back in 1949? And has been part of since then? Which of the latest countries who have joined the Commonwealth considered ‘foreign power’?
 

Any country which belongs to the Commonwealth Foundation must not be considered a ‘foreign power’. Any person who is a citizen with any of those member countries should be permitted dual-citizenship. How would that hurt Australia? 

S44 in Australia’s Constitution says “Any person who - (i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power…”

‘Foreign power’ is NOT connected to Commonwealth. Why can’t a person who is citizen of, say, New Zealand, Canada, Britain, still become a citizen of Australia and never relinquish their other country’s Commonwealth citizenship?

Keating, in 2015, said:

Australia is a diminished country, diminished by its own hand, maintaining the monarchy and our reliance upon the sovereignty of Great Britain.

And we are still a member of the Commonwealth Foundation, and we still deny dual citizenship to anyone from any other Commonwealth country when they want to be a politician. Why?

Why?