Menu

Argument: The governor-general is an Australian head of state

Issue Report: Australian republic vs. monarchy

Supporting quotes

Rev. Kameel Majdali, Ph.D. “Australia’s Constitution, Crown, and Future”. Retrieved April 20th, 2008 – “AN AUSTRALIAN HEAD OF STATE?

“Do you–or don’t you–want an Australian head of state?” former Prime Minister Paul Keating asked then Opposition leader John Howard in federal parliament. Keating’s question managed to distill the multi-faceted arguments for an Australian republic into a powerful and emotional war cry. The implication of this question is simple: Australia lacks its own head of state and when one is created, we will discover the secret of national revival. In practical terms, the adoption of the republican agenda means removing the Queen, or Crown, from our Constitution and replacing it with the office of President. “A resident for President” has become catchy slogan meant to win over the Australian electorate to a republic.

What is a “Head of State?” It is a term that is used out of diplomacy rather than point of law. Often, it merely signifies who is entitled to a twenty-one gun salute. Some heads of state exercise their powers ceremonially while other countries, most notably the United States, have heads of state (the president) who exercise executive powers. As Abbott puts it, some heads of state are team captains; others are umpires (ABBOTT 1997:62).

Heads of State command armed forces, sign bills into law, appoint ministers, summon and prorogue legislatures. As mentioned above, these are the functions of the Australian Governor-General. The Commonwealth Government Directory–The Official Guide” of December 1995 to February 1996 (written during Keating’s time) defines the role of Governor-General and Commander-in-Chief as “He is the Head of State in whom power of the Commonwealth is vested.” The Australian newspaper, well-known for its strong republican sentiments, used the term Australia’s “Head of State” to describe the Governor-General (23 June 1995, 24-25 June 1995). The same paper specifically referred Governor-General Sir William Deane as Head of State (6 September 1996).

So why are we told that we need an Australian head of state when we already have a distinguished Australian fulfilling all the functions of a normal head of state? How is it that the Governor-General is not considered by republicans to be an Australian Head of State, when a proposed President, who has exactly the same functions, powers, and prerogatives of the Governor-General, would be considered Head of State? We still await a proper explanation to such logic.

Sir David Smith, who served as secretary to five governors-general, made this statement: “Foremost among the reasons given for constitutional change is the claim that the republic will give us an Australian Head of State. This claim is as mischievous as it is dishonest. Its success is dependent on the notorious ignorance of the vast majority of Australians about their Constitution. The truth is that Australia has two Heads of State. The Queen is our symbolic Head of State, the Govenor-General is our constitutional Head of State, and we have had Australians in the office of Governor-General since Lord Casey’s appointment in 1965” (SMITH 1997:2).