On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:03:08 +0000, actionforum(a)comcast.net
<actionforum(a)comcast.net> wrote:
------------- Original message --------------
Peter, the Queen IS the Head of state here in
Australia , though the matter is
complicated by the G-G representing her.
But isn't Peter also correct that Austrailia is a republic? I thought most
constitutional monarchies were republics. The salient point is whether the monarch or the
constitution is supreme. If the monarch cannot suspend or amend the constitution, then
what you have is the rule of law, a "republic".
Spot on. The Australian people drew up their Constituion through a
People's Convention with popularly elected delegates, and the
resultant constitution was approved by the people in each of the six
colonies. The constitution may ONLY by changed by a majority of the
voters in a majority of the six States.
Neither the Queen, nor the Governor-General, nor Parliament, nor the
Government may amend a single letter of the Constitution without the
express approval of the people.
The Governor-General's powers are given to him in the Constitution by
the people, and the Queen is all but powerless. She cannot issue
instructions nor may she exercise any of the Governor-General's
constitutional powers.
--
Peter in Canberra