[WikiEN-l] Re: Queen Elizabeth II

Thu Mar 10 00:55:49 UTC 2005

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:21:22 +1100, csherlock at ljh.com.au
<csherlock at ljh.com.au> wrote:

> The controversy has come about because Skyring insists that our head of
> state is not the monarchy, therefore we fall inside the definition of
> what is a republic. This is ORIGINAL RESEARCH. I have read some of his
> sources, and none of them state what he thinks they say.

This is simply not true, and I welcome the opportunity to spit out the
words you cram into my mouth. Far from insisting anything, I merely
pass on the opinions of constitutional scholars. The view that we have
but one head of state is a minority position amongst these folk, and
if there is any consensus it is that we have two heads of state,
usually expressed as a formal or symbolic head of state in the Queen
and an effective or defacto head of state in the Governor-General.

TBSDY's interpretation of a source that states that we have two heads
of state as meaning that we have but one is one that he really should
explain further.

For example, Professor George Winterton, one of the scholars I cite,
says: "An objective assessment can lead to only one conclusion:
Australia's legal or formal head of state is the Queen. The
governor-general is the effective or de facto head of state of the
Commonwealth, but not of Australia."
http://www.quadrant.org.au/php/archive_details_list.php?article_id=927

By Australia, Winterton means the Commonwealth and the six State
governments, each of which have their own constitution and Governor.
Naturally, the Governor-General has no role in the government of a
State.

Professor Winterton says we have how many heads of state?

A. None
B. One
C. Two

-- 
Peter in Canberra