Democratic Alternative Information Service:
  Policies

Other Issues
Side Issues or Red Herrings?

The Flag

The issue of the Flag is way outside the terms of reference of the Convention. If any delegate proposes changing the Flag, he or she will be told by the chairperson, basically, to sit down and shut up. As far as I know, no candidates or groups have proposed any changes as part of their platforms. We could become a republic without changing the Flag, or we could do the Canadian vice-versa.

So why do the monarchists raise the issue at every opportunity - usually long before discussing the real issue of the Head of State? I believe they are well aware of all the points above. However, they are right into the manipulation of emotions and loyalties, and they realise that for most Australians, the Flag is a much more potent symbol than the Queen.

It would be a great pity if these people succeed in tying the Flag too closely to the Monarchy. The likely result would be that, soon after 1/1/2001, most people would look on the Flag as an anachronistic symbol and decide to discard it. I believe, like the RSL and the National Flag Association, that it is part of our nation's heritage and should retain its current legal status. However, in a fully sovereign Australia it would be completely inappropriate for our existing flag to be our only national flag.

What's that, I hear you say. Does this clown really want us to have two national flags? Well, when I was growing up, not too many decades ago, our country certainly seemed to have two flags, one representing the Empire and the other representing our little part of it. So what's wrong with giving ourselves two Australian flags - one representing our Heritage and the other representing our Sovereignty? Many monarchists reckon we have two Heads of State - surely that's more bizarre than having two flags.

If you would like me to develop this idea any further, you'll just have to wait until we finish with the real issues.

Citizens’ Initiated Referendum (CIR)

Unlike the Flag, CIR is a side issue not a red herring. That is, it is a genuine subject for constitutional reform - one with some merit, in my opinion - but it will not be able to be discussed at the Convention.

I agree with constitutional lawyer John Pyke that a CIR process should be used only for constitutional amendments and not for ordinary legislation, which should remain the province of Parliament. However, there may be a case for accepting a petition on any subject from an appropriate number of electors (say 1% of the country), and then using an appropriate tribunal - the High Court if necessary - to decide whether it amounts to a fair-dinkum constitutional amendment. If not, it could be submitted to Parliament as a Bill, and the people who became excited about the issue could at least find out exactly where their representatives stand.

I must emphasise again that none of this has any direct relevance to next February's Constitutional Convention.

Bill of Rights

Like CIR, this is an issue that definitely should be addressed - at the next Constitutional Convention. I won't attempt to justify its importance, as that has been done more effectively by others, John Pyke in particular.

The States

Reform of the federal structure, or the outright abolition of the states, is the ultimate side issue or the ultimate red herring, depending on your point of view. Most of us refuse to discuss the benefits of replacing the artificial state boundaries with a more natural regional arrangement; we only hear about this issue from scaremongering monarchists or an occasional republican who knows no fear (e.g. Charles Mollison with his new Constitution).

At the moment, the politicians have their snouts in nine separate troughs. Reducing this to one, in the face of such powerful vested interests, would be a herculean task - even though, at the current rate of privatisation and downsizing, there may soon be little left for state politicians to do. This is an issue that must be faced honestly, for our country's sake, but perhaps not at the same time as we discuss the issue of the Head of State.

·=============== ===============·

Ross Garrad, 18 November 1997