As anticipated, the passing of Queen Elizabeth II has reignited debate about Australia’s sovereignty. Is now the time to finally cut the apron strings with Mother England and establish a republic with an actual Aussie on the top table?
While constitutional experts and fervent boosters on both sides lock horns about the if, how and when, the rest of us are already at the who. Crikey satirist Tom Red runs a ruler over the early betting.
Geoffrey Robertson
Pros: Not only is he familiar with the international legal system and medieval work attire, but also he’s nailed the preposterous royal cadence and diction.
Cons: Punters want pomp, not pomposity.
Meghan and Harry
Pros: While not technically Australian, the appointment of this power couple as head of state would garner worldwide attention and induce cataclysmic conniptions in the likes of Piers Morgan, Hollie Hughes and Rowan Dean.
Cons: Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Paul Keating
Pros: Known for his royal touch, Paul Keating is unlikely to be hoodwinked by shifty PMs seeking extra-ministerial powers, as opposed to some other Yarralumla dignitaries our lawyers have advised us not to mention, imply or infer.
Cons: Mahler. So much fucking Mahler.
Ash Barty
Pros: Well loved by all Australians, Black and white. Respectful, humble, warm, honest, young and inspirational.
Cons: Lacking the personality defects of previous heads of state, royal and otherwise, Ash’s appointment would deny every Australian their inalienable right to complain bitterly about public figures.
The succulent Chinese meal guy
Pros: No one can utter the words “democracy manifest” with more am-dram gravitas than he. And like previous heads of state, this bloke has never paid for a meal.
Cons: There are serious question marks about his true identity. Some swear he is Hungarian chess master Paul Charles Dozsa. Others say he’s Brisbane painter Jack K, or perhaps a bloke called Cecil George Edwards. This ambiguity didn’t end well for Russian royal Anastasia and could compromise the appointment.
Eric Abetz
Pros: Like the House of Windsor, he’s got Germanic heritage.
Cons: He’d have to give up his day job at the Australian Monarchist League.
I go for PJK. He would let loose and call the PM a scumbag on various occasions – would not hold back even if it’s the Labor party in power. Woe betide any PM daring to tamper with his compulsory super legacy!
My gut feeling says George Christensen. He’d be in Angeles City more often than here, has no intellectual interest in politics, is entirely predictable and he’s cheap. Best of all, he’d not be taken seriously.
I was going to opt for Eric Abetz, however, after reading your glowing character reference for George, how could one not agree, George is the only person for the job?
EricA is certainly a person upon who the vast majority of people could agree – of being unfit.
For any public role.
There must be no exclusions. Our kings and queens have all been Poms with a compulsory trace of German blood in their veins. They have all been Church of England. Compulsory to be C of E. Catholics have been specifically forbidden. All other religions or none have been excluded. In an Australian republic all Australians, yes, even current or former politicians have the right to be head of state. I’ll say it again. Everyone.