Prominent Australian monarchists view their opposition to the Voice to Parliament as an opportunity to undermine notions of a future referendum on an Australian republic.
Former Liberal prime minister John Howard told a meeting of the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) group in Sydney on Monday he hoped the Voice referendum would fail partly because it would have a chilling effect on the republican movement.
“If this [October 14] referendum is heavily defeated, which I hope it will be, that will discourage the current government from having a referendum on a republic,” Howard said in a pre-recorded video aired at the gathering.
Howard, a monarchist whose government oversaw an unsuccessful republic referendum in 1999, said republicans would be “greatly emboldened” if the Voice referendum succeeded.
“It is my view that if it were to get up, and [the Labor government], as they promised, set about having a referendum on a republic, they will be greatly emboldened it if gets up. That’s why I hope it doesn’t get up.”
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has long been a supporter of making Australia a republic, and appointed an assistant minister for the republic after taking office. But he has said consistently that the referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament would take precedence.
“My priority is constitutional recognition [of Indigenous Australians] — I can’t imagine … as was suggested by some … that we should be having another referendum on the republic before that occurs,” Albanese said in May. “I think at some stage in the future that will occur … What I don’t want to do is to be a prime minister who presides over just constitutional debates.”
The ACM meeting, in a lecture hall in NSW Parliament, was also shown a video interview with former Liberal prime minister Tony Abbott. He said that in his view, the British colonisation of Australia had “had a wonderful impact, not just on us Australians, but the wider world”.
“We should be grateful, and indeed, Indigenous Australia is better today than it would have been, thanks to the British settlement of this country,” he said. “While I don’t say that British colonialism was blemish-free, at its best it … enabled the native peoples to walk in the pockets of justice. There was a high-mindedness to a lot of it.”
Abbott, who as prime minister faced calls to change the constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, said he wouldn’t back any such change if it was likely to “alter our system of government”.
“[Indigenous constitutional recognition] should be a change that completes our constitution, [but which] doesn’t change it in any meaningful way,” Abbott said.
University of Sydney constitutional expert Anne Twomey said monarchists were likely to be correct in assuming a defeated Voice would make it harder to achieve a republic referendum. She described the Voice referendum question as relatively simple, whereas amending the constitution to change the head of state would involve a far more complicated set of questions.
“There’s no particular relation between the Voice as a subject and the republic as a subject; it’s more a question as to how the Australian people approach referendums and constitutional reform,” she told Crikey.
“If you can’t get a very simple referendum in relation to the Voice passed, it would make it extremely difficult to have a very complicated referendum on the republic passed.
“If the Voice referendum fails, it will do damage to the political capital and will … If we start treating the constitution as a sacred document that we shouldn’t change, that flows to other suggestions as well.”
Can’t believe I have voted for this guy! The anachronistic ramblings of Howard and others in the now ‘right wing dominated’ LNP, should be ignored by those of us who crave a more progressive society. A ‘yes’ vote will be a significant step forward in uniting our country.
Say no to doing a good thing for Indigenous Australians because that will put a brake on the Republican movement? Is that right? A pox on that view and the stain-makers who push it
Most intelligent Australians can’t either.
Given what was known about Howard since he was Fraser’s Treasurer, many people are astounded that anyone voted for him, ever.
Yet here we are, a decade and a half after he was unceremoniously dumped, the faithful keep rolling him out like they did in the Dark Ages when Societies went to war over a long dead Saint’s bones. Then paraded them around the streets on Holy Days.
The mind boggles that today, influential (not not particularly intelligent) people still practice those habits.
“Most intelligent Australians can’t either”. Unfortunately, intelligent Australians aren’t most of them. Howard and his fellow grifters are aware of this and exploit it with misinformation, fear, and doubt in order to have a win.
Their may be some desperation in messaging by ‘No’ in wheeling out Howard et al linking Voice to any potential Republic or other referendums, and then LNP shadow Price claiming extremist attacks via social media by the right suggesting linked to the Voice ‘Yes’….. seems to be more about confusing older and less enlightened voters, then final push for negative?
Further, one assumes the proliferation of short term polls supporting ‘No’ are replicating the US mid term strategy by MSM for the GOP i.e. all polls predicting a ‘red wave’, only for a ‘blue wave’ to happen; how could they get it so wrong, me thinks purposely in an effort to nudge….
Their = there
Three cheers Charlie. A bit behind in my reading because I reside in WA. Yesterday watched former Chief Justice Robert French addressing the National Press Club and then Noel Pearson’s address on Iview. As a yes voter from the outset, I found their addresses deeply informative and loving of our country and one another. I was in tears at one stage. So there you go from a baby boomer who grew up in Kalgoorlie.
It’s not exactly a surprise that somebody like Howard would decide his stance on the referendum by ignoring entirely the merit or benefits of the actual question on the ballot and instead be only concerned with exploiting the vote for other purposes. But it is still wholly despicable.
Trying to paralyse Australia and shackle it forever to the current version of the constitution can only lead to decay and destruction. The constitution was created to be a living document that would be adapted and modified from time to time as required by the mechanism provided. That was wise. Howard’s stance is stupid reactionary folly, and must end badly for everyone.
The negativism of a NO vote and Howard’s justification for it will also lead to decay and destruction. The opposition parties won’t ever be able to live this down, at least not in our generation.
Err… that’s what I said.
I am in full agreement with you. It won’t hurt to be said twice.
Not a surprise, he wishing a return to a form of UK WASP 19thC, ‘whatever it takes’ and purloing the Whitlamesque ‘maintain the rage’….
However, if ‘No’ prevails, it will be a short term bump in the rod, but me thinks the end of the Liberal Party for normies i.e. culturally becoming the QLD LNP, to match the sentiments of Howard, Dutton, Abbott, Downer at al., MSM proprietors and ageing WASPs (honorary and wannabe ones too); become unelectable by normal means, but by ‘stunts’ see UK & US.
It will be the end of the Liberal Party as a choice for centre right and centrist normies, as it morphs into the QLD LNP, minority part but still a delivery system for RW MSM and IPA….
We won’t get a Republic in my lifetime. Frankly, I can’t see any Referendum getting up in my lifetime. They are far too easy to scupper with a scare campaign not restricted by having to be honest.
Howard is allegedly prominent in the Atlas Network of 500+ neoliberal think tanks. As Dr Jeremy Walker’s report ‘Silencing the Voice: the fossil-fuelled Atlas Network’s campaign against constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australia’ shows, the ‘No’ campaign is employing the classic Atlas Network playbook.
It reveals the ‘No’ campaign’s history, motives and powerful capacities to mobilise seemingly unlimited amounts of ‘dark money’ from global fossil fuel companies and their allies.
In summary:
“Should the Atlas Network’s ‘Vote No’ campaign shout down a profoundly important constitutional vote through racial provocation and ubiquitous disinformation, Australians will have conceded yet more power to the most powerfully-organised opponents of national self-determination and parliamentary sovereignty, to those who would, in pursuit of temporary riches for a tiny elite, render the Earth progressively uninhabitable. If Australians continue to turn a blind eye to the shadowy, far-right political infrastructure of the Atlas think-tanks and campaign organisations, which exert considerable influence over elections and public life without transparency or accountability, Australians may find themselves increasingly voiceless in the illiberal democracy of a petro-state.”
Please Australia, Vote YES ?
Read same, according to NY’er’s Jane Mayer in ‘Dark Money’ it’s a long game of ‘architecture of influence’.
Atlas, for those who don’t know was originally UK, behind Brexit and is now based in Washington and is more or less ‘Koch Network’ i.e. locally IPA, CIS, AIP & Taxpayers’ Alliance; fossil fueled libertarian or freedom or liberty promoting (i.e. authoritarianism) with Mont Pelerin Society & Buchanan’s ‘segregation economics’ while in the US sharing donors or investors with nativist greenwashing of Tanton Network.
DeSmog gives a good overview ‘Many of the member think tanks of the Atlas Network have supported climate science denial and have campaigned against legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions.’
https://www.desmog.com/atlas-economic-research-foundation/
One would argue these networks are effectively promoting eugenics masquerading as grounded and empirical socioeconomic policies.
Howard, the father of division and racism in Australia