People create a nation not royals
THE WORD ON THE STREET
IN DEFENCE of our constitutional monarchy, columnist Rowan Dean ( C-M, Aug 31) suggested the system is “a ceremonial nod to the past” in gratitude for who we are today.
For a start, the British monarch is not a purely “symbolic role” as Dean also opines, but our head of state, with the Governor-General acting as the Queen’s representative.
But I believe that our systems of rule of law, values and standards of “who we are” were not the result of monarchies but the centuries-long bloody and brutal journey of the common people.
The common people were in fact the ones who made Australia the country that it is today.
Is it therefore really that difficult for an Australian to be head of state while retaining our historical links to Britain by way of the British Commonwealth? Russell McGregor, Fitzgibbon IT IS all very well for a few republicans to suddenly begin banging on about an Australian republic.
However, monarchy aside, is there a system of government better than the Westminster system, which we have? I do not believe so.
In my view, most Australians would not support a United States system, which has a similar bicameral parliament to ours, but where the president is elected by popular vote.
Ireland has a presidential system which works for them, but Australia is not Ireland. We are structurally different.
Finally, I don’t think enough Australians would vote for a republic until after the Queen has gone. Lynne Redknap, Robina IF IT ain’t broke don’t fix it.
Let’s not waste time on redebating whether Australia should become a republic.
There are more important challenges facing us. Gerald Moses, Clear Island Waters LUKE BREUSS 31, entrepreneur, Varsity Lakes Yes. I once fell asleep while driving a car when I was coming back from a night shift. LUKE GIZZI 33, bar tender, Varsity Lakes Yes. Years ago I fell asleep at work a few times.