Sixty Joyless De-Britished Uncrowned Commonpoor Years (1949-2009)

Elizabeth II Vice-Regal Saint: Remembering Paul Comtois (1895–1966), Lt.-Governor of Québec
Britannic Inheritance: Britain's proud legacy. What legacy will America leave?
English Debate: Daniel Hannan revels in making mince meat of Gordon Brown
Crazy Canucks: British MP banned from Canada on national security grounds
Happy St. Patrick's: Will Ireland ever return to the Commonwealth?
Voyage Through the Commonwealth: World cruise around the faded bits of pink.
No Queen for the Green: The Green Party of Canada votes to dispense with monarchy.
"Sir Edward Kennedy": The Queen has awarded the senator an honorary Knighthood.
President Obama: Hates Britain, but is keen to meet the Queen?
The Princess Royal: Princess Anne "outstanding" in Australia.
H.M.S. Victory: In 1744, 1000 sailors went down with a cargo of gold.
Queen's Commonwealth: Britain is letting the Commonwealth die.
Justice Kirby: His support for monarchy almost lost him appointment to High Court
Royal Military Academy: Sandhurst abolishes the Apostles' Creed.
Air Marshal Alec Maisner, R.I.P. Half Polish, half German and 100% British.
Cherie Blair: Not a vain, self regarding, shallow thinking viper after all.
Harry Potter: Celebrated rich kid thinks the Royals should not be celebrated
The Royal Jelly: A new king has been coronated, and his subjects are in a merry mood
Victoria Cross: Australian TROOPER MARK DONALDSON awarded the VC
Godless Buses: Royal Navy veteran, Ron Heather, refuses to drive his bus
Labour's Class War: To expunge those with the slightest pretensions to gentility
100 Top English Novels of All Time: The Essential Fictional Library
BIG BEN: Celebrating 150 Years of the Clock Tower

Wednesday, 5 December 2007

Republican Rudd defers to nobody. Gettit?

Well isn't that nice. The new Prime Minister of Australia refused to swear allegiance to the Queen of Australia during yesterday's swearing-in. You know, the one in the country's constitution, the one who was democratically confirmed in the referendum of 1999, the one who swept every state in the Commonwealth, the chosen sovereign representative of the people of Australia!

No matter. The Honourable Rudd is above that sort of nonsense, and bloody hell if he is going to stoop so low as to respect the wishes of the Australian electorate and the existing Constitution. Mr. Rudd is answerable to nobody. Nobody! Far better to mouth loyalty to a bloodless abstraction and demonstrate allegiance to a phantom republic, than surrender to the indignity of bowing before the people's Monarch. In any event, the people want a republic. And by God, a republic is what I will give them if they have any sense!

Photo: The Queen with former Governors-General of Australia at Government House in Canberra, March 2006.

10 comments:

Scott said...

This puts him, I'm afraid to say, in the same company as the IRA and Sinn Fein, whose politicians all refuse the oath.

Indeed, like them, Rudd should be denied all government pay...

Well. We should start organising now - how can this new, stupid attempt be stopped? How can the threat, that republicans will regularly return to the question until they get the answer they want, be permanently killed? When next the republicans lose, there should be a movement for some kind of amendment that would bring the situation in line with Canada, where hell itself must freeze like the rest of the country before it can happen.

One question. If it passes, can the Libs then hold another one a few years later, and get the Queen back? It would be ludicrously immature to be swapping your head of state all the time, but, since he is so keen to return to the question already, only fair. Unless of course Rudd intends his victory to be once and for all, and won't let the other side's victory so stand... (which is what, I am sure, he means)... which is as far from democratic as you can get, and just as far from the Australian 'fair go', too.

David Byers said...

Look it is not that big a thing, believe it or not. Why? Because on entering parliament ALL new members MUST make an Oath to the Queen because it is in the constitution! So on entering parliament he would already have made the Oath.

Beaverbrook said...

Good point! Probably more republican sensationalist media hype than anything overtly disrespectful.

Scott said...

Sorta... but the constitutional symbolism is not ideal. In theory, the Queen, through her Governor-General, chooses the Prime Minister - he being the Member who can command the confidence of the House in such a capacity; electoral popularity being but the Queen's current method of choice.

The country and people of Australia are not the sovereign. It is peculiar though, in an anti-American age, to see this very Declaration of Independence-esque equation increasingly assumed. (SNP leader Alex Salmond made a similar oath/pledge upon assuming the First Ministership of Scotland).

aDM said...

What a little twit he already is. Sorry to be disrespectful.

Can we try a sensationalist revoking of the special reciprocal visa arrangements then please...Maybe that will wake some up?

Viscount Feldon said...

Unfortunately, the oath of loyalty to the Queen is a rare sight in Australia. New citizens swear to some vague entities of "Australia and its people."

I would never be comfortable swearing loyalty to all of the people in a given country. Frankly, many of them frighten me.

Lord Best said...

I'm surprised anyone here read the Daily Mail to be honest. I'd as soon watch reality television. There is no new plan for a Republic as Rudd has emphasised again only a few days ago:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/articles/2007/11/27/1196036881854.html
Yes it is sad he did not swear allegiance to the Queen, but as Mr Byers said it is not that big a deal. This was probably a stunt to salve the emotional wounds of the Labor Republicans.

David Byers said...

With the Citizenship Oath I fully agree with Viscount Feldon, it is stupid and I refuse to attend any citizenship ceremony with that silly vague oath, I will soon write more about this.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
redtown said...

Does the constitution require him to take the oath to become Prime Minister?

If he did not take the oath, is it possible that he is not legally the PM?