I have to admit that it's been a while since I looked into the argument for an Australian Republic, as such I thought I'd check again.
According to ARM it is the following, my comments in bold:
1) We’ll have a head of state that will put Australia and its interests first in all situations - the Queen or King of England will never be able to represent us properly while we share them with lots of other countries (15 others!); ok, I understand this point but disagree that the monarchy is incapable of representing us at a titular level. Can anyone point to an areas where this hasn't been the case. From an operational level, this is sorted.
2) We’ll be able to choose an Aussie as our head of state, instead of being told which British person we have to have because of their family connections; isn't this just the first point, reworded?
3) Our constitution will be 100% Australian and independent of other countries; how the hell would that happen? Does this mean we will drastically overhaul all our laws? Why would we do that considering our society works very well. Also, the constitution in my mind is meant to create the framework for a nation. If that is the case, isn't the current constitution responsible in large part for creating the concept of what is Australian. If we change this I'd expect it would make us not Australian and defeat the purpose of changing it.
4) We’ll have a head of state that can represent Aussie values – mateship, equality and a fair go - more than a foreign royal family ever could; once again, isn't this the first point????
Is this it or is there anything else, because the above looks rather unconvincing if you ask me and seems to be based upon a desire to change for changes sake.
