Based on this classification, Evans argues that apart from its formal headship, all of Australia’s institutions exercising public power are ‘modern republican’. His comment suggests that in addition to following Montesquieu’s doctrine of separation of powers, which seeks to divide the power of the government into three separate institutions, the Australian system also distributes power through a system of checks and balances. However, unlike the American Constitution of 1787, which, as table 1 and figure 3 demonstrates, divides the judicial, the legislative, and the executive into three relatively separate institutions that are “confined to the exercise of its own function”, Australia’s system of “rule from above” has led to what a former Vice …show more content…
However, early republican ideas did influence Australia’s political culture. As McKenna and Hudson note, since the colony of New South Wales was established in 1788, convicts were inspired by the bloody outcome of the French Revolution and with the works of Thomas Paine. As a result, it was during this period that a radical form of republicanism emerged as working-class convicts “quickly asserted their independence from the British caste”. In this sense, as loyalty to the Crown and traditionalism became the framework for political activity, the shooting of the republican pig highlighted that republicanism and anything outside of this traditional framework was considered to be the antithesis of the common law. The idea of republicanism as the monarchy’s political ‘other’ exacerbated in the 1830s. This is demonstrated by Governor Darling’s letter in 1827, which states, “the colony can no longer be preserved…the free press and bias legislative councils may result in an Australian republic”. His letter highlight’s that the struggle between the colonialists and the republicans was beginning to shape the political culture of New South Wales. It should be noted that the divisiveness over ‘the republic’ also led to different strands of republicanism. For instance, in addition to separatist yeomanry-radical and conservative-aristocratic republicanism, theological republicanism was promoted under clergyman John Lang. In contrast to the aspirations of the Irish radicals, Lang insisted that loyalty to Britain and equality under God would be the first priority for an Australian republic. However, as Lang’s attempts to appeal to the interests of the anti-Transportation League failed, Deniehy’s utopian republicanism, which was based on nationalism and democracy, gained mass support during the Eureka rebellion in 1854. Within two years, the emergence of colonial self-government
In this essay, it will be seen that the expansion of the external affairs power since Federation reflects Australia’s growing independence from a Dominion of the United Kingdom and its transition into nationhood.
During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries absolutism became highly prevalent. Absolutism was a type of national monarchy in which the monarch had great power. Many absolute monarchs kept their countries embroiled in war, which led to a feeling of instability and uncertainty that led to a dependence on one strong central power. Monarchs also justified their immense power by referencing the concept of the Divine Right to Rule, which was the belief that God created the monarchy; the monarch was his representative on Earth and thus was only answerable to God himself. The belief that the monarch was appointed by God, the need for a sense of security during a time of uncertainty, and the efficiency that resulted from an absolute monarchy were all factors that led some to believe that absolute monarchies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were
The 1600s and 1700s were times of change. The Reformation of the previous century had shaken the foundations of society in Europe, while the Age of Exploration had introduced Europe to lands, peoples, and resources that brought new wealth to individuals and countries. Building off of this wealth, monarchs in Europe began to centralize their power using methods of taxation and claims of divine right. These monarchs, including Louis XIV of France, Peter the Great of Russia, and James I of England, eventually created a governmental system, known as absolutism, that revolved entirely around themselves and their desires. Because of their claims to such extreme power, absolutism had wide reaching effects on many parts of their countries. The effects of absolutism were the Nobles got treated like servants, the king's power increased a lot, and the military improved.
The Whitlam Government (1972 – 1975) introduced many ideas that impacted on all the people of Australia. There may have been impediments that prevented the Whitlam Government from introducing new ideas, such as the Senate. Nevertheless in three years the Whitlam Government managed to win the hearts of many Australians. In their three year reign the Whitlam Government managed to create Medibank, establish firm relations with People’s Republic of China, establish the Department of Aboriginal Affairs (Giving all Aboriginals a ‘voice’), obtained responsibility for tertiary education over from the states and eradicated tertiary fees, and establishing Supporting Mother’s Benefit’s. These were only a few of their achievements.
Being the two most prevalent governments during the 17th and 18th century, absolutism and constitutionalism were similar because in both governments the people gave up their sovereignty to a person or group of people, and both governments were made to protect the people; however, they are different because the power distribution between the people and government, the limits on said power, and the right for people to revolt were completely different.
Absolutism started in the seventeenth century. The absolute monarchs main goal was to control every aspect of society. Usually the absolute monarchs ruled without any limitations to their authority. The most effective form of government in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is absolutism because men are selfish, the kings and princes were chosen by god, and the king has certain rights that no other person has.
The piece Advance Australia … within reason, was conveyed on the 5th of January by Amy Mackintosh, at the annual “University of Students for Youth Political Activism’ meeting held at The University of Melbourne. Mackintosh steadily argues the reasons why Australia should not have become a republic, and how the country should stay as a monarchy. The tone of the speech is very colloquial and even sarcastic, with the middle part being more analytical and serious. The speaker gives the impression that the argument for Australia to stay as a Monarchy is unbiased and logical.
As the Prime Minister of Australia, it is my duty to present my democratic nation with their elected desires. The current issue is concerning the movement of Australia’s governing system from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. I believe that Australia should become a republic, as our sunburnt country has overtime developed culturally and democratically since 1901 when we become the Commonwealth of Australia, and started living under the ruling of Queen Elizabeth the Second. We have created a place that is in no way similar to the British Empire. As Australians we respect and acknowledge the traditional owners of our land, the Aborigines. Over time, it seems as though we have taken this country out of their hands and handed it to the
The Australian Constitution is a rich amalgam of various classical political principles. The concepts of the Rule of Law and the doctrine of the Separation of Powers evident in Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws are both salient examples of political theses that are central to Australian Constitutional Law. The structure of the Constitution itself and decisions of the High Court of Australia unequivocally validate the entrenchment of the doctrine separation of powers in the Commonwealth Constitution . In particular, the High Court has applied this with relative rigour with respect to the separation of judicial power. The separation of the judicial power is fundamentally critical to upholding the rule of law. The High Court in Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs noted that “the separation of the judicial function…advances two constitutional objectives: the guarantee of liberty and, to that end, the independence of Chapter III judges” . Kitto J in R v Davidson also identified that the judiciary should be subject to no other authority but the law itself . This is a critical aspect ensuring the concept of legal equality is upheld. Therefore, its role clearly extends to providing checks and balances on the exercise of power by the legislative and executive arms of government . This ensures the liberty of the law and limits the abuse of the judicial system. Judicial Power is defined as “the power which every sovereign must of necessity have to decide between its subjects
Whilst in theory there should be a distinct division between the three arms of government, in practice the Australian political system makes evident overlaps. The overlapping nature of government often arises as an issue over which parties are to exercise what kinds of power. Essentially however, each head or group is designed to keep the others in check.
Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen, adjudicator, opposition and my fellow debaters. The topic for our debate is that ‘Australia should become a republic’. We, Gladstone Park Team 2 agree with the definition put forth by the affirmative team. However, we, the negative team, believe that statement is false.
Australia is run by a democratic system at all 3 levels of government (Federal, State and Local). Democracy means in Greek "rule by the governed". A democrary has key fundermentals that sustains that type of leadership.
When comparing the communist nation of China with the democratic nation of Australia many differences are apparent. The application of the legislative (law making and modifying function), executive (administrative function) and judiciary (law enforcing and dispute resolving function) is vastly different between the two nations as can see when we compare and contrast the underlying principles of each system of government. Firstly, both nations claim to uphold the concept of the rule of law, although due to corruptive forces surrounding the Chinese court system, this concept is often thwarted and equality before the law is not upheld. Within the constitutions of both nations the basic principles of separation of powers have been applied;
Republicanism as a concept is hard to define as it means different things to different people. Most people agree that becoming a republic represents the sovereignty of our nation. But it’s about the Australian community coming together and electing a supported member to become our head of state. It is the form of self-governance that the people of Australia deserve.
The Division and Separation of power are essential to keep our societies rulers to have a restriction on their powers. The importance of each on the Australian domestic law especially in relation to the rule of law, and protecting individual rights, and the legal system.