Right: Monarchist David Flint: "She swears allegiance to the Queen ... and yet she is talking about a republic"'
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against the Governor-General commenting publicly on social and political issues
1. The Governor-General's comments 'politicised' her role as the representative of the Queen
The Governor-General is meant to occupy a role above politics. For many this means that s/he is meant to do more than merely refrain from expressing support for any political party. Those who stress the apolitical aspect of the role note that Governors-General should refrain from commenting on issues which are part of the current political debate.
Critics have claimed that by expressing her support for gay marriage and an Australian as head of state (presumably as the president of an Australian republic) Bryce has politicised her office.
Yale Stephens on the political commentary blog 'The Red and the Blue' has stated, 'It is an utter disgrace that a serving Governor-General should opt to intervene in issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with her role, let alone divisive matters that politicise what is and should always be a strictly impartial role at the apex of Australian governance.'
West Australian Liberal Senator, Dean Smith, has similarly remarked, 'Last night's departure into current political events will come as a slap in the face to many, many Australians and a significant breach of trust because she [Quentin Bryce] would know better than most that in that central office it is so integral to stay above the day to day political fray...
She has stepped across the line in inviting a commentary around two very, very sensitive issues.'
Another critical view was expressed on the Australian Climate Madness site on November 24, 2013, where an open letter to the Governor-General was published by the site's moderator. In part it reads, 'I am astonished and disappointed, but not surprised, at your highly inappropriate comments on deeply political matters, both on the question of an Australian republic and the issue of same-sex marriage...
Such statements are not unexpected, given your previous history of engaging in political debate, for example with regard to your encouraging of costly and ineffective action on climate change, including at a renewable energy conference in January 2009, where you said:"We must act swiftly, act smartly, and act together..." The only course of action open to you is to resign with immediate effect. If you wish to engage in political matters, you should seek election to Parliament.'
2. Quentin Bryce's comments indicate that she is being hypocritical in occupying the office of Governor-General
It has been claimed that Quentin Bryce has put herself in a false and hypocritical position by advocating for a republic at the same time as she is acting as the representative of the Monarch. Quentin Bryce was appointed by the Queen, and swore an oath of allegiance 'to well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second'. Critics have questioned how Bryce can, in good faith, perform a role that her recent remarks indicate she believes should be superseded.
David Flint, of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, was quoted as saying, 'She swears allegiance to the Queen ... and yet she is talking about a republic'. In an interview with a reporter from The Australian, Flint said the comments were 'injudicious, inappropriate and unnecessary'.
Australian Monarchist League chairman Philip Ben described Bryce's comments on the republic as 'hypocritical', saying, 'If a person is a republican and does not believe in our system of constitutional monarchy then they should not accept the position of representative of the Queen'.
An editorial published in The Australian on November 25, 2013, has further stated, 'It is difficult to understand why a woman whose vision for the future includes a young girl or boy growing up "to be our nation's first head of state" has spent the past decade as the Queen's representative in Australia and before that in Queensland.' The implication of this comment is that the Governor-General has been inconsistent, if not hypocritical, in occupying a position to which she is opposed.
Critics have asked why Bryce would perform all the symbolic roles associated with being the Monarch's poxy if she is opposed to the Monarchy in Australia.
3. Quentin Bryce should not have undermined a role which she has been paid to perform
It has been suggested that Quentin Bryce has behaved unethically in accepting a paid position as Governor-General and then suggesting the role should be superseded.
In an editorial published in The Australian on November 25, 2013, it was stated, 'Australians are entitled to ask why Ms Bryce was happy to accept the lucrative salary, allowances, travel opportunities, stately mansions and staff attached to such prestigious positions when it now appears she did not wholeheartedly support the offices she has occupied.'
A similar point was made by Yale Stephens on the political commentary blog 'The Red and the Blue'. Stephens has stated, 'It is not indelicate to point out that since her appointment as Governor of Queensland in 2003 and subsequently as Governor-General in 2008, Bryce has been content to pocket millions of taxpayer-funded salary dollars as the representative of the Crown.'
Critics have referred to Ms Bryce as 'taking the Queen's shilling', with the implication that if one takes payment for performing a role, this carries the obligation to not undermine that role.
4. The Governor-General's comments should have been made after she had left office
It has been claimed that the requirement that the Governor-General refrain from political comment does not mean that a holder of this office can never express such views. Rather, it means that s/he cannot express such views while performing the role of Governor-General.
Critics have claimed that it was inappropriate for Quentin Bryce to make potentially divisive comments, especially those promoting republicanism, while she still occupied the role of Governor-General. In fact, it could be argued that it was inappropriate to give the Boyer lectures at all while she occupied this position. Former Liberal Party minister, Amanda Vanstone, said in an opinion article published in The Age, that, while people like herself, 'who are republicans and sympathetic to gay marriage' might agree with Ms Bryce's views, 'she should have waited until she left the office before expressing them'.
Ms Vanstone has stated, 'If she wanted to express contentious political views in her Boyer Lectures, one wonders why she did not agree to do them only after her term as Governor-General expired.'
John Warhurst, an Emeritus Professor of political science at the Australian National University, agrees that the inclusion of the comments in a Boyer Lecture was 'always a potentially risky venture' and that there was no precedent for her actions. No previous governor-general has given the Boyer Lectures while in still in office. Sir Zelman Cowen delivered the lectures in 1969; however, this was years before he served a Governor-General.
Professor Warhurst further added that Ms Bryce had had the choice of delivering the lectures after she left office, but had declined to do so, apparently well aware of the impact her words would make and choosing to use the Governor-General's office to increase that impact.
5. The Governor-General's comments have damaged her image as a role model for Australian women
It has been claimed that Ms Bryce's comments were particularly inappropriate because they have impaired her performance as Australia's first female Governor-General.
Critics have suggested that Quentin Bryce's supposed misstep is particularly important because she is the first woman to have occupied the position of Governor-General and her performance will be used as a benchmark against which the capacity of women to perform such roles will be judged.
In an editorial, `Why take the Queen's shilling?', the Australian newspaper leader writer questioned whether Quentin Bryce could be taken seriously as a feminist role model, as she had ''failed to grasp an important tenet of her office''.
The leader writer was apparently suggesting Bryce had sullied her historic place as Australia's first female Governor-General by making political and social comments. It has been claimed that this might make subsequent governments doubtful about the ability of women to fulfil such positions. It has also been suggested that Bryce has not presented to other women a model of appropriate behaviour in this office.
The Australian editorial concludes, 'Feminists will cringe, but like our first female prime minister, our first female Governor-General fell short of the mark.'