Right: the Governor-General is sworn in in a ceremony that includes an oath of allegiance to the Queen, her heirs and successors. Some commentators have accused the G-G of betraying this oath.
There is little doubt that the Governor-General knew her remarks at the very end of her final Boyer lecture would stir controversy. She had the opportunity to postpone her lectures until after she had left office, but she went ahead anyway and, perhaps wisely, made her controversial comments at the very end. At the time of writing this outline, there has been no further comment from her office. A previous Governor-General, Sir William Deane, another Labor government appointment, was also outspoken in office about causes close to his heart. In Sir William's case, it was Aboriginal land rights. Quentin Bryce's remarks alluding to gay marriage and an Australian republic were nowhere near as blunt as some of Sir William's utterances on land rights, but they were met with the same hostility - and with the same accusations of "political" interference. It might be said that the hostile reactions came from a range of "the usual suspects", as much of the anti-G-G comment came from monarchists, or anti-republicans in general. The G-G's gay marriage comment, although mentioned by many outraged anti-republic spokespersons, seemed to be mentioned as a secondary issue. And it was the allusion to a republic in the words ``our nation's first head of state'' that was cited as the reason for accusations that the Governor-General was meddling in politics. If, as many believe, Australia is destined to be a republic, with a President who is very much a ceremonial-only head of state appointed by the government, or parliament, of the day, it may now be an opportune time to debate the issue of political and social comment by the Governor-General. In a few years, it may be necessary to provide an inaugural head of state of an Australian republic with guidelines at least, on what he or she can publicly comment on. |