Original sentence: In the years afterwards, some Australian republicans have used the crisis as an argument for change, on the basis that Australia's current constitution is flawed over (a) the upper house and supply and (b) the lack of security of tenure of the de facto head of state in dealing with a crisis.The Australian crisis illustrates how unwritten conventions can be overridden during a crisis and forms an argument for their codification (though one that is not accepted by many prominent Australian constitutional scholars)
Edited sentence: As the cliché goes, conventions aren't worth the paper they are written on.He merely saw himself as fulfilling the technical requirements of instituting a constitutionally correct (if unusual) method by which the fundamental principle of resignation or dissolution on loss of supply was maintained, while keeping 'His' government, which was then on the brink of bankruptcy, solvent.However the issue was never related to whether Australia had a constitutional monarchy or a president.In the years afterwards, some Australian republicans have used the crisis as an argument for change.Indeed, an elected president, where problems are not rectified, could conceivably be more, not less, likely to act – seeing himself as responsible to Australia, being the 'spirit of the nation' (as de Gaulle described the French president).Kerr on the other hand was only an appointed representative of the Queen of Australia.The Australian crisis illustrates how unwritten conventions can be overridden during a crisis and forms an argument for their codification.The problem related to fundamental flaws in Australia's constitution over (a) the upper house and supply and (b) the lack of security of tenure of the resident head of state in dealing with a crisis