Talk:Queen of Australia/Archive 1

message: ----
Should this be at Australian monarchy like Canadian monarchy and British monarchy? It'll be one less thing to do if for some reason she croaks in the near future. --Jiang 11:02, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

message: I've ammended this page so that it includes more accurate info on the Australian monarchy, and has a less neagative, pro-republican attitude.
For example: "It is sometimes asserted that the 1973 Act establishes Australia as a monarchy completely separate from the monarchy of the United Kingdom, linked only by the fact that they happen to have the same monarch. This is not entirely true. When Elizabeth II dies or abdicates, for example, her successor as King or Queen of Australia will be determined according to the The Act of Settlement of 1701, which is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom..."
This is incorrect as the Act of Settlement is, since the patriation of Australia's constitution in 1986, now Australian constitutional law, not British.
Also, to claim "This Act is on the face of it in conflict with Australian law preventing discrimination on grounds of religion" is only opinion.  It has been altered to say: "Some Australians feel this Act is in conflict with Australian law.."  gbambino
:This is true from a technical point of view, but from a historical point of view, the Act of Settlement is a 1701 Act of the UK's Parliament, not Australia's.  That Australia much later incorporated it into its constitution doesn't change the nature of its origin. --Delirium 10:59, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
*Which section of the Australian Constitution incorporates the Act of Settlement?
*Which Act of the Australian Parliament makes the Act of Settlement Australian law?
Adam 11:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not believe that the act of settlement per se was ever adopted in Australia. The person who is Queen/King of Australia is defined in section 2 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Imp) (part of the preamble) as the King/Queen of the UK. Xtra 23:49, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

text: The Act of Settlement is not and need not be adopted into Australian law. As I said above, the Constitution provides for this. Also, only the following comprise the australian constitution: The Constitution Act, the Statute of Westminster, the Australia Acts, the Letters Pattent. Xtra 03:13, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text: You forget the Statute of Westminster, 1931 which most certainly is a part of Australian constitutional law. "And whereas it is meet and proper to set out by way of preamble to this Act that, inasmuch as the Crown is the symbol of the free association of the members of the British Commonwealth of Nations, and as they are united by a common allegiance to the Crown, it would be in accord with the established constitutional position of all the members of the Commonwealth in relation to one another that any alteration in the law touching the Succession to the Throne or the Royal Style and Titles shall hereafter require the assent as well of the Parliaments of all the Dominions as of the Parliament of the United Kingdom" --gbambino 16:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Gambino is a monarchist - i wouldn't trust him to be objective in a pink fit. PMA 04:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a bit of an unfair generalisation. Xtra 12:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Just wondering Adam, are you in the legal profession?--JSIN 06:27, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  more accurate, less pro-republican info 

message: Adam, I asked a question on this issue a while ago at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, but it was obscured in a discussion about Pakistan, and is probably more relevant to this article anyway. My understanding of the 1973 law is that it did nothing but change the title of the Queen. Your comments, and to a lesser extent this article, seem to imply that the change was more than a change of title. Are you actually claiming that something other than the Queen's title changed in 1973? JPD 09:46, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's my understanding that the Her Majesty's change of title to Queen of Australia in 1973 further proved that the Australian Crown is completely unique from the Crown of the United Kingdom and other Realms such as New Zealand. Dpd 22:45, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not "further proved", "began to establish".  Remember the Crown in right of the various states still relied on UK government advice to appoint state governors up until 1986.  Slac speak up! 03:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title/status