Letter: Australia's past
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Donald Foreman of the Monarchist League (letter, 11 August) criticises Australian republicans because they wish to "cut the final constitutional link with Britain". He claims that there "is no such constitutional link, for the Queen is Australia's sovereign by an Act of the Australian Parliament, not because she is imposed in some way by a British law". He is wrong.
The Constitution of Australia Act 1900 is an Act of the Imperial Parliament at Westminster, not the Australian Parliament.
By establishing a republic, Australia will take the last step in becoming a fully independent nation-state. The move is neither anti-British nor disrespectful to the Queen. It is merely pro-Australian.
RICHARD HURFORD
Sydney,
Australia
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments