https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/support-for-australia-becoming-a-republic-drops-following-queen-elizabeths-death/dcl351nl0

The article states, support for Monarch is still strong and a referendum would not pass. The article suggests 46% of Australians answered yes when asked if they would support the nation in amending the constitution to become a republic and ditching links to the monarchy. The article suggests that a referendum is not needed as the poll is sufficient, and the Prime Minister says that it is not the right time to discuss the republic push.

Under section 128 of the constitution, change is afforded under the guidance of the Australian people. Change is afforded by going to the Australian public, such change to the constitution will be made through a referendum. This article is problematic as it attempts to undermine and coerce the rule of law by suggesting that this article speaks on behalf of the nation. Constitutional change has not been afforded regularly with only 44 referenda being held since 1901. Such articles attempt to limit the voice of the public by imposing opinion polls. The article undermines the fundamental principles of the rule of law by intentionally limiting and imposing opinions on the people. The balance of power is undermined if the nation is not free thinking.

REFLECT AND ANSWER

• Do you agree with the connection that the original poster has drawn between the news story and public law? Why/why not?
• Can you think of other connections between the news story and public law that the original poster did not mention?
• Can you expand on the observations made in the original post or the subsequent responses of your classmates? Asking yourself some of the prompt questions for 'original posters' (set out above) might help you to develop some new insights.

Stronger responses will be specific in how they discuss the principles, concepts and other content covered in the subject Government and Public Law in nsw australia.