Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made no mention of an Australian Republic at yesterday's Australia Day celebrations despite urging by republicans for him to commit to a plebiscite on Australia's constitutional future.
While the republican movement used Australia Day to renew calls for a non-binding vote to be held on Australia breaking ties with the British monarchy, senior figures within the Federal Government said constitutional change wasn't an urgent priority.
One federal minister told The Canberra Times yesterday, ''A republic will come one day.
''But we've got bigger fish to fry just now.''
Australian Republican Movement chairman Major-General Michael Keating said yesterday there was overwhelming support throughout the community for a republic.
But he emphasised nothing would happen unless the Government took the initiative.
''[Moving to a republic] is ALP policy, both the prime minister and the leader of the opposition are republicans, the Greens want a plebiscite concurrent with the next federal election, the 2020 summit suggested it, and the government's own [national policy] committee heads are calling for it,'' General Keating said.
''But most of all, the people want it, so we are calling on the Government to commit to a process and a timeline.''
Monarchists said Australia Day should not used as a political football.
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy national convenor Professor David Flint said he regretted people being divisive on the very day when Australians would wish to be united.
Professor Flint also dismissed the idea of a plebiscite because he said it would not resolve the critical question of precisely what type of republic Australia would become, something that would still have to be put to a further vote at a federal constitutional referendum. ''Republicans fear they would lose another referendum, so to soften people up they want a plebiscite, a taxpayer funded opinion poll,'' Professor Flint wrote in an online article yesterday.
''The point is the first plebiscite calls for a vote of no confidence in one of the world's most successful constitutions without any indication of what is to follow and with every likelihood that a subsequent referendum will not pass.
''In other words, it is actually designed to achieve a period of constitutional instability.
''This is not only a divisive and expensive manoeuvre. It is difficult to think of a more irresponsible proposal.''
House of Representatives legal and constitutional affairs committee chairman, Labor backbencher Mark Dreyfus, recently urged Mr Rudd to announce that a plebiscite would be held soon. However, two Federal Labor ministers told The Canberra Times yesterday there was no great enthusiasm within the Government for moving quickly on the issue of a republic.
''At some time in the future the Prime Minister will want to move on this, he may do so when he responds to the 2020 summit recommend- ations, but he'll probably want to appoint a committee first, so don't expect anything soon,'' one of the ministers said
''With the economic issues we've got on our plate, there isn't much of an argument for spending political capital on an issue that is potentially divisive and ultimately pretty marginal to the good of the nation; and why should we give Malcolm Turnbull an opportunity to play statesman?''