After 210 years of European settlement Australia's long-running debate about becoming a republic and cutting links with the British monarch finally reaches a critical make-or-break point on Monday.
It is then that 152 delegates to the Constitutional Convention will gather in Canberra to spend two weeks arguing over whether Australia should become a republic and, even more controversially, how. Ms Kerry Jones, executive director of Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy (ACM), said yesterday the focus was finally on the best system of government for Australia. "The months of phoney debate are over. Now at last the various republican groups must set aside emotion and put up a model which can be tested against the present system of checks and balances which has served Australia so well," she said.
Of the 76 delegates who were elected in a postal ballot late last year 46 have declared themselves as republicans, 27 as monarchists and three have yet to show their hands publicly. The other half was appointed by the federal government and a small majority is believed to be in favour of replacing the British monarch with an Australian president.
So the first question the conference in the old parliament house will consider as to "whether Australia should become a republic" is expected to be almost a foregone conclusion. Even the Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, who still claims to be a monarchist, has now admitted a foreign head of state is an anachronism and suggested his own preferred model of a council of "wise men" to appoint the president.
However, most of the convention's time will be spent debating what form the republican alternative should take and if any president should be appointed by parliament or chosen by a direct popular election. With republican delegates divided on key issues, such as how to choose the president and if any changes to the 1901 constitution should be minimal or radical, the outcome of the convention is still far from clear.
Mr Malcolm Turnbull, chairman of the Australian Republican Movement (ARM), said the convention must produce a consensus before the people can consider any constitutional change with a referendum in the year 2000.
"If we don't come up with the mechanics for a republic with an Australian head of state it will be a terrible failure of leadership," he said. "The one thing more demeaning than having a foreign head of state would be not to have the intellectual capacity or the will to change."
One of the chairmen of the convention, Mr Ian Sinclair MP, who favours a so-called minimal republic with little change, said the convention was different from any predecessors as the government was committed to a national vote after it. "It is an opportunity: whether it fulfils that opportunity remains to be seen. I think the people want to know the model before they actually cast their vote," he said.
The Foreign Minister, Mr Alexander Downer, who is currently in London, said while the opinion polls showed a simple majority for change a republic was not inevitable by the proposed deadline of 2001. "The public will be asked to evaluate the republican model put to them and it's not entirely clear they are going to like it."
If the convention can recommend a single preferred model then a majority of voters in a majority of states must accept the proposal in a referendum before there can be any change. However, if there is stalemate or a split in the debate the people will have to choose from the various republican options in a non-binding plebiscite to be held by end of 2000.