The Queen's liberty
Sir: I have noted the comments in Boris Johnson's article of 10 October (`East, West, which is best?') referring to 'Aus- tralia's sudden abandonment of the British honours system'. I have also noted the ref- erence in 'Portrait of the week' in the same issue: 'Australia announced that it would no longer permit its people to be awarded knighthoods, or any other British honours for that matter.'
The following points need to be made: (i) Mr Keating's announcement merely confirmed a policy which has been a matter of public knowledge for two years or more.
(ii) The policy itself means no more and no less than that Australian governments, both federal and state, will no longer make recommendations for Imperial honours.
(iii) The Queen has retained her prerog- atives in respect of the Order of the Garter, the Order of the Thistle, the Order of Merit and the Royal Victorian Order. The late Lord Casey and Sir Paul Hasluck, for- tunately still active as an octogenarian,
were made Knights of the Garter and Sir Robert Menzies a Knight of the Thistle. The Queen is at liberty, the aforemen- tioned policy notwithstanding, to admit Australians to either one or both of those Orders. Earlier this year the Queen invest- ed Dame Joan Sutherland, AC, DBE, with the Order of Merit (OM) at the Governor- General's official Sydney residence, Admi- ralty House. Since the publicising of the policy two years back the Queen has con- ferred the accolade of knighthood on a long-serving Official Secretary to the Gov- ernor-General, David Smith, and invested him with the insignia of a Knight Comman- der of the Royal Victorian Order (KCVO).
(iv) Australians resident in the United Kingdom are not debarred from receiving Imperial honours under the British dispen- sation. Even Australian citizens resident in Australia may be admitted to Imperial hon- ours in an honorary capacity for services to Britain.
John Paul
The University of New South Wales, PO Box 1, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia 2033
Previous page
