Add articles to your saved list and come back to them any time.<\/p>\n
Leading campaigners for splitting Australia from the monarchy remain hopeful of the nation becoming a republic, but some fear the cause may be lost for a generation.<\/p>\n
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has previously flagged the possibility of a referendum on a republic in the second term of his government should it be re-elected.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
King Charles III with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at Buckingham Palace in May.<\/span>Credit: <\/span>Getty<\/cite><\/p>\n But in May he said his priority was on the Indigenous Voice referendum and stressed he did not want to be a \u201cprime minister who presides over just constitutional debates\u201d.<\/p>\n Division within the Australian Republic Movement emerged earlier this year over whether the outfit should campaign for the Voice. After agonising over the decision, it appointed No campaigner Warren Mundine to a broader Voice advisory body and chose not to back the Indigenous referendum, partly to avoid alienating conservative republicans.<\/p>\n A referendum on Australia becoming a republic was held in 1999, when Australians voted to stick with the monarchy with a national No vote of 54.9 per cent. The question proposed replacing the Queen and Governor-General with a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth parliament. As with the Voice referendum, no states had a majority in favour of the constitutional change.<\/p>\n Multiple senior republic figures, who requested anonymity to speak frankly, said it was likely the push for independence was doomed for another \u201cgeneration\u201d after Saturday\u2019s vote. \u201cThat is the clear takeout from this. It is tragic,\u201d one said.<\/p>\n But Australian Republic Movement chief executive Isaac Jeffrey claimed he did not believe the Voice loss would have any influence on Labor\u2019s appetite to pursue another referendum.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would take a few years for us to work through what the model looks like and for people to be ready to have a vote,\u201d he said. \u201cIf it takes a bit longer [than being held in Labor\u2019s second term], that is alright.\u201d<\/p>\n Australian Monarchist League chair Eric Abetz, a former Liberal senator, said the Voice referendum proved Australians would only change the constitution when the proposed change was viewed as crystal clear and compelling, which he said the republic change was not.<\/p>\n Labor\u2019s assistant minister for the republic Matt Thistlethwaite is not taking interviews about the republic as the government lets the dust settle following Saturday\u2019s referendum defeat.<\/p>\n One Labor MP said: \u201cIt\u2019s pretty clear this now won\u2019t be happening next term. Who knows when the time is right for it to be put back on the agenda. Not soon.\u201d<\/p>\n Greg Barnes in 1999, when he was campaign director for the Yes vote in the republic referendum.<\/span>Credit: <\/span>Peter Rae<\/cite><\/p>\n Barrister Greg Barnes, one of the leaders of the 1999 campaign, rejected the suggestion the cause was doomed for a long period.<\/p>\n He said the monarchy was in inexorable decline, as evidenced by King Charles\u2019 relative unpopularity compared with Queen Elizabeth II, the growing number of nations becoming a republic, and the incoming New Zealand prime minister\u2019s support for his nation cutting ties with Great Britain.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t accept this view it\u2019s gone for another generation, but it may have to be a slower process,\u201d Barnes said.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat [the Voice referendum] demonstrated, as we saw in 1999, is the difficulty of constitutional reform and that the capacity for people to wreck progress is not in any way diminished. If anything, it\u2019s enhanced,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n ARM vice-chair Meredith Doig said it would be naive to think Labor would not consider the Voice result when thinking about its plans for a republic. \u201cBut that doesn\u2019t mean they don\u2019t take up challenging topics,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n