The 1999 Referendum to become a Republic.

Historians lay claim the Australia Act severed the last ties Australia had with the United Kingdom, but is this true? If Australia became a 'sovereign independent nation' as claimed by the Australia Act in 1986, why in 1999 was there a referendum to remove the Queen and Governor General and replace them with a President to become a Republic?
If Australia's head of State is still the Queen of the United Kingdom in substance, masquerading as an alternate title created by the Whitlam Government in 1973, but in reality lacking an enumerated head of power within the constitution for the titles valid creation, how can one truly understand the legal ramifications that are explained away by the Departments of the Australian Government to be relying on a general acceptance of the administration of this new title? [1].
Was the 1999 referendum a deceptive trick upon the Australian people to bring about a dictatorship like Republic by asking the Australian people to accept a president chosen the members of Parliament and not the Australian people? If so this elaborate trick failed to be realised as the vote was a clear "NO" to the new system of government which would actually create Australia as an independent and sovereign nation severing the final ties with the Crown of the United Kingdom.

[1] Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Office responsible for the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973, regularly explain this anomaly away as being a general acceptance or understanding, see https://constitutionwatch.com.au/is-the-queen-of-australia-sovereign-for-the-purposes-of-the-commonwealth-constitution/

 

38 pages, use the toolbar at top to open.


yes_no_pamphlet

If you can spare a few dollars for the creators of this website to continue their research to bring you more great content, any amount, no matter how great or small, would be greatly appreciated.