The copernican model doesnt address: other constitutional issues though. It is a minimal model that seeks to change the constitution as little as possible while appeal to both the political elite and people.
There is a vertical fiscal imbalance that largely exists due to high court decisions rather than an explicit constitution. The federal government also has adopted many responsibilities which do not match an explicit reading of the constitution.
There is also the issue of a bill of rights, which is a constitutional one. The Copernican model doesn\'t address that either.
That isn\'t a criticism, there are republicans who prefer a smaller model and would rather have those issues decided in statutory legislation.
One of the purposes of SSR is to create a wider republican doctrine or philosophy that is unique to the Australian circumstance. To build off the likes of Madison, Jefferson, Harpur, Deniehy; and even Turnbull.
These discussions have been going on for a while now, following on from k5 to here. And it seems we keep coming back to wider constitutional issues.
As soon as the Australian Constitution is focused on, flaws and gaps in it appear. Jefferson said;
They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment.
The trouble with the Au constitution is that it is a pretty poor document. It is also hard to change by referendum. It is effectively shutting out future generation\'s and their ability to modernise the constitution to reflect the \'Australian Creed\'.
cam
Comments