Using previously secret government documents, The Chameleon Crown re-writes the history of Australia's relationship with the United Kingdom and the Crown. It makes clear that the Australian States remained colonial dependencies of the British Crown until 1986 when the Australia Act was passed. It was the 'Queen of the United Kingdom', not the 'Queen of Australia' who reigned over them. For many decades historians, lawyers and politicians believed that the British Government's role in advising the Queen on State matters was simply a formality and that the British merely provided the 'channel of communication' for State advice. This book reveals for the first time the true extent of the independent role played by the British Government in State affairs as well as the significant role of the Queen. The Chameleon Crown takes the reader behind the scenes into the confidential negotiations between the States, the Commonwealth, the British Government and Buckingham Palace on the termination of the colonial links between the States and the United Kingdom. This was a battle of high politics, played by the likes of Whitlam, Murphy, Bjelke-Petersen, Wran, Fraser, Hawke, in which the sovereignty of the States was at stake. It is essential reading for those interested in Australian politics, history and the monarchy. A NSW Sesquicentenary of Responsible Government publication.

Following Queen Elizabeth II's historic Diamond Jubilee in 2012, there is renewed interest in the institution of the Crown in Canada and the roles of the queen, governor general, and lieutenant governor. Author D. Michael Jackson traces the story of the monarchy and the Crown and shows how they are integral to Canada's parliamentary democracy.

Canada, Australia and New Zealand inherited and adapted a monarchical framework of government, even in the absence of a resident monarch. Although steady transfer of the royal prerogative to a popularly elected executive has enabled these three former dominions to be sometimes described as "crowned republics" or "disguised republics", there was no popular drive to abandon monarchy until the 1990s, and even then the republican cause was based largely on issues of symbolism and national identity than on perceived core weaknesses in the political system. This book traces the long and sometimes subtle process of localising monarchy in the vice-regal office from the mid-twentieth century onwards, and compares the powers and functions of the Queen's surrogates with each other and with those of the monarch herself, including their recourse to the so-called "reserve powers". Among the key questions posed in this comparative study are: Can the current monarchical system be refined to the point of countering republican sentiment? Why has the republican argument gained more momentum in Australia than in Canada or New Zealand? Can a republican model retain residual monarchic elements? What is likely to be the lasting legacy of the Crown in these three strikingly similar political cultures? The author's underlying loyalties are neither firmly monarchist nor firmly republican. He is convinced, however, that the combined effects of a strong sense of national identity and an increasingly presidential style of political leadership within these three Westminster-derived systems make it difficult for contemporary governors-general (or their state and provincial colleagues)to fulfil two of their key roles-to unite and inspire the people on the one hand and to be a credible constitutional watchdog on the other.

This unique and meticulously-researched study examines the triangular relationship between the British government, the Palace, and the modern Commonwealth since 1945. It has two principal areas of focus: the monarch's role as sovereign of a series of Commonwealth Realms, and quite separately as head of the Commonwealth. It traces how, in the early part of the twentieth century, the British government promoted the Crown as a counterbalance to the centrifugal forces that were drawing the Empire apart. Ultimately, however, with newly-independent India's determination to become a republic in the late 1940s, Britain had to accept that allegiance to the Crown could no longer be the common factor binding the Commonwealth together. It therefore devised the notion of the headship of the Commonwealth as a means of enabling a republican India 'to continue to give the monarchy a pivotal symbolic role and therefore to remain in the Commonwealth.' In the years of rapid decolonization which followed 1945, it became clear that this elaborate constitutional infrastructure posed significant problems for British foreign policy. The system of Commonwealth Realms was a recipe for confusion and misunderstanding. Policy makers in the UK increasingly saw it as a liability in terms of Britain's relations with its former colonies, so much so that by the early 1960s they actively sought to persuade African nationalist leaders to adopt republican constitutions on independence. The headship of the Commonwealth also became a cause for concern, partly because it offered opportunities for the monarch to act without ministerial advice, and partly because it tended to tie the British government to what many within the UK had begun to regard as a largely redundant institution. Philip Murphy employs a large amount of previously-unpublished documentary evidence to argue that the monarchy's relationship with the Commonwealth, which was initially promoted by the UK as a means of strengthening Imperial ties, increasingly became an source of frustration for British foreign policy makers.

Canada's Deep Crown looks at the role of the Sovereign from the perspective of political science, history, and law to assess its role and influence in respect to how Canadians govern themselves.

In his 2001 volume on politics in Saskatchewan, Howard Leeson observed that vast changes were underway in the Saskatchewan polity, and he predicted that the familiar politics of the past would soon look jarringly antiquated. The contributors to this new volume--Saskatchewan Politics: Crowding the Centre--come to the conclusion that this process of change is now largely complete. As its subtitle makes clear, this new study suggests that political parties in the province have crowded closer and closer to the ideological centre. Without the fulcrum of ideological division, politics in the province appears to be more and more about personal and administrative clashes and less and less about substantive differences as to how the economy and society should be organized. In short, left and right are increasingly being left out of provincial politics. Includes a dvd of the 2006-08 Throne and budget debates between NDP leader Lorne Calvert and Saskatchewan Party leader Brad Wall.

Alan J. Ward combines constitutional history and political science to compare all nine of Australia’s political systems, federal, state and territorial, from colonial times to the present. Guided by a model of parliamentary government drawn from comparative politics, he considers the following key topics: the selection of the government, the prime minister and cabinet; government control of the lower house; the primacy of the lower house in bicameral systems; the head of state; the influence of Australian federalism on parliamentary government; and the growth of executive democracy in Australia. Ultimately, Ward argues that as only one of Australia’s nine constitutions accurately describes parliamentary government as practiced in the country, it is a democratic imperative that the other eight be rewritten.