Mr KING (9:24 PM) —I rise tonight to call for a review of the system of obtaining and regulating coats of arms used in Australia and to propose the creation of an Australian heraldic authority. As honourable members will be aware, at least since the passing of the Australia Act by this parliament and the United Kingdom parliament in 1986, Australia has been a sovereign and independent nation—independent particularly of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

In the case of Sue and Hill, the High Court held that the United Kingdom has since 1986 been a foreign power to Australia and Australians, yet in New South Wales, for example, the Supreme Court, the Land and Environment Court, the parliament and, to a lesser extent, the Governor carry out their various functions under representations of the royal arms of the United Kingdom. The royal arms of the UK appear in the foyer of the court, and every justice sits beneath a representation of those arms, issues judgments headed with those arms and corresponds on notepaper bearing those arms. The presiding chairs of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and the President of the Legislative Council are placed under representations of the royal arms of the United Kingdom.

In 2002 the state parliament in New South Wales, through the Legislative Council Standing Committee on Law and Justice, inquired into this matter, unanimously reported and then adopted a recommendation that the situation be changed and that state arms be established. However, recognising that the legislation would be unnecessary if Australia possessed its own heraldic authority such as the College of Arms in England, the Court of the Lord Lyon in Scotland or the Chief Herald of Ireland, a number of interested individuals made submissions that the committee should support the creation of an Australian heraldic authority by the Commonwealth and support the creation of a New South Wales heraldic authority on an interim basis only until such time as the Australian authority was established.

The present entirely unsatisfactory position is that Australian organisations and individuals must approach the College of Arms in London—which claims to have some imperial jurisdiction over Australia and Australians—the Court of the Lord Lyon in Edinburgh or the Chief Herald of Ireland for their needs. Needless to say, the Commonwealth and states cannot make use of any of these foreign authorities should they wish to change the Commonwealth or state arms.

I believe the only effective method by which this unsatisfactory position will be changed is if Australia creates its own authority along the lines of the Canadian Heraldic Authority, established in 1988, which has proved enormously popular with Canadians across the whole cultural and ethnic range. In the English-speaking world, national heraldic authorities exist in South Africa, in the form of the Bureau of Heraldry, and in the United States of America, in the form of the Institute of Heraldry, which is limited to furnishing heraldic services to the United States armed forces and other US government organisations, including the executive office of the President. National heraldic authorities also exist in Spain, Russia and other European countries.

There have been three separate inquiries over the years which have considered this matter in Australia, and each has supported the creation of an Australian heraldic authority. The first was in 1994: the Commonwealth inquiry by the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs of this House. Its report went under the title The use of the coat of arms: armed with national pride. Paragraph 4.1.10 noted that this issue had been raised and said that the committee saw that the issue had merit but was unable to address the issue specifically because of the nature of the inquiry. In South Australia in 1999 the state parliament made a recommendation through the Constitutional Advisory Council and recommended the adoption of such a heraldic authority, and in 2002 the unanimous recommendations of the Standing Committee on Law and Justice of the New South Wales Legislative Council were for the establishment of such an authority.

In May this year a private member's bill based on the recommendations of the New South Wales Legislative Council report was introduced into the parliament in New South Wales and has been in general supported by the state government. The time has come for the Commonwealth to exercise a power which should be exercised at Commonwealth level without concurrent or competing exercise by the states. Let me adapt the words of Robert Watt, Chief Herald of Canada since 1988, which I believe are now applicable here. All Australians share a rich heraldic tradition. The challenge is to seize the opportunity to provide a framework for innovation in symbolism, grafting onto an ancient tradition new symbols and new approaches while also encouraging a proper appreciation of a little-known but widely used and misused part of our heritage.

Support for this policy does not derive from any antimonarchist sentiment. On the contrary, no better form of government has yet been proposed and, until such time as it is and receives overwhelming public support, we have a sound system which works well. I commend Mr Richard d'Apice of my electorate, who has substantially assisted my office in the consideration of this issue. I ask that the Prime Minister issue terms of reference to the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs to inquire into and report upon the status of heraldic authority in Australia and the creation of an Australian heraldic authority, to be called the Chief Herald of Australia.

The SPEAKER —Order! It being 9 p.m., the debate is interrupted.

House adjourned at 9.30 p.m.