Senator faces backlash for protest against the monarch, clarifies comments on her parliamentary oath

Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe has made headlines once again, this time for amending her previous statement regarding her controversial swearing-in oath. The recent uproar followed her protest against King Charles during his visit to Parliament House, prompting calls for her resignation from Opposition leader Peter Dutton.

During her swearing-in ceremony, Thorpe claimed she intentionally blundered the oath of allegiance, reciting her commitment to the late Queen Elizabeth II inaccurately. “I don’t remember swearing allegiance to the monarch,” Thorpe said, asserting that she meant to swear loyalty to the queen’s “hairs” rather than “heirs.” Her comments quickly garnered media attention, with many questioning the seriousness of her intentions.

At the time of the incident, Thorpe expressed her belief that her allegiance was misplaced now that Queen Elizabeth has passed. “If you listen closely, it wasn’t her ‘heirs,’ it was her ‘hairs’ that I was giving my allegiance to. Now that they are no longer here, I don’t know where that stands,” she told ABC, highlighting her controversial stance in a rather whimsical manner.

The Australian Parliament mandates that all members must make an oath before taking their seats, a requirement that has now come under scrutiny due to Thorpe’s remarks. National Senator Bridget McKenzie was among those questioning whether Thorpe’s actions contradicted her sworn duty, particularly given the specific wording of the oath: “I … do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors according to law.”

As the fallout from her comments continued, Thorpe faced pressure to clarify her statements. In an interview with Sky News, she walked back her earlier claims, stating, “I spoke what I read on the card. Forgive me for not being as articulate; my English grammar isn’t as good as others, and I misspoke.” Her insistence that she simply read from a card sought to deflect accusations about her fitness to serve in Parliament.

Thorpe’s admission of her supposed misstep has sparked further controversy, with critics like Dutton suggesting her actions are not just unprofessional but potentially disqualifying. “For them to question my legitimacy in this job is an insult,” she responded, asserting her right to serve and expressing frustration at the scrutiny she faces from other senators.

As the debate rages on, the implications of Thorpe’s protest against the monarchy and her subsequent clarification raise significant questions about political allegiance and the responsibilities of elected officials. The incident has put the spotlight on broader issues surrounding Australia’s relationship with the British monarchy, especially in the wake of King Charles’s visit, which has reignited discussions about republicanism and national identity.

The unfolding drama encapsulates a moment of reckoning within Australian politics, as figures like Thorpe challenge traditional norms and question long-held beliefs about loyalty and governance. Whether her protest will lead to lasting change or merely serve as a footnote in the annals of parliamentary history remains to be seen.

As Thorpe navigates this turbulent political landscape, her fate may hinge on her ability to reconcile her radical views with the expectations of her peers and constituents. The coming days will likely reveal whether she can maintain her position amidst mounting criticism or if calls for her resignation will resonate beyond the Parliament’s walls.