Talk:Coat of arms of Western Australia

Australia: Western Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Coat of arms of Western Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Heraldry and vexillology

Coat of arms of Western Australia is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles

The full title of the Armorial Bearings Protection Act 1979 is "An Act to prohibit the unauthorised use of the Royal, State or other Arms and for other incidental purposes". This seems to draw a distinction between the Royal Arms (the arms borne by the Queen) and the State Arms (the arms used by Western Australia). I'm therefore removing the listing of Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia as armiger from the infobox as it will need a definite citation. Opera hat (talk) 00:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References to Royal and State arms as different is correct as far as any matter in 1979 are concerned, but this is not the case to-day. Prior to the Australia Acts, Australian states were British colonies and thus their sovereignty was derived only British laws - Governors were still appointed on the advice of the British government rather than the Premier of the state concerned and state legislation could vetoed in London. Much as to-day states were not subordinate to the power of the Commonwealth, but they were to the power of the United Kingdom, even if this power was rarely exercised. Thus, whereas in 1979 the British Royal arms were appropriate to be used by Australian states, this is no longer the case as they are no longer subordinate to the United Kingdom and are legally sovereign as is the Commonwealth - both having their sovereignty limited by the Australian Constitution. As Western Australia is sovereign with the Queen as Head of State, the Crown in Right of Western Australia is the legal embodiment of WA, and thus the armiger of its arms is the Queen. --58.106.71.63 (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but you'll still need to provide a citation for that legal interpretation. Opera hat (talk) 13:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The High Court disagrees - see in particular the quote from Windeyer J that starts "The Colonies which in 1901 became States in the new Commonwealth were not before then sovereign bodies in any strict legal sense; and certainly the Constitution did not make them so." Also a google search for "majesty in right of western australia" returns only this page. TRS-80 (talk) 14:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The High Court ruling cited is completely irrelevant as subsequent constitutional developments (i.e. the Australia Acts) have fundamentally changed the legal standing of Australian states. Prior to the Australia Acts, they were still in practice British colonies, with Westminster still able to overrule state legislation and Governors appointed on the advice of the British government. Since the passing of the Australia Acts, the states have become sovereign in their own right (although subject, as is the Commonwealth, to the limitations imposed by the Australian Constitution) with the monarchy being legally distinct in each state. 110.32.128.194 (talk) 03:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't necessarily follow that the Western Australia arms are now the arms of the Queen. Opera hat (talk) 16:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of Western Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060213023658/http://www.dpc.wa.gov.au/index.cfm?event=symbolsWaWaFlag to http://www.dpc.wa.gov.au/index.cfm?event=symbolsWaWaFlag

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]