A quick guide to plebiscites in Australia

Parliament house flag post

A quick guide to plebiscites in Australia

Posted 30/06/2011 by Brenton Holmes


When Opposition Leader Tony Abbott proposed a plebiscite to test Australians’ support for a carbon tax, the proposal was variously described in the media as ‘junk politics’, a ‘stunt’, a ‘serious misjudgement’ and ‘an expensive, bad idea’. But what exactly is a plebiscite?

In Australia, a national plebiscite has quite a distinctive meaning. A plebiscite is a vote by citizens on a matter of national significance, but one which does not affect the Constitution. Moreover, plebiscites are normally advisory, and do not compel a government to act on the outcome. A plebiscite might be used to obtain electors’ views on, say, military conscription, or choosing a new Australian flag.

Only the Australian parliament can authorise the holding of a plebiscite. Unlike some countries, Australia has no mechanism by which citizens might initiate a plebiscite by, for example, petitioning Parliament with a threshold number of signatures calling for a matter to be put to a national vote. Such a plebiscite is commonly referred to as a ‘citizen initiated referendum’. Bills for citizens’ initiated referendums have been introduced occasionally into Australian state or territory legislatures but none have passed.

In Australia, we hear more about ‘referendums’ than ‘plebiscites’. While both entail a vote by Australia’s electors, a referendum concerns a change to Australia’s Constitution, and the outcome is binding. For a referendum proposal to succeed it must win the majority of votes nationally and also win in a majority of the states. This is called a ‘double majority’. Since Federation there have been 44 proposals for constitutional change put to Australian electors at referendums. Only eight have been approved. Plebiscites simply require a majority of electors’ votes.

There have only been three national plebiscites in Australia:
  • 1916: military service conscription (defeated)
  • 1917: reinforcement of the Australian Imperial Force overseas (defeated)
  • 1977: choice of Australia’s national anthem ('Advance Australia Fair' preferred.)
Before a national plebiscite can take place, an enabling bill proposing the plebiscite and setting out its purpose must be passed by parliament. The bill thereby becomes an Act enabling a vote to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission. The enabling legislation may or may not specify any actions expected of the government as a result of the plebiscite.* In the case of a carbon tax plebiscite that simply asked whether electors are in favour of a carbon tax or not, the government could ignore the plebiscite result and pursue its own preferred outcome through the Parliament. Indeed, Mr Abbott himself said that if a plebiscite favoured a carbon tax he would ignore the result.

While the kind of direct democracy implied by a plebiscite has its merits, it may not necessarily be the best way to resolve an issue. We live in a representative democracy, and it is a feature of our system of government that laws and major policy proposals are determined by our elected representatives through debate and deliberation in the parliament. The prominent constitutional lawyer George Williams puts it this way:

‘Plebiscites are rare in Australia. They go against the grain of a system in which we elect parliamentarians to make decisions on our behalf’.
Nevertheless, plebiscites have been used by Australian state governments from time to time, especially to deal with social or environmental issues:
  • The drinking of alcoholic beverages was once a controversial issue that was dealt with in a number of plebiscites—6 p.m. closing (NSW 1916), open bars on Sundays (NSW 1969), 10 p.m. closing (Vic 1956), prohibition of liquor sales (WA 1925, 1950).
  • In 1904 Victoria held three simultaneous plebiscites involving religion and schools.
  • Daylight saving has been the subject of plebiscites in Western Australia (1975, 1984, 1992), New South Wales (1976), South Australia (1982) and Queensland (1992).
  • There was a plebiscite in Tasmania on the establishment of the Wrest Point casino (1968).
  • In 1992 voters in the ACT endorsed the Hare-Clark electoral system.
  • In 2005 Western Australians rejected an extended shopping hours proposal.
  • In Queensland in 2007 plebiscites on local government amalgamation were held in 85 council areas. A planned plebiscite on the use of recycled water was cancelled.
The use of plebiscites and referendums (the more widely-used term) seems to be increasingly common among democratic countries—although practices vary as to whether outcomes are binding or advisory, or whether citizens or only governments can initiate them. Earlier this year the UK held a referendum on whether to change its voting system (defeated), and a referendum in Wales gave increased legislative powers to the Welsh Assembly. In 2007, the Canadian province of Ontario held its first referendum in 80 years, with a proposal for electoral reform. British Columbia did likewise in 2009. The proposals were defeated. British Columbia is currently in the middle of a postal ballot referendum about ‘harmonised sales tax’.

Switzerland has a longstanding tradition of referendums, the use of which is thoroughly integrated into its political processes. Ireland has held referendums on matters as diverse as the ratification of EU treaties, abolition of the death penalty and the recognition of local government.

Many US states conduct referendums or allow citizen-initiated ‘ballot initiatives’, and these have been used for a wide range of purposes, including to veto legislation. On occasions, the outcome of such initiatives can prove counter-productive. For example, the consequences for California of the citizen-initiated Proposition 13—which reduced property taxes and limited the legislature’s capacity to raise taxes—have been much lamented. There has never been a referendum at national level in the USA.

* The Plebiscite for an Australian Republic Bill 1997—which appeared as separate versions in the House and the Senate—expressly provided that: ‘The results of the national plebiscite are intended to be indicative only’. The House version of the bill was removed from the Notice paper in March 1998, and the Senate version lapsed at the end of the 39th Parliament. By contrast, the Flags Amendment Bill 1996 expressly provided that the plebiscite outcome would be acted upon if ‘the new flag, or one of the new flags, is chosen by a majority of all the electors voting’. The bill was eventually passed and became the Flags Amendment Act 1998, No. 2.

(Image sourced from: http://www.ngshire.vic.gov.au/)


Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.

Add your comment

[Click to expand]

We welcome your comments, or additional information which is relevant to a post. These can be added by clicking on the ‘Add your comment’ option above. Please note that the Parliamentary Library will moderate comments, and reserves the right not to publish comments that are inconsistent with the objectives of FlagPost. This includes spam, profanity and personal abuse, as well as comments that are factually incorrect or politically partisan. We will close comments after three months.




Captcha
Generate a new image
Type characters from the image:

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print

FlagPost

Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament


Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

Refugees asylum climate change immigration Australian foreign policy parliament social security welfare reform school education welfare policy health financing elections Australian Defence Force emissions trading women higher education private health insurance people trafficking Indigenous Australians illicit drugs gambling health reform federal election 2010 United Nations Employment Asia Middle East Medicare Australian Bureau of Statistics statistics sport health forced labour federal budget Afghanistan Industrial Relations Carbon Pricing Mechanism politics income management dental health United States aid disability child protection environment poker machines Australia in the Asian Century Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency steroids World Anti-Doping Agency National Disability Insurance Scheme detention aged care 43rd Parliament slavery health system Fair Work Act Australian Public Service governance labour force people smuggling transport debt taxation international relations constitution New Zealand food WADA Australian Crime Commission pharmaceutical benefits scheme public service reform law enforcement children's health Aviation foreign debt gross debt net debt defence capability parliamentary procedure Senate Senators and Members ALP ASADA Australian Federal Police criminal law Newstart Parenting Payment multiculturalism Youth Allowance sea farers federal state relations accountability Papua New Guinea youth paid parental leave pensions same sex relationships corruption coal seam gas customs planning federal election 2013 Australian Electoral Commission doping OECD crime health risks International Women's Day Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling sex slavery Special Rapporteur Northern Territory Emergency Response social policy terrorist groups Australian Security Intelligence Organisation carbon tax mining High Court Higher Education Loan Program HECS military history electoral reform employer employee renewable energy regional unemployment fishing European Union Federal Court family assistance skilled migration banking United Nations Security Council Australian economy forestry food labelling vocational education and training Drugs UK Parliament welfare systems Indonesia social media children Constitutional reform local government codes of conduct terrorist financing homelessness Parliamentary remuneration money laundering Trafficking in Persons Report energy science social inclusion human rights paternalism terrorism World Trade Organization Australia public health China housing affordability bulk billing political parties water productivity health policy Governor-General US economy trade unions domestic violence export liquefied natural gas foreign bribery firearms question time speaker superannuation public housing election results by-election expertise public policy climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change leadership voting Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry regulation Pacific Islands reserved seats research and development new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC ASIO intelligence community carbon markets animal health middle class welfare ADRV Census Indigenous constitutional recognition of local government referendum consumer laws PISA competition policy royal commission US politics violence against women language education baby bonus Leaders of the Opposition citizen engagement policymaking Australia Greens servitude Trafficking Protocol forced marriage Population rural and regional mental health alcohol entitlements ministries Hung Parliament social citizenship maritime Iran transparency ANZUS regional students school chaplains federal budget 2011-12 salary Medicare Locals primary care Building the Education Revolution smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Asia; Japan; international relations Work Health and Safety Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine asylum refugees immigration political finance donations foreign aid disability employment Economics efficiency human rights; Racial Discrimination Act employment law bullying asylum seekers Animal law; food copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry peace keeping contracts workplace policies same-sex marriage disorderly conduct integrity retirement Parliament House Australian Secret Intelligence Service welfare standing orders prime ministers election timetable sitting days First speech defence budget submarines workers financial sector Canada Somalia United Kingdom GDP Tasmania world heritage political engagement leave loading Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission limitation period universities Ireland cancer gene patents genetic testing suspension of standing and sessional orders live exports infant mortality honorary citizen railways disciplinary tribunals standard of proof World Health Organisation arts international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies roads Italy national heritage NHMRC nutrition anti-dumping Rent Assistance obesity evidence law sacrament of confession sexual abuse US presidential election international days DFAT UN General Assembly deregulation Regulation Impact Statements administrative law small business Breaker Morant regional engagement social determinants of health abortion Members suspension workplace health and safety marine reserves hearing TAFE Victoria astronomy resources sector YMCA youth parliament Korea fuel rebate Australian Greens presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act political parties preselection solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef Stronger futures political financing political education Social Inclusion Board early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin sanctions Norway hospitals republic President Barack Obama Presidential visits qantas counselling Korean peninsula Work Choices biosecurity hendra environmental law federalism federation preselection therapeutic goods Therapeutic Goods Administration plebiscites computer games pests suicide nuclear COAG Ministerial Councils floods ADHD stimulant medication advertising electricity extradition standards conscience votes poverty preventative health rural health coastal erosion Parliamentary Budget Office NATO work-life balance

Show all
Show less