Research Note 19 1999-2000

1999 Referenda-Summary of Results

Gerard Newman
Statistics Group
30 November 1999

Introduction

To alter the Australian Constitution a referendum is required to be approved by a majority of voters overall and by a majority of voters in a majority of States. Votes in the Territories are added to the overall total. Prior to the 1999 referenda, 42 proposals to change the Constitution had been voted upon by the Australian electorate on 18 separate occasions.

On 6 November 1999, Australian electors went to the polls to vote in constitutional referenda on whether Australia should become a republic and whether to insert a preamble to the Constitution. Both proposals were defeated, having failed to achieve a majority overall and a majority in any State (see Table 1).

Table 1: 1999 Referenda Results

With the failure of these proposals the constitutional referendum success rate now stands at 8 out of 44 attempts (18.2 per cent).

Background

In February 1998 a Constitutional Convention was held to debate the issue of whether Australia should become a republic. The Convention was asked to consider whether Australia should become a republic and if so which republican model should be put to the people in the form of a referendum.

The Convention supported the notion that Australia should become a republic and recommended a model that called for a President appointed with bipartisan support of the Parliament. The Convention's preferred model became the basis of the 1999 referendum proposal even though the Government, and particularly the Prime Minister, were not in favour of the change. The republic referendum was thus the only time that a referendum question has been put to the people without Government support.

The second, and almost forgotten question, asked was whether a non-legally binding preamble, providing a statement of values of the Australian people, should be included in the Constitution.

Results

Neither the republic nor the preamble question received a majority in any State, although the republic question did receive a majority in the ACT and at one stage of the count seemed likely to succeed in Victoria. In all States and Territories the republic question received more support than the preamble question. Support for both questions was higher in New South Wales, Victoria and the two Territories than in the other States. Queensland recorded the lowest vote of all States and Territories for both questions. Overall, both questions were soundly defeated.

A notable feature of the republic referendum result was the different levels of support in geographic regions. Electoral Divisions classified as metropolitan, as a whole, were slightly in favour of the republic, while provincial and rural divisions were strongly opposed (see Table 2).

Table 2: Republic Referendum

Although the republic question has been characterised as an issue that crosses party lines, it is worth noting that when Electoral Divisions are aggregated on the basis of the party holding the seat (based on the 1998 election) the expected party patterns still exist. Support for the republic was highest in Divisions held by the Labor Party and lowest in Divisions held by the National Party, with the Liberal Party in the middle.

The most significant feature of the republic referendum result was the differing levels of support for the republic among different socio-economic groups¹. Electoral Divisions with a high socio-economic status (high income earners, professional occupations, tertiary educated, etc.) were much more likely to support the republic than Electoral Divisions with a lower socio-economic status.

The perception that the republic question (as manifested by the proposed model) is an issue of interest to the urban 'elites' and of little interest to rural and regional Australia is confirmed by the strength of the yes and no vote in particular Electoral Divisions (see Table 3).

Table 3: Republic Referendum, High Yes and No Voting Electoral Divisions

Of the top twenty 'yes' voting divisions all are in metropolitan areas, particularly Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra. Fifteen of the divisions are classified as having a high socio-economic status, four a medium status and only one has a low socio-economic status.

Conversely, of the top twenty 'no' voting divisions all are in rural or provincial areas except the Perth electorate of Canning. In terms of socio-economic status, fourteen are classified as having a low status and six as having a medium status. No divisions with a high socio-economic status are in the top twenty 'no' voting divisions.

References

Australian Electoral Commission, Electoral Newsfile, No. 84, September 1999.

S. Bennett and S. Brennan, 'Constitutional Referenda in Australia', Research Paper, no. 2, Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 1999.

G. Newman and A. Kopras, 'Socio-Economic Indexes for Electoral Divisions', Current Issues Brief no. 4, Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 1999.

referendum.aec.gov.au/

www.referendum99.gov.au/

1. The classification of Electoral Divisions by socio-economic status is on the basis of the Australian Bureau of Statistics Index of Relative Socio-Economic Advantage. The top third highest ranking Divisions are classified as high status, the middle third as medium status and the bottom third as low status.

Comments to: web.library@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 17 October 2001 by the Parliamentary Library Web Manager
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC