Professor John Warhurst
Consultant,
Politics and Public Administration Group
29 June 1999
Contents
Major Issues
Introduction
Debating the
Republic
Chronology
Purpose of the Constitutional
Convention
Outcomes of the
Constitutional Convention
The Bipartisan Appointment of the
President Model
The Referendum
Process
Public Opinion
Major Participants in The
Debate
Issues for Resolution
during 1999
Conclusion
Endnotes
Appendix 1: Delegates to
the 1998 Constitutional Convention
Appendix 2: Summary of
Constitutional Referendums
Appendix 3: Opinion Polls on
an Australian Republic
Appendix 4: Poll Data
Appendix 5: Governments
and Political Parties
Appendix 6: YES Community
Organisations
Appendix 7: NO
Community Organisations
Appendix 8: The YES and NO
Campaign Organisations
Appendix 9: Educational
Organisations
Appendix 10: Some Additional
Public Figures
Major Issues
This paper provides the background necessary for
an understanding of the context of the republic referendum to be
held on 6 November 1999. Its purpose is not to critically examine
the contending arguments being put by monarchists and republicans,
as this has been done already by the participants and others, but
rather to provide a guide to the processes, issues and
participants. In particular, the paper sketches:
-
- the contemporary evolution of the monarchy-republic debate
-
- the pattern of public opinion
-
- the emergence of the key community organisations
-
- the Constitutional Convention in February 1998
-
- the referendum process
-
- the positions adopted by the political parties
-
- the positions adopted by Commonwealth and state government
leaders
-
- the way in which political institutions, such as the executive
and the parliament, are processing the issue, and
-
- the likely dynamics and shape of events over the final six
months before the referendum.
The aim of the paper is to enable those
interested in the referendum to follow the debate as it unfolds by
identifying the roles and positions of the key actors. Contact
addresses of the major players and suggestions for further reading
are included for this purpose. Cross-references are given to a wide
range of complementary papers and notes produced by Information and
Research Services.
Introduction
This paper aims to be a guide to the
participants, issues and processes in the debate leading up to the
constitutional referendum to decide whether Australia will become a
republic. While there is some discussion of the debate about the
preamble this paper is not meant to be a guide to that issue.
It concentrates particularly on the years
1998-1999, especially from the February 1998 Constitutional
Convention (CC) to April 1999, in the lead-up to the November 1999
referendum. But to put these years in their proper context and to
explain the emergence of the key organisations and individual
personalities, the account of the whole decade must be told.
The referendum has focused the debate. It will
be conducted according to well-worn constitutional provisions,
which are spelled out in the Constitution and elaborated in
legislation for the conduct of referenda. But it also has its own
unusual characteristics. These include the pre-eminent role played
by community organisations in a formally non-partisan referendum.
Furthermore, the referendum is being put by a prime minister who is
personally opposed to the change, but who has declared that he will
play no active part in the campaign.
Processes
Australian debate about republicanism became
serious, if the measure is some prospect of constitutional change,
in the 1990s. The decade has seen a transformation of the debate
though the emergence of organised groups in the community, changing
attitudes within the political parties and a generalised concern
with constitutional reform as the centenary of federation
approaches on 1 January 2001.
The key events have been those that have brought
closer the likelihood of a government putting before the parliament
a bill to have the issue considered by the Australian people at a
constitutional referendum held under section 128 of the
constitution. They have included:
-
- the appointment of the Republic Advisory Committee by the
Keating Labor Government in May 1993
-
- the address by the Prime Minister, Paul Keating, to the
Parliament on 7 June 1995 in which he set a timetable of a republic
by 2001
-
- the campaign promise by the victorious Coalition parties at the
March 1996 federal elections to call a people's convention to
address the issue
-
- the holding of the Constitutional Convention at Old Parliament
House in Canberra in February 1998
-
- the recommendations by the Constitutional Convention that a
republican model be put to the people at a referendum towards the
end of 1999, and
-
- the mechanisms and processes being put in place during 1999 by
the Howard Government.
Issues
The general debate about the competing virtues
of monarchy and republic has been shaped by the events of the
1990s. The focus has been the adoption of the so-called
'minimalist' model by Paul Keating's Labor government and the
Australian Republican Movement (ARM) and its reincarnation, with
amendments, as the Bipartisan Parliamentary Appointment of the
President model as the preferred model of the Constitutional
Convention.
By the time of the elections for the
Constitutional Convention the organised opponents of change,
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM), were campaigning
behind the slogan 'No Republic'. The elements of their campaign
are:
-
- the existing constitution has served Australia well and is not
'broke'
-
- no substantial arguments have been put forward for radical
constitutional change
-
- there are no discernible benefits
-
- the move to a republic might destabilise the political
system
-
- the preferred republican model has particular weaknesses, such
as the unrestricted ability of the Prime Minister to dismiss the
President, and
-
- there is no hurry for change even if the republic is inevitable
in the long term.
The elections for the Constitutional Convention
brought into the open the different strands in a republican
movement dominated until that stage by the 'minimalist' Australian
Republican Movement. These other republicans almost always wanted
more expansive change. They held caucus meetings during the
convention to organise opposition to a president elected by
Parliament. After the convention a majority of these delegates, led
by Ted Mack, Phil Cleary and Clem Jones formed the Real
Republicans. Other direct election republicans, including Reverend
Tim Costello, chose to join the YES campaign.
These 'direct election' or 'popular election'
republicans argue that the minimalist model is too narrowly
conceived. They argue that direct election of the president is:
-
- an expression of 'real' republicanism, meaning citizen
sovereignty
-
- a democratic step because public opinion polls suggest that it
is what the majority of Australians want, and
-
- a step towards opening up and reshaping the whole Australian
political system.
They argue, furthermore, that, by contrast,
parliamentary election of the president is:
-
- a very conservative and unacceptably limited change, and
-
- an outcome favoured by the existing political party
establishment because it leaves control of the presidency in their
hands.
The mainstream proponents of the YES case
advocate the middle position. They are driven by the central
nationalist argument that:
-
- the present constitutional monarchy, whereby the British
monarch is also the Australian Head of State, is unacceptable
because the Australian Head of State ought be an Australian
citizen.
They argue, furthermore, that:
-
- the hereditary nature of the monarchy is undemocratic, not
allowing appointment by merit and excluding in this case women and
those who are not Anglicans, and
-
- the minimalist change will effectively not change anything
other than replacing the Governor-General with the President.
This emphasis on the conservative nature of the
proposed change appeals particularly to an organisation that
emerged early in 1999, Conservatives for an Australian Head of
State. It is especially critical of the proposals for direct
election of the president, which they see as potentially
destabilising. They advocate that conservative Australians should
support the YES case not only on its merits but also because,
should it be defeated, the alternative is likely be more radical
change.
Participants
There are three categories of participants
actively involved in the republic debate:
-
- governments and political parties
-
- community organisations and individuals advocating YES or NO,
and
-
- politically neutral organisations engaged in political
education and analysis.
The Australian Labor Party is formally committed
to a republic as is the Australian Democrats. The Liberal Party and
the National Party are each committed to the status quo. The Prime
Minister has made it clear that party discipline will not apply to
this issue within the Liberal Party and that, while he remains a
monarchist, republicans within the party are free to vote and
campaign according to their conscience. The National Party has
remained solidly monarchist and none of its current
parliamentarians have publicly supported a republic.
The main republican community organisation is
the non-partisan ARM. There are also nascent organisations called
the YES Coalition in most states and territories composed of ARM
members and other prominent citizens, including some direct
election republicans advocating a YES vote. Standing to one side is
another organisation, Conservatives for an Australian Head of State
(CAHS).
The main monarchist organisation is ACM. There
are also other community organisations, such as the Australian
Monarchist League (AML). At the elections for the Constitutional
Convention there were some successful monarchist electoral
organisations, such as Safeguard the People and Constitutional
Monarchists. By 1999 ACM, like its opposite number ARM in the case
of republicans, appears to have become the spokesperson for
monarchists.
The direct election republicans opposed to the
preferred republican model have only recently begun to organise.
Their main organisation is Real Republicans.
Since 1991 the Constitutional Centenary
Foundation, funded by the Commonwealth and state governments, has
pursued public education on constitutional reform matters.
The YES and NO advocates in the political
parties and the community organisations have been brought together
in the official committees for the advertising for the referendum
for the republic. The YES committee has ARM, CAHS, Labor, Liberal
and Democrat representatives, while the NO committee has ACM,
National and Liberal representatives as well as two direct election
republicans. So the referendum campaign will be a three-sided
campaign about a two-sided question.
Debating the
Republic
Australians have long discussed the idea of
replacing the constitutional monarchy with a republican
constitution, even during the 19th century before federation in
1901. This discussion has continued during the 20th century. But
republicans have been in a minority and the issue has always been
peripheral to the main political debate.(1)
From the 1960s onwards, public debate quickened
and well-known public identities, such as Geoffrey Dutton, Donald
Horne and Max Harris, declared themselves to be republicans.(2) But
none of the major political parties were committed to the republic
and republicans remained in the clear minority according to public
opinion polls. The 1975 constitutional crisis drew attention to
Australia's constitutional arrangements and over the years that
followed the Australian Labor Party edged towards declaring itself
for the republic. This it eventually did in 1982.(3) It was in this
context that there was considerable criticism of the appointment of
the former Labor leader, Bill Hayden as Governor-General in 1989.
He was presumed to be a republican.
The 1990s is the decade in which the republican
debate has flourished, generated by community action and
reaction.(4) In April 1991 a Constitutional Centenary Conference
was held in Sydney, convened by leading legal figures. From this
meeting the Constitutional Centenary Foundation was created. On 7
July 1991 the Australian Republican Movement, the first major
republican organisation, was launched by author, Tom Keneally. In
turn this led to similar organisational efforts to defend the
status quo and, less than a year later, on 4 June 1992, ACM held
their first public meeting.
Chronology
3-5 April 1991
|
Constitutional Centenary Conference, Sydney
|
7 July 1991
|
Australian Republican Movement launched,
Sydney
|
4 June 1992
|
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy first
public meeting, Sydney
|
28 April 1993
|
Republic Advisory Committee established
|
5 October 1993
|
Republic Advisory Committee reports
|
7 June 1995
|
Paul Keating commits his government to a
republic by 2001
|
8 June 1995
|
John Howard proposes a People's Convention
|
26 March 1997
|
Constitution Convention (Election) Bill
second reading
|
3 November-9 December 1997
|
Voting for Elected Delegates to Constitutional
Convention
|
29-30 January 1998
|
Women's Constitutional Convention, Canberra
|
2-13 February 1998
|
Constitutional Convention meets in Canberra
|
19 February1999
|
YES and NO campaign teams announced
|
9 March 1999
|
Release of Exposure Drafts of the Constitutional
Alteration (Establishment of Republic) Bill 1999 and of the
Presidential Nominations Committee Bill 1999
|
Some state premiers had also entered the debate
on both sides and became important figures in the debate. Of
greatest political significance was the emergence of a pro-republic
Liberal State premier, Nick Greiner, in NSW. Greiner served to make
republicanism a bipartisan issue.
Paul Keating replaced Bob Hawke as Labor Prime
Minister in December 1991 and immediately began to advance issues
of national identity. On 24 February 1993, in his policy speech
just before the March 1993 federal elections, Keating announced his
intention to form 'a committee of eminent Australians to develop a
discussion paper that would consider the options for an Australian
republic'.(5) This committee, the Republic Advisory Committee (RAC)
was established on 28 April 1993. The chair was Malcolm Turnbull of
the ARM. The other members included Greiner; Mary Kostakidis, SBS
TV presenter and CCF member; Lois O'Donoghue, chair of the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission; Susan Ryan,
former Labor Senator and Minister for Education; George Winterton,
Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales; Dr Glyn
Davis of the School of Politics and Public Policy at Griffith
University, who was the nominee of the Queensland Premier; and
Namoi Dougall, a solicitor, who was the nominee of the NSW Premier
(each State premier had been asked to put forward names for
consideration).(6)
The RAC reported on 5 October 1993 and concluded
that a republic was achievable. It was 'both legally and
practically possible to amend the Constitution to achieve a
republic without making changes which will in any way detract from
the fundamental constitutional principles on which our system of
government is based'.(7) The Keating government committed itself to
this position and, on 7 June 1995, Keating gave a televised address
to parliament in which he reiterated this view and set a timetable
of a republic by 2001.(8) By now public opinion surveys (see below)
suggested that a majority of Australians joined the ALP in
supporting in principle the move to a republic, as did the
Australian Democrats. So it had thus become an issue of some
urgency for the Coalition parties to address.
The early 1990s saw a quickening of the debate
and a number of books were published, by academics and activists,
examining the constitutional and political issues.(9) Most of these
authors wrote in favour of the move to a republic.
Earlier, in November 1994, the then Leader of
the Opposition, Alexander Downer, had suggested the idea of a
people's convention to discuss the issue, a procedure advocated by
the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. This first step later
enabled the subsequent Opposition Leader, John Howard, to put
forward a more detailed proposal along these lines in response to
Paul Keating's June 1995 initiative.
When the Coalition parties won the March 1996
federal elections this proposal was part of its campaign promises
but the republic did not play a major part in its campaign. At the
time the Labor Government countered with a proposal for an
indicative plebiscite (a non-binding vote) that would test support
for a republic in principle before proceeding to a referendum on a
particular model.(10)
The Howard government proceeded to implement its
proposal and from that time onwards the debate narrowed. The
Constitutional Convention (Election) Bill 1997 received
its second reading on 26 March 1997. The bill was held up in the
Senate for some time because it proposed that the 76 elected
delegates would be elected by voluntary postal ballot rather than
by in-person compulsory voting. Eventually the bill passed through
the Senate and planning for the election proceeded.(11)
On 12 September the date of the election was
announced. Voting papers were mailed out in the period 3-14
November and the polling closed on 9 December. The results were
notified on 24 December.
Elections were held in each state and territory
for a total of 76 delegates. The distribution of seats was: New
South Wales (20); Victoria (16); Queensland (13); Western Australia
(9); South Australia (8); Tasmania (6); Australian Capital
Territory (2); and Northern Territory (2). A Senate-style voting
method was used. The turnout was 46.93 per cent of eligible voters.
Under the circumstances this was quite a respectable turnout. But
it did leave open the question of whether this was a representative
sample and just what the views of the remaining 53 per cent would
be at any subsequent referendum.
There were 609 candidates including 80 groups
and 176 non-aligned individuals.(12) The two largest groups, ARM
and ACM, polled the lion's share of the votes and won the bulk of
the elected positions. ARM polled 30.34 per cent and ACM polled
22.51 per cent.(13) Republican candidates led the count in NSW,
Victoria, WA, ACT and NT, while monarchists won in Queensland, SA
and Tasmania.(14) The successful candidates are listed in Appendix
1.
The Prime Minister appointed the other 76
delegates: 40 parliamentary and 36 non-parliamentary.(15) The
parliamentary delegates were divided between Commonwealth and state
representatives. The Commonwealth representatives included both all
the party leaders and some backbenchers. The state representatives
included the State premiers and opposition leaders and the chief
ministers of the ACT and the Northern Territory. The
non-parliamentary delegates included seven youth delegates, some
indigenous leaders such as Lowitja O'Donoghue and Gatjil Djerkurra
(past and present chairs of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Commission), prominent women such as Professor Judith
Sloan, Julie Bishop (now MHR), Dame Leonie Kramer, Helen Lynch, and
Dame Roma Mitchell; church leaders such as Anglican Archbishop
Peter Hollingworth and Catholic Archbishop George Pell; and other
prominent Australian men, including Professor Geoffrey Blainey,
Major-General William 'Digger' James, Bill Hayden, Professor Greg
Craven, Sir Arvi Parbo, Peter Sams and Lloyd Waddy. The Prime
Minister also appointed two senior parliamentarians: Ian Sinclair
(National Party) and Barry Jones (ALP) as Chair and Deputy Chair of
the Convention. The full list of appointed delegates is also given
in Appendix 1.
The Constitutional Convention met at Old
Parliament House in Canberra for ten working days, 2-13 February
1998. The convention was televised and it attracted considerable
and favourable attention from both the media and the public who
were able to watch the proceedings from the visitors'
galleries.(16)
Just before the Constitutional Convention a
Women's Constitutional Convention (WCC) was held in Canberra on
29-30 January 1998. The WCC was convened by representatives of
Australian Women Lawyers, Constitutional Centenary Foundation,
National Women's Justice Coalition, Women's Electoral Lobby, Women
into Politics and YWCA Australia. WCC aimed to 'ensure that the
debate concerning the potential shift to a republic is not
one-sided but includes the interests of women'.(17)
It was a successful event, attended by 300
delegates, including a number who would be attending the
Constitutional Convention itself. While it added to the momentum
for a republic it did not support a particular model. However a
majority of delegates indicated their wish to go beyond a
minimalist republic. It was reported that a majority 'endorsed a
republic that recognised and accepted indigenous Australians,
enshrined gender equity in the political process, promoted social
cohesion, political stability and a democratic culture, and
included a bill of rights'.(18)
Purpose of the
Constitutional Convention
The convention had a narrowly defined purpose.
It was asked by the Prime Minister to consider three questions:
-
- first, whether or not Australia should become a republic
-
- secondly which republic model should be put to the voters to
consider against the current system of government, and
-
- thirdly, in what time frame and under what circumstances might
any change be considered.
In his opening address to the Convention, John
Howard promised delegates that:
if clear support for a particular republican
model emerged from the Convention, my government would, if returned
at the next election, put that model to the Australian people in a
referendum before the end of 1999.(19)
Then, if the referendum was successful, Howard
promised the convention that the republic would be put in place for
1 January 2001 which would be the Centenary of Federation and the
birth of the new millennium.
Outcomes of the
Constitutional Convention
Of the Prime Minister's three questions:
-
- the Constitutional Convention supported, in principle, the idea
that Australia should become a republic. This resolution was
carried by 89 votes to 52 with 11 abstentions
-
- the Convention supported the Bipartisan Appointment of the
President Model by 73 votes in favour to 57 against with 22
abstentions. While this was less than an absolute majority it was
declared carried by the chair and a motion of dissent in the
chair's ruling was overwhelmingly defeated, and
-
- the Convention voted to recommend to the Prime Minister and
Parliament that this model be put to a referendum by 133 votes to
17 with two abstentions. It recommended that the referendum be held
in 1999 and that if successful the republic should come into effect
by 1 January 2001.
The Convention also discussed the implications
for the states.(20) It resolved
That the Commonwealth Government and parliament extend an
invitation to State Governments and Parliaments to consider:
- the implications for their respective Constitutions of any
proposal that Australia become a republic; and
- the consequences to the Federation if one or more States should
decline to accept republican status.
In any case it resolved that State autonomy not
be infringed.
In choosing the Bipartisan Appointment of the
President Model the Convention preferred it to three other models.
The first, moved by the WA Opposition Leader Dr Geoffrey Gallop,
was the Direct Election Model, involving:
the election of the head of state by the
Australian people following a two-stage process for identifying
candidates.(21) ... 'not less than three candidates would be
selected from the nominees by a special majority of a joint sitting
of the House of Representatives and the Senate'.
The second, moved by the former Governor-General
Bill Hayden, was another direct election model. It involved
'nomination of candidates for the election by way of petition
endorsed by at least one percent of voters'.(22)
The third, moved by the former Victorian
Governor, Richard McGarvie and hence known as the McGarvie Model,
involved the least change from the present system. Under this model
the head of state would be appointed by a new, three person
Constitutional Council whose only role would be to ratify the Prime
Minister's selection. Any citizen could put a name forward to the
Prime Minister.
The choice of model was carried out by
exhaustive ballot. The Hayden Model received only four votes and
was eliminated in the first round. Then the Direct Election Model
was narrowly eliminated in the second round after receiving 30
votes.
Finally, the Bipartisan Appointment Model
prevailed in the final round with 73 votes to 32 votes for the
McGarvie Model, 43 for no model and three abstentions.
The second major issue considered was whether
the Constitution should include a new preamble, while allowing for
the existing preamble to remain intact.
The Convention recommended that there should be
a new preamble including the following elements:
-
- introductory language in the form 'We the people of
Australia'
-
- reference to 'Almighty God'
-
- references to the origins of the Constitution and
acknowledgment that the Commonwealth has evolved into an
independent, democratic and sovereign nation under the Crown
-
- recognition of our federal system of representative democracy
and responsible government
-
- affirmation of the rule of law
-
- acknowledgment of the original occupancy and custodianship of
Australia by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
-
- recognition of Australia's cultural diversity
-
- affirmation of respect for our unique land and the
environment
-
- reference to the people of Australia having agreed to
reconstitute our system of government as a republic, and
-
- concluding language to the effect that '[we the people of
Australia] asserting our sovereignty, commit ourselves to this
constitution'.
It also agreed that some other matters might be
considered for inclusion in the Constitution. These included the
following:
-
- affirmation of the equality of all people before the law
-
- recognition of gender equality, and
-
- recognition that Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders
have continuing rights by virtue of their status as Australia's
indigenous peoples.
It was resolved that the preamble should not be
used to interpret the other provisions of the Constitution and that
this stipulation should be written into chapter three of the
Constitution which deals with the judicature.(23)
Finally, the Convention recommended a continuing
process of constitutional review. It resolved:
that, if a republican system of government
should be introduced by referendum, at a date being not less than
three years or more than five years thereafter the Commonwealth
Government should convene a further Constitutional
Convention.(24)
The first item on the agenda of such a
convention, for which two-thirds of the delegates would be directly
elected by the people, would be to review the operation of the new
system of government. It would also be able to address many other
matter related to the new arrangements, including ways to better
involve people in the political process.
The Bipartisan Appointment of
the President Model
The Convention recommended that the Prime
Minister should present to a Joint Sitting of the Parliament a
'single nomination for the office of President, seconded by the
Leader of the Opposition'.(25) The nomination would need the
approval/support of a two-thirds majority.
In presenting a single name the Prime Minister
would take into account the report of a committee established by
Parliament to consider nominations.
This committee should be:
of a workable size, its composition should have
a balance between parliamentary (including representatives of all
parties with party status in the Commonwealth Parliament) and
community membership and take into account so far as practicable
considerations of federalism, gender, age and cultural
diversity.(26)
Nominations should be invited from as wide a
range of individuals and organisations as possible so as 'to ensure
that the Australian people are consulted as thoroughly as
possible'.(27) Consultation shall involve the whole community,
including 'State and Territory Parliaments; local government;
community organisations, and individual members of the
public'.(28)
The Committee should compile a short-list of
candidates for consideration by the Prime Minister, being mindful
in doing so of 'community diversity'. No nomination should be made
public without the consent of the nominee. The qualification for
office is that the person be an Australian citizen qualified to be
a member of the House of Representatives under s 44 of the
Constitution.
The term of office is five years. The President
can be dismissed 'at any time by a notice in writing signed by the
Prime Minister'.(29) This action would have to be approved within
30 days by the House of Representatives. If it was not approved
this would constitute a vote of no confidence in the Prime
Minister.
The powers of the President would be 'the same
as those currently exercised by the Governor-General'.(30) To
achieve this the Convention recommended that Parliament:
-
- spell out as far as practicable the powers that are exercised
on the advice of ministers (known as non-reserve powers), and
-
- issue a statement that 'the reserve powers and the conventions
relating to their exercise continue to exist'.
The Referendum
Process(31)
In his introduction to the report of the
Constitutional Convention the Chairman, the Rt Hon. Ian Sinclair,
noted that the outcomes of the convention, including the
recommendation that the Republic question be put to the people at a
referendum, 'should be assessed against the history of rejection of
constitutional change'.(32) He further noted that 'only eight of
the 42 propositions submitted by referendum have been approved'.
The details of all the constitutional referendums held so far are
to be found in Appendix 2.
This means that it is difficult to achieve
constitutional change by constitutional referendums. Various
reasons are advanced for these unpromising results ranging from the
conservatism of the Australian people in resisting positive changes
to the perspicacity of the Australian people in resisting 'grabs
for power' by the central government. However it should be noted
that the Australian record might not be too conservative at all
when it is compared with attempts to change constitutional
arrangements in other comparable countries, such as Canada.(33)
Constitutional change is rarely easy to achieve because in all
countries it involves the most major changes possible and is,
therefore, conducted according to stringent rules.(34)
There is, however, general agreement that any
significant party political opposition to a referendum proposal
will spell its defeat. This was the case on the occasion of the
most recent referendums, in 1988, when four proposals were so
overwhelmingly defeated (no proposal achieved even 40 per cent
support) that the future of constitutional change by referendum
appeared to be bleak.(35) Consequently, one strategy has been to
attempt to 'depoliticise constitutional change' in an attempt to
'build constitutional change on effective consensus'.(36) In the
past this non-partisan consensus-building has been undertaken by
constitutional committees and commissions, most recently by the
Constitutional Commission in the 1980s. On this occasion the
Constitutional Convention served this purpose.
The formal process of alteration of the
constitution by referendum is set out in section 128 of the
Constitution. It is a two-stage process: initiation by the
parliament and ratification by the people. First, the proposed bill
must be passed by both houses of the Commonwealth Parliament
(although under certain limited circumstances the Governor-General
can authorise a referendum question which has only passed one
house). Secondly, the proposal must be put to the people and passed
at a referendum.
The referendum campaign is accompanied by
government distribution to each household of a pamphlet including
the cases for YES and NO (each in 2000 words or less) and a
statement outlining the textual alterations and additions to the
Constitution that have been proposed. This is in accordance with
the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act, 1984.(37) The
preparation and authorisation of these cases is the responsibility
of those parliamentarians who voted accordingly in the parliament.
The NO case is prepared only if there are votes against the bill in
the Parliament.
The limitations of this method of informing
electors have previously been recognised.(38) The government has
been prevented from spending any other money in support of the YES
case, whatever spending is undertaken by other organisations,
including state governments. The official arguments have tended to
be partisan cases rather than the provision of reasonably factual
information. It is for these reasons that alterations to the
process have been agreed to under the Referendum Legislation
Amendment Bill 1999 (see below).
Once the vote has been taken the proposed change
is approved if two majorities are achieved: an overall majority of
voters and a majority of voters in a majority (i.e. four or more)
of the states. The votes from the two territories are only counted
in the calculation of the national result. These requirements have
caused some referendums to fail. Five proposals, including most
recently Simultaneous Elections for the House of Representatives
and the Senate in 1977, have failed despite attracting overall
majorities.(39) There have been no cases of the reverse
occurring.
Public
Opinion
Surveys of Australian attitudes towards the
monarchy and republican constitutional change have been undertaken
by polling organisations since 1953, at which time support for a
republic was 15 per cent.(40) Appendices 3 and 4 contain the
pro-republic and pro-monarchy percentages from then until February
1999.(41) Analysts of these surveys point out that they need to be
interpreted cautiously as the wording of the questions is rarely
identical and attitudes vary according to the question asked.
Majority community support as measured by public
opinion polls does not necessarily translate into majority support
for the YES case at a referendum. Support may evaporate during the
referendum campaign. In one famous case of this the Menzies
government's referendum to ban the Communist Party in 1951 was
defeated, after a NO campaign led by the Labor Party leader Dr H.
V. Evatt, despite previously enjoying apparent majority community
support.(42)
Broadly speaking Australians favoured the
monarchy until the 1990s. There was not a single case of a majority
for the republic, although the size of the minority steadily
increased, reaching about 25 per cent in the 1960s and about 30 per
cent in the 1970s. During the 1980s the majority for the monarchy
was usually about 60 per cent with about 30 per cent supporting a
republic and about 10 per cent undecided.(43)
This changed quite quickly in the 1990s for
reasons discussed earlier. They included growing nationalism
stimulated by earlier events such as the 1988 Bicentennial
celebrations, the changing character of the Australian community
and the active support for a republic now emanating from some
community organisations and political parties. In 1991-92 support
for republicanism increased and individual surveys began to report
either majority opinion (more than 50 per cent) or plurality
opinion (greater than support for the monarchy but less than 50 per
cent because of undecided respondents) in favour of a republic.
Attitudes towards the monarchy/republic vary
according to the social and political background of the respondents
in ways that are generally not surprising given the general
character of Australian political life. Liberal and National voters
are much more likely to support the monarchy than Labor voters. So
too are a number of other categories, including: women rather than
men; older rather than younger citizens; rural rather than urban
residents; members of the main Protestant denominations rather than
Catholics and those of no religious affiliation; and Australians
born in England rather than other Australians.(44) As for regional
differences, according to one study, Queenslanders and Tasmanians
stand out as supporters of the status quo.(45)
By the time of the Constitutional Convention in
February 1998 surveys regularly reported a majority in favour of an
Australian republic (though this is not to say that this is how
Australians would have voted at a referendum).(46) As the
ARM/Keating minimalist model became more clearly defined surveys
began to test public opinion towards this particular model. They
reported that faced with a choice between a president directly
elected by the people and a president elected by parliament a large
majority supported the former. For instance, a poll taken in the
first week of February 1998, during the Constitutional Convention,
reported that 66 per cent supported election by popular vote
compared with election by Parliament (17 per cent) and the McGarvie
model (10 per cent).(47) When pitted against the status quo only
the popular election model produced a majority for the republic. At
the Constitutional Convention itself advocates of direct election,
notably Associate Professor Patrick O'Brien from WA, made great
play of these survey results.(48)
Since then most surveys have addressed this
aspect of the question as well as opinion for/against the republic.
Surveys continue to show majority support for a directly elected
president. They show also that, despite continued majority support
for a republic the parliamentary model that was recommended by the
Constitutional Convention would not have majority support and would
fail to pass. For instance, this was the case in both an Age/AC
Nielsen poll in January 1999 and a Newspoll survey in March
1999.(49) The former, presented under the headline 'Voters reject
republic' reported that only 41 per cent would vote for a republic
with an appointed president. The figure in the latter was only 33
per cent and the headline was 'Republic case in crisis'. Yet on
both occasions general support for a republic was far greater, by
about 15 per cent, than general support for the monarchy.
Nevertheless, there is no agreement as to what
these results actually mean.(50) The wording of questions continues
to make quite a difference (which suggests that the wording of the
referendum question may also be crucial to the outcome).
Furthermore, there continues to be a substantial number of
Australians, between 10 per cent and 17 per cent of the community,
that is uncommitted.
The most favourable recent response in favour of
the republic came from a poll commissioned by the ARM and conducted
by Newspoll in January 1999. The question read:
The referendum later this year will propose to
amend the Constitution to replace the Queen with an Australian Head
of State chosen by a two-thirds majority of Parliament with the
support of both sides of politics. This will very likely mean that
the new Head of State will not be a politician. With this in mind
will you yourself vote YES or will you vote NO in the referendum to
make this change to the Constitution? The result was 58.3 per
cent YES, 30.7 per cent NO and 10.8 per cent 'DON'T
KNOW/REFUSED'.(51)
Major
Participants in The Debate
The positions of those who will play a major
role in the referendum debate have now almost all been made public.
The processes are being led by the Prime Minister, the
Attorney-General, who has responsibility for the bills, and the
Special Minister of State, who has responsibility for the conduct
of the referendum itself, with the administrative support of the
Referendum Taskforce. For further details see Appendix 5.
The Liberal Party is divided and there are both
monarchists and republicans in about equal numbers among Cabinet
ministers. The National Party is uniformly monarchist and the Labor
Party is solidly republican. The Australian Democrats are
republican and are currently deliberating further within their
party on the merits of the referendum model versus popular
election. State political leaders have generally declared their
positions and most are republicans. For further details of all
these party positions at both Commonwealth and State level, and
those of the Greens and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party see
Appendix 5.
The major part of the advocacy in the debate
will be carried out by committed community organisations. On the
YES side these include the Australian Republican Movement,
Conservatives for an Australian Head of State, members of the YES
Coalition and a number of smaller republican groups. For further
details of these organisations see Appendix 6. The NO side includes
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, Real Republicans, and the
Returned Services League. For further details see Appendix 7.
Leading members of these organisations have come
together in the YES and NO campaign committees. For further
details, including staff, see Appendix 8
Important participants also include some
uncommitted bodies, such as the Constitutional Centenary
Foundation, which engages in public education and Issues
Deliberation Australia, which will conduct a deliberative poll,
Australia Deliberates: A Republic. Yes or No on 22-24 October 1999.
For further details see Appendix 9.
Finally, there have been a number of individuals
who have played a prominent role. Many of them are formally part of
the advocacy groups and are discussed in this paper in that
context, but some republicans, on both the YES and the NO side, are
unattached. For details see Appendix 10.
Issues for Resolution during
1999
The Timing of the Referendum
It now appears almost certain that the
referendum will be held on Saturday, 6 November.(52) The referendum
legislation will be introduced about mid-year. The referendum must
be held no less than two months and no more than six months after
the legislation has passed.(53)
The Referendum Questions
The Prime Minister decided, early in 1999, that
there would be two questions-one on the republic and one on a new
preamble to the constitution.(54) Mr Howard announced that he would
take a personal interest in the drafting of the Preamble. The
Attorney-General would take responsibility for the Republic
question. Coalition MPs were told at this time that the republic
question would ask whether the 'Constitution should be altered to
establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with a
president chosen by a two-thirds majority of Parliament'.(55) Each
question's wording will be the final responsibility of Cabinet.
On 9 March the government released the Exposure
Draft of the Constitution Alteration (Establishment of Republic)
1999 Bill for public comment by 16 April. The draft does not depart
from the major recommendations of the Constitutional Convention in
regard to the appointment and removal of the President, and his/her
powers.(56) The same is true of the position of the states. Any
state 'that has not altered its laws to sever its links with the
Crown by the time the office of Governor-General ceases to exist
retains its links with the Crown until it has so altered its
laws'.(57) The bill addresses some additional matters, such as the
positions of Acting President and Deputy President, and removes all
references to the Queen and the Governor-General.
The proposed question has so far proved
relatively uncontroversial, although Andrew Robb, for CAHS, has
claimed that, by failing to mention the Queen, it 'includes a
clever selection of words most likely to provoke a negative
reaction from people at the very moment they go to vote'. Robb
proposed an alternative wording along the following lines: 'A Bill
for an Act to alter the Constitution to provide for an Australian
citizen, chosen by a two thirds majority of a joint sitting of the
Federal Parliament, to replace the British Monarch as Australia's
head of state'.(58)
The Public Education Programme
The traditional paper versions of the YES and NO
cases will be supplemented on this occasion by wider distribution,
including on the Internet. Furthermore, the government has
allocated $4.5 million funding to a separate public education
programme.(59) This programme is likely to begin towards the end of
May, peaking in September. It will include:
-
- information on the current system of government
-
- information on the referendum process, and
-
- information on the actual questions.
The campaign will be advised by an advisory
panel of experts, chaired by Sir Ninian Stephen and also including
Professor Geoffrey Blainey, Dr Colin Howard QC, Professor Cheryl
Saunders and Dr John Hirst.(60) The Newspoll organisation has been
commissioned to survey the community's existing knowledge about the
above questions.
The YES and
NO Media Campaigns
There will also be a $15 million government
funded media campaign organised by two ten-person teams drawn from
the Constitutional Convention delegates.(61) These campaigns will
occur in the month leading up to the referendum, after the
conclusion of the government's public education campaign.
The Presidential Nominations Committee
The consultative committee, which if the
referendum is successful will be responsible for recommending names
to the prime minister, will have 32 members. It will be known as
the Presidential Nominations Committee. Half of its membership will
be politicians-eight from the federal parliament and eight from the
states and territories. The Commonwealth members will be chosen on
the basis of the representation of parties in the parliament. One
state representative will be nominated by each state parliament or
territory legislative assembly. The other 16 will be community
representatives, who may not be parliamentarians, appointed by the
prime minister (they could however be former parliamentarians).(62)
One member of the committee will be appointed as the convenor.
On 9 March the Exposure Draft of the
Presidential Nominations Committee Bill 1999 was released for
public comment by 16 April.
Implications for the States
The major developments so far have been
statements of personal position by state and territory leaders and
MPs (see below). The implications for the states were discussed at
the Premiers Conference in April 1999 but no resolution was
reached.(63) However, if the referendum is passed it appears that
all Australian governments are aiming for a simultaneous change to
a republic on 1 January, 2001.(64)
Conclusion
It is too early to predict the shape of the
referendum campaign, much less the outcome. The relevant bills have
not yet been passed by the parliament and the campaign proper is
yet to begin. We do not yet even know if the referendum will have
one question or two. The media are still concentrating on other
things and may well do so until October.
What we do know however that the publicly funded
campaign for this historic referendum is likely to be the most
expensive ever undertaken. The 1999-2000 Budget estimates that the
referendum will cost the government $79 million. There will also be
considerable privately funded campaigning. Judging by the campaign
appointments made so far it will be fought with all the techniques
of modern election campaigning. It will include large scale,
centralised media and direct mail campaigns as well as local
grass-roots activities. In scale it will be at least the equivalent
in size of a federal election campaign, perhaps bigger.
Judging by the debate so far it will also be as
divisive as any previous referendum. The arguments will be
extremely wide-ranging, covering many aspects of the Australian
political system, and there will be numerous participants. On both
the YES and the NO sides there will be a variety of views expressed
because each side is made up of a loose coalition of organisations.
Because there is a great deal at stake it is likely that there will
be no holds barred.
An important aspect of the campaigns, in
addition to substantive arguments about the republic, will be the
debate about whether the timing of the proposed change is
appropriate and what will follow if the referendum where to be
defeated. There are various views about this question.(65) The
question of whether or not there will be another referendum in the
foreseeable future, should this one be defeated, may well influence
the outcome. Would a NO vote entrench the constitutional monarchy
or lead the way to a popularly elected president or lead to another
vote on the same republican model? Until we know the dimensions of
the result on 6 November we can only speculate.
Endnotes
-
- M. McKenna, The Captive Republic: A History of
Republicanism in Australia, 1788-1996, Cambridge University
Press, 1996; D. Headon, J. Warden and B. Gammage eds, Crown or
Country: The Traditions of Australian Republicanism, Allen and
Unwin, Sydney, 1994.
- G. Dutton, ed., Australia and the Monarchy, Sun Books,
1966; G. Dutton ed., Republican Australia? Sun Books,
1977.
- J. Warhurst, 'Nationalism and Republicanism in Australia: The
Evolution of Institutions, Citizenship and Symbols', Australian
Journal of Political Science, vol. 28, 1993, pp. 100-20.
- C. Hide, 'The Recent Republic Debate-A Chronology', June 1996
in Department of the Parliamentary Library, The Constitution
Papers, Parliamentary Research Service, Subject Collection No.
7, Australian Government Publishing Service, 1996; McKenna, 'The
Captive Republic', Chapter 11; Constitutional Convention
Report, vol. 1, Chapter 3.
- ibid., vol. 1, p. 13.
- 'Republic Advisory Committee An Australian Republic: The
Options', vol. 1, The Report, Commonwealth of Australia,
1993.
- ibid., p. 10.
- M. Ryan, ed, Advancing Australia: The Speeches of Paul
Keating, Prime Minister, Big Picture Publications, 1995, pp.
173-84.
- W. Hudson and D. Carter, eds, The Republicanism
Debate, New South Wales University Press, 1993; S. Lawson and
G. Maddox, eds, 'Australia's Republican Question', Special Issue,
Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 28, 1993; G.
Winterton ed., We, The People, Allen and Unwin, 1994.
- For an analysis of the 1996 elections see C. Bean, S. Bennett,
M. Simms and J. Warhurst eds, The Politics of Retribution, Allen
and Unwin, 1997.
- Australian Electoral Commission Constitutional Convention
Election 97: The Australian Electoral Commission's Report and
Statistics, Commonwealth of Australia, 1998.
- ibid., p. 18.
- ibid., p. 19.
- Australian Electoral Commission Constitutional Convention
Election 97, pp. 33-4.
- Constitutional Convention Report, op. cit., pp. 58-60.
- G. Williams, 'Constitutional Convention,'; Department of the
Parliamentary Library, 1998; S. Vizard, Two Weeks in
Lilliput, Penguin, 1998.
- J. Curtin, 'The 1998 Women's Constitutional Convention',
Research Note 21, Department of the Parliamentary Library,
1997-98.
- A. Rollins 'Women's meeting backs republic with enshrined
rights', The Age, 31 January 1998.
- Constitutional Convention Report, vol. 1, p. 1.
- ibid., p. 43.
- ibid., p. 38.
- ibid., p. 38.
- ibid., p. 47.
- ibid., p. 49.
- ibid., p. 45; in general on this model see also Constitutional
Centenary Foundation, Voting on a Republic, CCF, 1998.
- ibid., p. 44.
- ibid., p. 44.
- ibid., p. 44.
- ibid., p. 45.
- ibid., p. 45.
- See also Scott Bennett and Sean Brennan, 'Constitutional
Referenda in Australia', Forthcoming Research Paper,
Department of the Parliamentary, 1998-99.
- Constitutional Convention Report, vol. 1, p. 3.
- B. Galligan, A Federal Republic: Australia's constitutional
System of Government, Cambridge University Press, 1995, p.
121.
- B. Galligan, 'The Politics of Constitutional Change' in M.
Coper and G. Williams, eds, Power, Parliament and the
People, The Federation Press, 1997, pp. 6-15; C. Saunders,
'The Australian experience with constitutional review',
Australian Quarterly, vol. 66, no. 3, Spring 1994, pp.
49-66.
- B. Galligan and J. R. Nethercote, eds, The Constitutional
Commission and the 1988 Referendums, Centre for Research on
Federal Financial Relations and Royal Australian Institute of
Public Administration (ACT Division), Canberra, 1989.
- Saunders, 'The Australian experience ...', op. cit., p. 54.
- Section 11 Distribution to Electors of Arguments For and
Against Proposed Law.
- E. Campbell, 'Southey Memorial Lecture 1988: Changing the
Constitution-Past and Future', Melbourne University Law
Review, vol. 17, no.1, June 1989, pp. 1-23; L. Lenaz-Hoare,
'The History of the 'YES/NO' Case in Federal Referendums, and a
Suggestion for the Future', in Australian Constitutional
Convention, Constitutional Amendment Sub-Committee, Report to
Standing Committee, 1984, Appendix 5, pp. 85-93; C. Saunders,
'Referendum Procedures' in ibid, Appendix 7, pp. 111-7.
- Saunders, 'The Australian Experience ...', op. cit., p. 55.
- M. Goot, 'Monarchy or Republic? An Analysis of the Questions
and Answers in Surveys of Australian Public Opinion', in
Executive Government: Report of the Advisory Committee to the
Constitutional Commission, Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra, 1987; C. Bean, 'Public Attitudes on the Monarchy-Republic
Issue', Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 28,
Special Issue, 1993, pp. 190-206; M. Goot, 'Contingent
inevitability: Reflections on the prognosis for republicanism' in
G. Winterton, ed, We, the People, op. cit., pp. 63-96.
- Opinion polls on an Australian republic: 1953-1999, Australian
Republican Movement,
http://www.republic.org.au/issues/pollsumm.html, 7 April 1999.
- L. C. Webb, Communism and Democracy in Australia: A Survey of
the 1951 Referendum, Praeger, 1955.
- Bean, op. cit., p. 193, Table 1 'Attitudes towards the
Monarchy-Republic Issue, 1967-1990 (in percentages)'.
- Bean, op. cit., pp. 196-201.
- Bean, op. cit., p. 1999.
- For instance, see Roy Morgan Research Centre, Australian
Financial Review, 14 February 1998: YES 53 per cent; NO 39 per
cent; 'UNDECIDED' 8 per cent.
- Newspoll, Australian, 10 February 1998.
- Australian, 11 February 1998.
- The Age, 26 January 1999; Australian, 3 March
1999.
- M. McKenna, 'Too early for polling pessimism',
Australian, 1 March 1999.
- Newspoll Market Research, Job No. 990103, Republic Study,
January 1999.
- Australian Financial Review, 13 May 1999.
- D. Williams, 'Republic Referendum: The Process Leading to the
Referendum', video address to the National Convention of
Republicans, 6 February 1999.
- 16 February 1999.
- Australian Financial Review, 17 February 1999.
- Constitutional Centenary Foundation, Analysis of the
Constitution Alteration (Establishment of the Republic) Bill 1999
and the Presidential Nomination Committee Bill 1999, Melbourne,
1999.
- Exposure Draft, section 5 'The States'.
- A. Robb, 'An Australian Head of State ... a small, yet symbolic
step', National Press Club, 29 March 1999, p. 4.
- Senator Chris Ellison, Senate Hansard, 29 March 1999.
- The Hon. Daryl Williams, Attorney-General, and Senator the Hon.
Chris Ellison, Special Minister of State, 'Expert Panel for the
Public Education Programme for the Referendum on the Australian
Republic', Joint News Release, 20 April 1999.
- The Hon. Daryl Williams, Attorney-General and Senator the Hon
Chris Ellison, Special Minister of State, 'Advertising for the
referendum on the republic', Joint News Release, 16 February
1999, and 'Committees for the advertising for the referendum on the
republic', Joint News Release, 19 February 1999.
- Australian Financial Review, 17 February 1999.
- L. Dodson, 'A state of concern about the fate of Governors',
Australian Financial Review, 10 April 1999.
- Australian, 16 April 1999.
- J. Warhurst, 'Much to debate before November 6', Canberra
Times, 15 May 1999.
Appendix 1:
Delegates to the 1998
Constitutional Convention
1. Elected delegates (in order of election for
each State and Territory)
New South Wales
1.
|
Mr Malcolm Turnbull (Australian Republican Movement)
|
2.
|
Mr Doug Sutherland (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
3.
|
Mr Ted Mack (Ted Mack)
|
4.
|
Ms Wendy Machin (Australian Republican Movement)
|
5.
|
Mrs Kerry Jones (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
6.
|
Mr Ed Haber (Ted Mack)
|
7.
|
The Hon Neville Wran AC QC (Australian Republican Movement)
|
8.
|
Cr Julian Leeser (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
9.
|
Ms Karin Sowada (Australian Republican Movement)
|
10.
|
Mr Peter Grogan (Australian Republican Movement)
|
11.
|
Ms Jennie George (Australian Republican Movement)
|
12.
|
Ms Christine Ferguson (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
13.
|
Mr Alasdair P Webster (Christian Democratic Party (Fred Nile
Group))
|
14.
|
Ms Glenda Hewitt (ungrouped-I Care About Australia's Future)
|
15.
|
Dr Pat O'Shane AM (A Just Republic)
|
16.
|
Brigadier Alf Garland AM (Australian Monarchist League)
|
17.
|
Mr Andrew Gunter (Ethos-Elect the Head of State)
|
18.
|
Ms Hazel Hawke (Australian Republican Movement)
|
19.
|
Mr Jason Yat-Sen Li (ungrouped-A Multi-Cultural Voice)
|
20.
|
Ms Catherine Moore (Greens, Bill of Rights, Indigenous
Peoples)
|
Victoria
1.
|
Mr Eddie McGuire (Australian Republican Movement)
|
2.
|
The Hon Don Chipp AO (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
3.
|
The Reverend Tim Costello (Real Republic)
|
4.
|
Mr Bruce Ruxton AM OBE (Safeguard the People)
|
5.
|
Ms Mary Delahunty (Australian Republican Movement)
|
6.
|
Ms Sophie Panopoulos (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
7.
|
Mr Steve Vizard AM (Australian Republican Movement)
|
8.
|
Ms Poppy King (Australian Republican Movement)
|
9.
|
Mr Lindsay Fox AO (Australian Republican Movement)
|
10.
|
The Hon Vernon Wilcox CBE (Safeguard the People)
|
11.
|
Ms Moira Rayner (Real Republic)
|
12.
|
Ms Misha Schubert (Republic4U-The Youth Ticket)
|
13.
|
The Hon Jim Ramsay (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
14.
|
Mr Kenneth Gifford QC (Australian Monarchist League)
|
15.
|
Mr Phil Cleary (ungrouped-Phil Cleary-Independent Australia)
|
16.
|
Mr Eric G Bullmore (Shooters Party)
|
Queensland
1.
|
The Hon James Killen KCMG (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
2.
|
Dr Clem Jones (Clem Jones Queensland Constitutional Republic
Team)
|
3.
|
The Hon Michael Lavarch (Australian Republican Movement)
|
4.
|
Dr Glen Sheil (Constitutional Monarchists)
|
5.
|
Mr Neville Bonner AO (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
6.
|
Mr David Alexander Muir (Clem Jones Queensland Constitutional
Republic Team)
|
7.
|
Ms Sallyanne Atkinson AO (Australian Republican Movement)
|
8.
|
Mr Thomas Bradley (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
9.
|
Lady Florence Isabel Bjelke-Petersen (Constitutional
Monarchists)
|
10.
|
Ms Mary Kelly (Women for a Just Republic)
|
11.
|
Ms Sarina Russo (Australian Republican Movement)
|
12.
|
Cr Paul Tully (Queenslanders for a Republic)
|
13.
|
Cr Ann Bunnell (Clem Jones Queensland Constitutional Republic
Team)
|
Western Australia
1.
|
Ms Janet Holmes a Court AO (Australian Republican Movement)
|
2.
|
The Rt Hon Reg Withers (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
3.
|
Prof Peter Tannock (Australian Republican Movement)
|
4.
|
Mr Geoff Hourn (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
5.
|
Mr Graham Edwards (Australian Republican Movement)
|
6.
|
Ms Clare Thompson (Australian Republican Movement)
|
7.
|
Ms Marylyn Rodgers (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
8.
|
Mr Liam Bartlett (ungrouped-An Open Mind for the Future)
|
9.
|
Prof Patrick O'Brien (Elect the President)
|
South Australia
1.
|
Mr Kym Bonython AC DFC AFC (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
2.
|
Dr Baden Teague (Australian Republican Movement)
|
3.
|
The Right Reverend John Hepworth (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
4.
|
Ms Linda Kirk (Australian Republican Movement)
|
5.
|
Ms Victoria Manetta (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
6.
|
Dr Tony Cocchiaro (Australian Republican Movement)
|
7.
|
Father John Fleming (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
8.
|
Ms Kirsten Andrews (Australian Republican Movement)
|
Tasmania
1.
|
Mr Edward O'Farrell CVO CBE (No Republic-Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy)
|
2.
|
Mr Julian Green (Australian Republican Movement)
|
3.
|
Mr Michael Castle (No Republic-Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy)
|
4.
|
Ms Marguerite Scott (Australian Republican Movement)
|
5.
|
Dr David Mitchell (The Australian Monarchist League)
|
6.
|
Mr Eric Lockett (ungrouped-Voice of Ordinary, Fair-Minded,
Thinking Citizens)
|
Australian Capital
Territory
1.
|
Ms Anne Witheford (Australian Repubican
Movement)
|
2.
|
Mr Frank Cassidy (Australian Republican
Movement)
|
Northern Territory
1.
|
Mr David Curtis (A Just Republic)
|
2.
|
Mr Michael Kilgariff (ungrouped-Territory Republican)
|
2. Appointed delegates-non-parliamentary
Ms Andrea Ang (WA)
|
Mr Donald McGauchie AC (VIC)
|
Ms Stella Axarlis (VIC)
|
The Hon Dame Roma Mitchell AC (SA)
|
Ms Dannalee Bell (VIC)
|
|
Ms Julie Bishop (WA)
|
|
Prof Geoffrey Blainey AO (VIC)
|
Mr George Mye MBE AM (QLD/TAS)
|
Prof Greg Craven (WA)
|
|
Ms Miranda Devine (NSW)
|
|
Mr Gatjil Djerrkura OAM (NT)
|
Dr Lois O'Donoghue CBE AM (SA)
|
Ms Mia Handshin (SA)
|
|
The Hon Bill Hayden AC (QLD)
|
The Most Reverend George Pell (VIC)
|
The Most Reverend Peter Hollingworth AO OBE (QLD)
|
Ms Nova Peris-Kneebone OAM (NT/WA)
|
Ms Mary Imlach (TAS)
|
|
Major General W B James AO MBE MC (QLD)
|
|
Mr Adam Johnston (NSW)
|
Sir David Smith KCVO AO (ACT)
|
Mrs Annette Knight AM (WA)
|
Prof Trang Thomas AM (VIC)
|
Dame Leonie Kramer AC (NSW)
|
Mr Lloyd Waddy RFD QC (NSW)
|
Ms Helen Lynch AM (NSW)
|
Prof George Winterton (NSW)
|
The Hon Richard McGarvie AC (VIC)
|
|
Commonwealth
Government
The Hon John Howard MP (Prime Minister)
The Hon Peter Costello MP (Treasurer)
The Hon Daryl Williams AM QC MP
(Attorney-General)
Senator the Hon Robert Hill (Minister for the
Environment)
Senator the Hon Jocelyn Newman (Minister for
Social Security)
Mr Neil Andrew MP
Mrs Chris Gallus MP
Mr Kevin Andrews MP
Senator Alan Ferguson
The Hon Tim Fischer MP (Deputy Prime
Minister)
The Hon John Anderson MP (Minister for Primary
Industries and Energy)
Senator Ron Boswell (Leader of the National
Party of Australia in the Senate)
Australian Labor Party
The Hon Kim Beazley MP (Leader of the
Opposition)
The Hon Gareth Evans QC MP
Senator the Hon John Faulkner (Leader of the
Opposition in the Senate)
Senator Sue West (Deputy President of the
Senate)
Senator the Hon Nick Bolkus
Senator Kate Lundy
Australian Democrats
Senator Natasha Stott Despoja
Independent/Green
Mr Allan Rocher MP
State/Territory
NSW
The Hon Bob Carr MP (Premier)
The Hon Peter Collins QC MP (Leader of the
Opposition)
The Hon Jeff Shaw QC MLC (Attorney-General and
Minister for Industrial Relations)
VIC
The Hon Jeff Kennett MLA (Premier)
Mr John Brumby MLA (Leader of the
Opposition)
The Hon Pat McNamara MLA (Deputy Premier and
Minister for Agriculture)
QLD
The Hon Rob Borbidge MLA (Premier)
Mr Peter Beattie MLA (Leader of the
Opposition)
The Hon Denver Beanland MLA
(Attorney-General and Minister for Justice)
WA
The Hon Richard Court MLA (Premier)
Dr Geoffrey Gallop MLA (Leader of the
Opposition)
The Hon Hendy Cowan MLA (Deputy Premier)
SA
The Hon John Olsen FNIA MP (Premier)
The Hon Michael Rann MP (Leader of the
Opposition)
Mr Mike Elliott MLC (Leader of the Australian
Democrats)
TAS
The Hon Tony Rundle MHA (Premier)
Mr Jim Bacon MHA (Leader of the Opposition)
Mrs Christine Milne MHA (Leader of the Tasmanian
Greens)
Territories
Mrs Kate Carnell MLA (Chief Minister, ACT)
The Hon Shane Stone MLA (Chief Minister,
Northern Territory)
Source: http://www.dpmc.gov.au/convention/delegate.htm
Appendix 2:
Summary of Constitutional
Referendums
Subject
|
Date
|
Government
|
Yes
States
|
Yes
Per cent
|
1
|
Senate Electionsa
|
Dec 1906b
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
82.7
|
2
|
State Debtsa
|
Apr 1910b
|
Non-Labor
|
5
|
54.9
|
3
|
Finance
|
Apr 1910b
|
Non-Labor
|
3
|
49.0
|
4
|
Legislative Powersc
|
Apr 1911
|
Labor
|
1 (WA)
|
39.4
|
5
|
Monopoliesc
|
Apr 1911
|
Labor
|
1 (WA)
|
39.9
|
6
|
Trade and Commercec
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.4
|
7
|
Corporationsc
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.3
|
8
|
Industrial Mattersc
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.3
|
9
|
Trustsc
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.8
|
10
|
Nationalisation of Monopoliesc
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.3
|
11
|
Railway Disputesc
|
May 1913b
|
Labor
|
3
|
49.1
|
12
|
Legislative Powersc
|
Dec 1919b
|
Non-Labor
|
3
|
49.7
|
13
|
Nationalisation of Monopoliesc
|
Dec 1919b
|
Non-Labor
|
3
|
48.6
|
14
|
Industry and Commercec
|
Sep 1926
|
Non-Labor
|
2
|
43.5
|
15
|
Essential Servicesc
|
Sep 1926
|
Non-Labor
|
2
|
42.8
|
16
|
State Debtsc
|
Nov 1928b
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
74.3
|
17
|
Aviationc
|
Mar 1937
|
Non-Labor
|
2
|
53.6
|
18
|
Marketingc
|
Mar 1937
|
Non-Labor
|
None
|
36.3
|
19
|
Reconstruction, Democratic Rights
|
Aug 1944
|
Labor
|
2
|
46.0
|
20
|
Social Servicesac
|
Sep 1946b
|
Labor
|
All
|
54.4
|
21
|
Marketing of Primary Productsc
|
Sep 1946b
|
Labor
|
3
|
50.6
|
22
|
Industrial Employmentc
|
Sep 1946b
|
Labor
|
3
|
50.3
|
23
|
Rents and Pricesc
|
May 1948
|
Labor
|
None
|
40.7
|
24
|
Communismc
|
Sep 1951
|
Non-Labor
|
3
|
49.4
|
25
|
Parliament
|
May 1967
|
Non-Labor
|
1 (NSW)
|
40.3
|
26
|
Aboriginalsac
|
May 1967
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
90.8
|
27
|
Pricesc
|
Dec 1973
|
Labor
|
None
|
43.8
|
28
|
Incomesc
|
Dec 1973
|
Labor
|
None
|
34.4
|
29
|
Simultaneous Electionsd
|
May 1974b
|
Labor
|
1 (NSW)
|
48.3
|
30
|
Altering Constitution
|
May 1974b
|
Labor
|
1 (NSW)
|
48.0
|
31
|
Democratic Elections
|
May 1974b
|
Labor
|
1 (NSW)
|
47.2
|
32
|
Local Government Bodiesc
|
May 1974b
|
Labor
|
1 (NSW)
|
46.9
|
33
|
Simultaneous Electionsd
|
May 1977
|
Non-Labor
|
3
|
62.2
|
34
|
Senate Casual Vacanciesa
|
May 1977
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
73.3
|
35
|
Referendumsa
|
May 1977
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
77.7
|
36
|
Retirement of Judgesa
|
May 1977
|
Non-Labor
|
All
|
80.1
|
37
|
Terms of Senatorsd
|
Dec 1984b
|
Labor
|
2
|
50.6
|
38
|
Interchange of Powers
|
Dec 1984b
|
Labor
|
None
|
47.1
|
39
|
Parliamentary Terms
|
Sep 1988
|
Labor
|
None
|
32.9
|
40
|
Fair Elections
|
Sep 1988
|
Labor
|
None
|
37.6
|
41
|
Local Government
|
Sep 1988
|
Labor
|
None
|
33.6
|
42
|
Rights and Freedoms
|
Sep 1988
|
Labor
|
None
|
30.8
|
(a)
|
Referendum carried.
|
(b)
|
Held on same day as general election.
|
(c)
|
Referendum including a proposed amendment to section 51.
|
(d)
|
These three proposals were identical even though the titles
varied.
|
Source: I. McAllister, Malcolm Mackerras,
Alvaro Ascui and Susan Moss, Australian Political Facts,
Longman Cheshire, 1990, p. 80.
Appendix
3: Opinion Polls on an Australian Republic
Opinion polls on an Australian republic:
1953-1999

These graphs (bottom graph shows same in detail
for the last 15 years) show the changing mood of the Australian
people over the past 46 years on the issue of Australia retaining
the monarchy or becoming a republic. Despite variations up and
down, the increasing trend of support for a republic is undeniable
and it is now clear that a majority of Australians want to see
Australia become a republic.
Republic opinion poll data
1984-1999

Source: http://www.republic.org.au/issues/pollsumm.html
Appendix 4:
Poll Data
Date
|
Pollster and (question)
|
Pro-republic %
|
Pro-monarchy %
|
Undecided
|
June 1953
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (a)
|
15
|
77
|
8
|
April 1966
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (b)
|
22
|
65
|
13
|
July 1966
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (b)
|
28
|
63
|
9
|
February 1968
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (b)
|
40
|
53
|
7
|
October 1969
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (a)
|
24
|
64
|
12
|
June 1970
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (c)
|
26
|
68
|
6
|
February 1973
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (a)
|
42
|
50
|
8
|
November 1973
|
Morgan Gallup Poll (c)
|
32
|
53
|
15
|
December 1975
|
Bulletin (a)
|
28
|
61
|
11
|
October 1976
|
Bulletin (a)
|
25
|
60
|
15
|
December 1976
|
Age (b)
|
39
|
58
|
3
|
April 1977
|
Bulletin (a)
|
26
|
62
|
12
|
December 1978
|
Sun Herald (a)
|
31
|
61
|
8
|
November 1979
|
Australian Public Opinion Polls-the Gallup Method (a)
|
31
|
61
|
8
|
April 1980
|
Age (b)
|
36
|
61
|
3
|
August 1981
|
Bulletin (a)
|
28
|
59
|
13
|
September 1982
|
Australian Public Opinion Polls-the Gallup Method (a)
|
30
|
60
|
10
|
January 1983
|
Bulletin (a)
|
28
|
60
|
12
|
January 1984
|
Bulletin (a)
|
30
|
62
|
8
|
February 1985
|
Age (a)
|
30
|
63
|
8
|
1984-85
|
National Social Science Survey (d)
|
41
|
59
|
0
|
April 1985
|
Quadrant (e)
|
30
|
62
|
8
|
March 1986
|
Frank Small & Associates (i)
|
36
|
45
|
16
|
1986-87
|
National Social Science Survey (d)
|
40
|
59
|
1
|
October 1987
|
Newspoll (e)
|
21
|
64
|
15
|
1987-88
|
National Social Science Survey (d)
|
41
|
59
|
0
|
1990
|
National Social Science survey (d)
|
41
|
58
|
0
|
June 1991
|
Newspoll (e)
|
34
|
52
|
14
|
February 1992
|
Saulwick (f)
|
57
|
39
|
4
|
March 1992
|
Newspoll (e)
|
44
|
40
|
16
|
April 1992
|
Saulwick (f)
|
56
|
42
|
3
|
May 1992
|
Newspoll (e)
|
41
|
45
|
14
|
March 1993
|
Saulwick (f)
|
66
|
30
|
4
|
April 1993
|
Newspoll (e)
|
46
|
35
|
19
|
April 1993
|
AGB McNair (e)
|
45
|
36
|
19
|
April 1993
|
Morgan (g)
|
52
|
38
|
10
|
April 1993
|
Morgan (h)
|
56
|
35
|
9
|
July 1993
|
Newspoll (e)
|
46
|
36
|
18
|
July 1993
|
Saulwick (f)
|
62
|
34
|
4
|
September 1993
|
Newspoll (b)
|
39
|
44
|
17
|
October 1993
|
AGB McNair (e)
|
48
|
42
|
10
|
November 1993
|
Newspoll (e)
|
39
|
44
|
17
|
December 1993
|
Morgan (h)
|
44
|
48
|
8
|
March 1994
|
Newspoll (e)
|
39
|
43
|
18
|
September 1994
|
Newspoll (e)
|
42
|
43
|
15
|
March 1995
|
Newspoll (e)
|
47
|
34
|
19
|
July 1995
|
Newspoll (e)
|
50
|
35
|
15
|
December 1996
|
AGB McNair (e)
|
55
|
38
|
7
|
February 1997
|
Newspoll (e)
|
47
|
28
|
25
|
June 1997
|
Newspoll (e)
|
49
|
30
|
21
|
September 1997
|
Newspoll (e)
|
54
|
30
|
16
|
November 1997
|
Newspoll (e)
|
52
|
33
|
15
|
December 1997
|
Constitutional Convention Election
|
57
|
34
|
9
|
December 1997
|
Newspoll (e)
|
51
|
35
|
14
|
February 1998
|
Roy Morgan (g)
|
52
|
37
|
11
|
January 1999
|
Newspoll (e)
|
48
|
35
|
17
|
February 1999
|
Newspoll (j)
|
58
|
31
|
11
|
Questions Asked
(a)
|
Retain the Monarchy or become a Republic?
|
(b)
|
Retain present links with the United Kingdom or become an
entirely separate Republic?
|
(c)
|
At the end of the Queen Elizabeth's reign, should we recognise
Charles as King or become a Republic with an elected President?
|
(d)
|
Should Australia retain the Queen as Head of State or become a
Republic? ('Definitely' and 'Probably' figures combined in the
table)
|
(e)
|
Should Australia become a Republic?
|
(f)
|
Should Australia remain a Monarchy within the (British)
Commonwealth, become a Republic within the Commonwealth, or a
Republic outside the Commonwealth? (Republic figure in the table is
a composite of the latter two answers)
|
(g)
|
Should Australia remain a Monarchy or become a Republic with an
elected President?
|
(h)
|
Should Australia remain a Monarchy or become a Republic by the
year 2001?
|
(i)
|
Question not specified.
|
(j)
|
The referendum later this year will propose to amend the
Constitution to replace the Queen with an Australian Head of State
chosen by a two-thirds majority of Parliament with the support of
both sides of politics. Will you vote YES or will you vote NO in
the referendum to make this change to the Constitution?"
|
Source: G. Winterton, Monarchy to
Republic: Australian Republican Government, Oxford
University Press, 1994.
Figures since 1994 from The Australian and
Sydney Morning Herald archives.
Source:Australian Republican Movement,
http://www.republic.org.au/issues/pollsumm.html
Appendix 5:
Governments and
Political Parties
The Prime
Minister
The Prime Minister, John Howard, has taken the
position that parliamentary members of the Liberal Party will have
a free/conscience vote at the time of the referendum, and they will
be able to campaign freely in the lead up to the referendum vote.
This position has since been extended to the National Party members
of the Coalition. He has maintained his personal position in
support of the status quo, while giving an undertaking not to
campaign for either NO or YES.(1)
In January 1999 the Prime Minister wrote to the
premiers asking for their commitment to help push through
constitutional change simultaneously if the referendum
passes.(2)
Attorney-General
The Attorney General, Daryl Williams, has
responsibility for the carriage of the bills in the Parliament and
chairs the Referendum Task Force (sometimes referred to as the
referendum steering group).
On 19 February 1999 Williams announced the names
of the two ten-member teams responsible for planning and managing
national paid media campaigns to supplement the official YES and NO
campaigns prior to the referendum.
The members of the YES team are: Malcom
Turnbull, Janet Holmes a Court, Neville Wran, Lowitja O'Donoghue,
Gareth Evans MHR, Senator Natasha Stott Despoja, Chris Gallus MHR,
Jason Yat-Sen Li, Professor Greg Craven and Steve Vizard.
The members of the NO team are Kerry Jones, Cr
Julian Leeser, Major-General "Digger" James, Senator Ron Boswell,
Dame Leonie Kramer, Senator Alan Ferguson, Sir David Smith, Heidi
Zwar, Ted Mack and Clem Jones. The first eight are monarchists
while the last two are direct election republicans.
Each was given responsibility for half ($7.5
million) of the $15 million allocated for the national media
component of the YES and NO cases. Guidelines, released in April by
the Attorney-General, will apply to these campaigns which will be
restricted to the month leading up to the referendum. Under the
guidelines:
-
- the committees must restrict their activities to the use of the
Commonwealth government funding and cannot accept donations or
raise other funds
-
- competitive selection processes should be considered for work
contracted out where this is feasible and there should be proper
monitoring of the performance of contractors
-
- records are to be made available for audit and are to be
transferred in full to Prime Minister & Cabinet
-
- the committees will be required to submit a proposed budget for
consideration by the Ministerial Council on Government
Communications; and
-
- administrative costs are limited and committee members are only
allowed travel expenses.(3)
The Special Minister of
State
Senator Chris Ellison has responsibility for the
conduct of the referendum by the Australian Electoral Commission
and is the other ministerial member of the Referendum Task
Force.
The Referendum Taskforce
(RTF)
The RTF comprises the two ministerial members,
staff members from the Prime Minister's office, the
Attorney-General's office and the Special Minister of State's
office and officials from the Attorney-General's Department.(4) The
RTF is supported by a secretariat based in the Department of Prime
Minister and Cabinet. It is composed of officers from PMC and the
Attorney-General's department, assisted by AEC officials. Its
convenor is John Doherty.(5)
Contact: Mr J. Doherty, convenor, Referendum
Taskforce, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, 3-5 National
Circuit, Barton, ACT, 2600. Freecall: 13 24 47; Telephone: (02)
6271 5564; Facsimile: (02) 6271 5566. Email:
referendum@dpmc.gov.au(6)
State
Governments
While state governments have no formal role in
the referendum process several of them have conducted their own
inquiries (WA in 1995; SA in 1996).(7) All state premiers and
opposition leaders and the territory chief ministers took part in
the Constitutional Convention, where they adopted a range of
positions in voting on the proposed models.
In 1999 several state leaders have declared
their positions. Jim Bacon (Labor, Tasmania), Peter Beattie (Labor,
QLD), Kate Carnell (Liberal, ACT), Bob Carr (Labor, NSW), Jeff
Kennett (Liberal, Victoria) and John Olsen (Liberal, SA) support
the YES case.(8) So do the Opposition leaders in Tasmania (Liberal)
and Victoria, South Australia, ACT and NT (all Labor).
Richard Court (Liberal, WA) has reaffirmed his
support for the NO case, but his deputy, Colin Barnett supports the
YES case.(9) The two Opposition leaders who support the NO case are
Rob Borbidge (National, QLD) and Kerry Chikarovski (Liberal, NSW),
although Ms Chikarovski declined to confirm this during the March
1999 NSW election campaign.(10)
The Liberal
Party
The Liberal Party reflects community divisions
on the republic. It contains many declared monarchists, as well as
the Prime Minister, including Cabinet ministers such as Dr David
Kemp and Senator Nick Minchin, who had carried responsibility for
the Constitutional Convention, and ministers such as Bronwyn Bishop
and Tony Abbott.(11) Abbott has been the most outspoken monarchist
and his address to the Queensland Young Liberals in January 1999,
which described republicanism as 'a kind of national feel-good pill
or constitutional Viagra, to be prescribed whether we need it or
not', angered senior republicans in the party.(12)
Republican Liberals on the frontbench include
the Treasurer, Peter Costello, Environment Minister, Robert Hill,
and Finance Minister, John Fahey.
Peter Reith, Minister for Employment, Workplace
Relations and Small Business, supports a popularly elected
president and has announced that he will vote NO at the
referendum.
There are a number of Liberal backbenchers who
have contributed to the public debate. The Liberal MP on the
official YES team is Chris Gallus, MHR for Hindmarsh, South
Australia. Senator Marise Payne (NSW) was once Deputy National
Convenor of the ARM. Senator Amanda Vanstone, Minister for Justice,
spoke at the National Convention of Republicans. Senator Alan
Eggleston (WA) has convened a group of parliamentary Liberals for
the republic and has served as patron for the ARM in Western
Australia.
The National
Party
The National Party, led by the Deputy Prime
Minister, Tim Fischer, formally supports the constitutional
monarchy.(13) However, Fischer has stated that individual National
Party MPs will be allowed a conscience vote.
Senator Ron Boswell, Leader of the National
Party in the Senate, is a member of the official NO team.(14)
The Australian Labor
Party
The ALP formally supports a republic and since
June 1991 has been committed to a republic by 1 January 2001.(15)
The party is committed to campaigning for a YES vote at the
referendum and Kim Beazley has restated this position on a number
of occasions this year.(16) A preliminary discussion has been held
at the ALP National Executive as to whether the party should
declare the republic to be a conscience vote for MPs and party
members. The NO case will include rank and file members such as
Clem Jones, an ALP life member, and Constitutional Convention
delegate Paul Tully.(17)
The most prominent national Labor republicans
are the Shadow Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, and former
Deputy Leader, Gareth Evans, who is a member of the official YES
team, and who drafted Labor's contribution to the Preamble debate.
Graham Edwards MHR (Cowan, WA) was an elected ARM delegate to the
Constitutional Convention prior to his entry into parliament.
The Australian
Democrats
Senator Natasha Stott Despoja (SA), Deputy
Leader of the Democrats, is the most prominent spokesperson for the
official pro-republican position of the Democrats and supports the
YES case. She was a parliamentary delegate to the Constitutional
Convention, spoke at the National Convention of Republicans and is
a member of the official YES team. The Democrats advocate greater
public participation in the process of constitutional reform and
wanted the Constitutional Convention to be a fully elected
body.(18)
Senator Andrew Murray (WA) has expressed some
disquiet at the official Democrats position and has claimed that a
directly elected president would make the executive more
accountable.(19)
The party is currently balloting its members to
elaborate its policy by adding specific items to its Constitutional
Reform Policy on the question of choosing a Head of State.(20)
The Greens
The Greens have not been prominent in the debate
and were not represented among Commonwealth parliamentary delegates
to the Constitutional Convention, although the delegates included
Christine Milne, then Leader of the Greens in the Tasmanian
parliament and an elected NSW delegate, Catherine Moore. They are,
in general, direct election republicans. Greens (WA) senator, Dee
Margetts was critical of the Constitutional Convention process. She
supports a further constitutional convention 'preceded by extensive
community consultation' if the referendum is successful and, if it
is unsuccessful, she advocates a plebiscite at the next federal
election on the question 'Should Australia become a
republic?'(21)
Pauline Hanson's One
Nation (PHON)
Like the Greens PHON was unrepresented among
parliamentary delegates to the Constitutional Convention and the
party has not played a prominent role in the debate. In general,
because of its commitment to traditional British ties, PHON appears
to support the NO case. Pauline Hanson declared her opposition to a
republic for the first time in July 1998.(22) Senator-elect Heather
Hill has suggested that she will be voting against the new
preamble.(23)
Endnotes
-
- 'PM promises no republic meddling', The Age, 18
December 1998.
- West Australian, 5 February 1999.
- Australian Financial Review, 13 April 1999.
- Senator Ellison, Hansard, 29 March 1999, pp. 3091-92. The
members are Tony Nutt and Catherine Murphy (Prime Minister's
office), Nick Grono and Simone Burford (Attorney-General's office)
and Senator Ellison's Chief of Staff, Alastair Kinloch. They are
being assisted by a number of officials including Henry Burmester,
Chief General Counsel from Attorney General's, Robert Orr, Deputy
General Counsel, Ian Govey and Sandra Power.
- The other members of the secretariat are Jim Faulkner, Wendy
Southern, Nicholas Schofield, David Lewis, and from Prime Minister
and Cabinet Alan Henderson. The AEC officials have included Bill
Gray, the Commissioner, and Paul Dacey.
Website: http://www.dpmc.gov.au/referendum
- The Report of the Western Australian Constitutional Committee,
Malcolm McCusker Q. C.
- (chair), January 1995; The South Australian Constitutional
Advisory Council, First Report, South Australia and Proposals for
an Australian Republic, September 1996 and The Distribution of
power between the three levels of government in Australia, and The
Importance of Education and Consultation in Constitutional Reform,
December 1996, (Assoc. Prof. Peter Howell, Chair).
- See Australian, 27 January 1999 (Olsen); Age,
28 January 1999 (Kennett); Canberra Times, 7 February
1999 (Carnell).
- West Australian, 10 February 1999.
- Sydney Morning Herald, 18 March 1999.
- For a representative Liberal monarchist position see R. Kemp
'Facing the Constitutional Debate' in K. Aldred, K. Andrews and P.
Filing, eds, The Heart of Liberalism, The Albury papers, 1994, pp.
73-4.
- M. Gordon, 'A fistful of faith' The Age, 3 April 1999.
- Tim Fischer, General address, Report of the Constitutional
Convention, vol. 3, pp. 247-50; John Anderson, General Address,
Report of the Constitutional Convention, vol. 4, pp. 532-5.
- R. Boswell, 'Constitutional ''cage'' should remain shut',
Australian, 8 January 1999.
- Australian Labor Party 1998, ALP Platform, pp. 139-40; see also
Australian Labor Party 1994 Platform, Resolutions and
Rules, pp. 58-9.
- K. Beazley, 'Best Chance for Republic', Sydney Morning
Herald, 26 January 1999; K. Beazley, 'Debate must
transcend party allegiances', Australian, 26 January 1999;
K. Beazley, Address to CEDA, Pathways to the Future: A Labor
Vision, Melbourne, 16 March 1999.
- Sydney Morning Herald, 23 February 1999.
- Senator Stott Despoja, Referendum Legislation Amendment Bill
1999, Second Reading, Senate Hansard, 29 March 1999, pp. 3045-8.
- A. Murray, 'Impeachable plan is anti-democratic', West
Australian, 28 January 1999; 'Offer a choice on republic vote:
Senator', West Australian, 13 January; A. Murray, 'A
president by plebiscite or none at all', Australian, 30
December 1998.
- See 'Draft Ballot'; A. Murray, 'The Case for direct election';
and B. Austen, 'A Case against direct election', Making Policy,
A Supplement to the National Journal of the Australian
Democrats, February 1999, pp. 2-4.
- Senator Dee Margetts, 'Greens move to amend referendum bill',
Media release, 24 March 1999.
- 'Hanson opposed to republic', Canberra Times, 23 July
1998.
- Canberra Times, 10 March 1999.
Appendix 6:
Community
Organisations
Australian Republican Movement (ARM)
The ARM is the main republican organisation.(1)
It was founded on 7 July 1991, has branches in each state and
territory, and maintains a secretariat in Sydney. It was the
largest organised force at the 1998 Constitutional Convention and
elected 27 delegates. Its national president is Malcolm Turnbull
and its national campaign coordinator is former NSW Labor Premier,
Neville Wran.
The elected ARM delegates were led by media
personality Eddie McGuire (Vic), former Labor Attorney-General
Michael Lavarch (Qld), businesswoman Janet Holmes á Court
(WA), former Liberal Senator Baden Teague (SA), Julian Green (Tas),
Anne Witheford (ACT) and Turnbull himself (NSW).
The ARM stands for the minimalist republican
model and the Bipartisan Appointment of the President Model adopted
by the Convention is a modified version of the ARM's preferred
model that it brought to the convention.
Its chairman, Turnbull, has written:
There is only one fundamental issue in the republican debate:
how long will Australia allow the highest office under its
constitution, that of the monarch, the head-of-state, to be
occupied by the kings and queens of another country, the United
Kingdom?(2)
The official YES committee includes four ARM
members, Turnbull, Wran, Steve Vizard and Janet Holmes á
Court.(3)
Conservatives for an
Australian Head of State (CAHS)
CAHS was formed by the former Federal Secretary
of the Liberal Party, Andrew Robb, in January 1999.(4) It is a
group of 12 leading conservatives, which includes businessmen
Robert Champion de Crespigny and Charles Goode and academics and
Constitutional Convention delegates, Prof Judith Sloan and Prof
Greg Craven. The others are former Liberal MPs, Paul Everingham,
Warwick Smith and Michael Yabsley, and Paul Houlihan, Michael
Lishman, Deane Russell and Fiona Smith.
Its aim is to persuade conservatives that the
minimalist position is a safe model for a republic, safer than
direct election, which Robb says 'would be an unmitigated
disaster'.(5) It plans to maintain its independence while working
in collaboration with other republican organisations, such as ARM.
It has raised some money and aims to share in public funding.
On 29 March 1999 the CAHS convenor, Andrew Robb,
addressed the National Press Club. He outlined the CAHS position as
follows:
[it] supports the minimal approach to the
republic debate in only changing the head of state of Australia. We
strongly oppose any attempt to undermine both State autonomy and
the long-standing Parliamentary systems and conventions which
currently apply. We support the outcome of the Constitutional
Convention which appoints an Australian Head of State with no other
changes to the way which we are governed. We will urge a YES vote
at the referendum.(6)
One of its members, Craven, is on the official
YES committee for the pre-referendum campaign.(7) CAHS also has
announced a group of Friends who support its position.(8) The
Friends include Doug Anthony, the former deputy prime minister and
National Party leader, Don McGauchie, former president of the
National Farmers Federation, and Rod McGeoch, chairman of the
Committee of Sydney and a former member of SOCOG.(9)
'YES' Coalition
(YC)
YC is a loose-knit organisation of all
republican groups whose first manifestation emerged at the National
Convention of Republicans (NCR), held in Canberra on 6-7 February
1999.(10) The aim of YC is to present a broad and united front of
republicans-non-partisan and from all shades of republican opinion.
It includes prominent direct election advocates, who will support
the YES case, such as Rev. Tim Costello, ACT Chief Minister Kate
Carnell, Rev. Dorothy McRae McMahon and Senator Natasha Stott
Despoja.(11)
Following the NCR organised YCs emerged in most
states and territories, beginning with the NSW YC which was
launched on 18 February in Sydney.(12) These coalitions are usually
comprised of a small ARM core plus other high-profile figures. The
NSW YES coalition includes former tennis star, John Newcombe and
Constitutional Convention delegate, Jason Yat-Sen Li, who was the
No 1. Senate candidate for the Unity Party at the October 1998
federal election.(13)
Smaller Republican
Groups
-
- A Just Republic stands for 'A Just republic,
Not just a republic!' Its larger agenda includes a Bill of Rights,
Prior Ownership, a Directly Elected President, and Ongoing
Constitutional Reform, but on this occasion it supports a YES vote.
In the elections for the Constitutional Convention it stood
candidates in NSW (including Pat O'Shane and Dorothy
McRae-McMahon), ACT and NT.(14)
-
- Women for an Australian Republic is a
'virtual' group convened by Sarah Brasch. It argues for equal
representation of women on all committees, short lists, etc.
concerned with the election of the president.(15)
-
- Youth for an Australian Republic is a national
organisation that also emphasises electronic communication amongst
its members. Previously known as 'YES YOUTH' its representatives
spoke at the National Convention of Republicans. In campaigning for
a YES vote its target is young people and its aim is to enliven
constitutional debate with slogans such as 'Put the Pub back in
Republic'.
-
- The Campaign for the Popular Election of the Australian
President was set up in 1995 by the Republican Party of
Australia, a tiny party led by Peter Consandine. It 'reluctantly'
advocates a YES vote and is organising a 'write-on' campaign in
which it advises its supporters to write P.E.P (popularly elected
president) on their ballot papers.(16),(17)
Endnotes
-
- For further information see Australian Republican Movement
'Declaration by Republicans for a YES Vote for Australian Head of
State', 25 January 1999; S. Vizard, Two Weeks in Lilliput,
Penguin, 1998; M. Turnbull, The Reluctant Republic,
William Hienemann Australia, 1993; T. Keneally, Our
Republic, William Hienemann Australia, 1993; J. Hirst, A
Republican Manifesto, Oxford University Press, Melbourne,
1994.
- 'Addressing the Republic' in D. Headon, et al eds, Crown or
Country.
- Contact: Australian Republican Movement
http://www.republic.org.au; Email:
republic@ozemail.com.au PO Box A870 Sydney South NSW 1235
FreeCall 1800 80 2000; Facsimile: (02) 9267
8155.
- Australian, 25 January 1999.
- ibid.
- Frank Crews, 'Republic Debate Continues', Media
release, National Press club, 8 March 1999; A. Robb, Convenor,
Conservatives for an Australian Head of State, 'An Australian Head
of State ... a small, yet symbolic step', Address to the National
Press Club, 29 March 1999.
- G. Craven, 'No room for two at the top', Australian, 5
February 1999; G. Craven, 'New setting for timeless jewel',
Australian Financial Review, 3 March 1999; G. Craven,
'Safety First', The Adelaide Review, 186, March 1999.
- M. Grattan, 'Robb to become republic's 'YES' man', Sydney
Morning Herald, 30 March 1999.
- Contact: Conservatives for an Australian Head of State, GPO Box
3955, Sydney NSW 2001; Telephone (02) 9233 2156; Facsimile: (02)
9371 7820.
- National Convention of Republicans, A Declaration, Canberra, 7
February 1999.
- See, for instance, T. Costello, 'Why, with doubts, I back this
republic', The Age, 13 January 1999.
- Australian Financial Review, 17 February 1999.
- Contact: For the papers from the National Convention of
Republicans see
http://www.act.republic.org.au/ncr/
- Contact: PO Box 3779, Manuka 2603, ACT.
Email: ajract@hotmail.com
- See www.womenrep.dynamite.com.au Contact: Email:
womenrep@dynamite.com.au
- Campaign for the Popular Election of the Australian President
'Australian Republic: to be or not to be?', Summer 1999.
- Contact National Secretariat: PO Box 843, Castle Hill, NSW,
1765; Ph. 02-9899 5590; Email: ozrepublic@hawknet.com.au; see
www.hawknet.com.au/-ozrepublic
Appendix 7:
NO Community Organisations
Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy
ACM is the main monarchist organisation.(1) Its
first organisers were Lloyd Waddy, a leading Sydney lawyer, and
Michael Kirby, President of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme
Court of NSW. It was launched at a public meeting on 2 June 1992.
Its Foundation Charter Council included: Sir Harry Gibbs, former
Chief Justice of the High Court; Dame Leonie Kramer, Chancellor of
Sydney University; Doug Sutherland, former (Labor) Lord Mayor of
Sydney; Justice Michael Kirby, President of the NSW Court of Appeal
(now High Court Justice); Sir John Atwill, former Federal president
of the Liberal Party; former Senator, Neville Bonner; artist
Margaret Olley; NSW MLC Helen Sham-Ho; Margaret Valadian; Gareth
Grainger; Stephen Hall; Vahoi Naufahu; and Barry O'Keefe QC.(2)
It also maintains a secretariat in Sydney and
has branches in each state and territory. Its first executive
director, in June 1993, was Tony Abbott, now Liberal MHR for
Warringah, NSW, and Minister for Employment Services in the Howard
government. John Howard himself spoke at one of ACM's early rallies
and has always been a supporter.
It elected 19 delegates to the Constitutional
Convention on a 'No Republic-ACM' ticket, including Doug
Sutherland, NSW, the Hon. Don Chipp, Vic., the Hon. James Killen,
QLD, The Rt Hon Reg Withers, WA, and Kym Bonython, SA. Other
leading members, such as Lloyd Waddy and Sir David Smith, former
Secretary to the Governor General, were among the appointed
delegates.
Its main spokespersons, since March 1994, have
been its convener, Lloyd Waddy, and its executive director, Kerry
Jones. Waddy withdrew from active campaigning in June 1998, when he
was appointed a judge of the Family Court. Jones, Smith and
Councillor Julian Leeser are among the members of the official NO
committee.
Its position is support for the constitutional
monarchy and opposition to an Australian republic. The ACM
focuses on the defects in the various models of
republics as alternatives to our current working system of
government; the problems with each of the methods advanced for
appointing and dismissing a president, exposing the powers a
president would have, and the dangers inherent in replacing the
Governor-General as our non-political Head of State, which only the
Crown can ensure, with a powerful political president'.(3)
Sir David Smith has been a consistent public
advocate of the status quo, debating Australian constitutional
history (especially in regard to the 1975 constitutional crisis)
and taking issue with Sir Anthony Mason on constitutional matters.
He has argued the case, in particular, for the independent role of
the Governor-General as the Australian Head of
State.(4),(5)
Real Republicans
(RR)
RR is the name appropriated early in 1999 by
those direct election republicans committed to supporting the NO
case (the name was originally used by the ticket that elected
Constitutional Convention delegates Tim Costello and Moira Rayner
in Victoria). Now it is the name for an organisation created by
Phil Cleary (Victoria), Clem Jones (Queensland) and Ted Mack (NSW)
who were among those direct election republicans that had earlier
joined forces as delegates at Constitutional Convention.(6) Bill
Hayden has indicated that he will support the RR campaign.(7)
RR supports various models for direct election
of the president. Mack favours a US-style presidency, Jones a
president with executive powers, and Cleary favours an Irish-style
president with only 'cultural, symbolic and moral' authority.(8)
They argue that defeat of the YES case is necessary to enable the
later passage of a referendum for a popularly elected
president.(9)
Jones and Mack are members of the committee to
run the NO campaign prior to the referendum. Peter Reith met
publicly with Ted Mack to offer his support and has indicated his
intention to campaign against the referendum in November.(10)
Returned Services League (RSL)
The RSL has been the most determined opponent of
any move towards a republic. For the League, Australian national
identity is inseparable from the British connection and the
monarchy. As the League's historians have written of its values as
imperial loyalists: 'The links with Britain and the symbols of
loyalty-monarchy, flag, and anthem-are to be defended and
sustained'.(11) Consequently one of its standing policies has been
'That any move to change Australia into a republic be opposed.(12)
RSL leaders have consistently put this position publicly and
identified themselves as monarchists. At the Constitutional
Convention there were three RSL voices, all of them monarchists.
There were two past National presidents, Major General James, one
of the appointed delegates, and Brigadier Alf Garland, an elected
member (Australian Monarchist League, Victoria) as well as the
present Victorian state president, Bruce Ruxton.
Endnotes
-
- For further information see G. Grainger and K. Jones, eds,
The Australian Constitutional Monarchy, 1994; K. Jones,
The works: why mess with it?', Australian, 28 January
1999; K. Jones, The ACM Handbook: Key Facts and Opinions
for the Republic Debate in Australia, ACM Publishing, 1996;
The Australian Constitution: Essential Documents in Australian
Constitutional History to be read in conjunction with the 'ACM
Handbook', ACM Publishing, 1997; T. Abbott, The Minimal
Monarchy: and why it still makes sense for Australia,
Wakefield Press, 1995; T. Abbott; How to Win the Constitutional War
and give both sides what they want; Australians for Constitutional
Monarchy and Wakefield Press, 1997.
- The ACM Handbook, op. cit., pp. 4-5.
- The ACM Handbook, p. 2.
- Sir David Smith, 'The head of state', in G. Winterton, ed.,
We, The People, op. cit., pp. 152-65; 'The G-G is not a
delegate of the Queen', Letter to the Editor, Canberra
Times, 16 January 1999; 'An Open Letter to the
Attorney-General', Press Release, 5 January 1999.
- Contact: Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, GPO Box 9841,
Sydney, NSW, 2001. Telephone: (02) 9231 2200 or FreeCall: 1800 622
229. Facsimile: (02) 9231 2359.
- S. Jackson, 'Rebels in the Ranks', Australian, 16
January 199?
- C. Dore, 'Hayden will back rebel republic campaign',
Australian, 8 January 1999.
- Australian, 23 January 1999.
- T. Mack, 'Giving power to the People', Sydney Morning
Herald, 24 December 1998; T. Mack, 'Undue haste could
undermine a unique opportunity', Australian, 27 January
1999; T. Mack, 'Democratic ideal transcends minority fascist
smear', Australian, 23 February 1999; P. Cleary, 'The end
of the republic', The Age, 8 January 1999.
- L. Wright, 'Reith sticks with directly elected president',
Canberra Times, 14 March 1999.
- P. Sekuless and J. Rees, Lest We Forget: The History of the
Returned Services League, 1916-1986, Rigby, 1986, p. 6.
- Returned Services League RSL Handbook:75th Anniversary Issue
1991, Sydney, 1991, 17.18, p. 150.
Appendix 8: The YES and NO Campaign
Organisations
The YES campaign
committee
The YES Committee, appointed by the government
to manage the $7.5 million government-funded campaign, has
announced the appointment of a campaign committee. Its composition,
which goes beyond Constitutional Convention delegates is Malcolm
Turnbull (chair), Peter Barron, former political adviser to Bob
Hawke, and Neville Wran, (deputy chair), Andrew Robb, and Karin
Sowada, ARM Constitutional Convention delegate and former
Australian Democrats senator for NSW.(1)
The national campaign director is Greg Barns,
who will leave his position as chief of staff of John Fahey, the
Minister for Finance, from the end of May.(2) Public opinion
polling will be the responsibility of Liberal Party pollster, Mark
Textor, while the advertising campaign is likely to be the
responsibility of John Singleton, who has in the past worked on
Labor party election campaigns.(3)
Overall this membership is notably bipartisan
and cross-group, but with strong ARM representation. It also
represents considerable political expertise drawn from high-level
participation in recent national election campaigns.
The NO campaign
committee
The NO campaign committee, about which less is
known at the time of writing, is chaired by the ACM's Kerry
Jones.(4) Its campaign director is David Elliott, former press
secretary to former NSW Liberal leader Peter Collins and previously
research officer to John Howard and Bronwyn Bishop.(5)
Endnotes
-
- Australian Financial Review, 12 April 1999; Sydney
Morning Herald, 13 April 1999.
- Sydney Morning Herald, 13 April 1999.
- Australian, 30 March 1999; Senator John Faulkner has
been critical of Textor's appointment on the grounds that it was
'inappropriate' for pollsters on either side of party politics to
be involved, Sydney Morning Herald, 1 April 1999.
- Sydney Morning Herald, 13 April 1999.
- M. Grattan, 'Collins staffer for NO vote', Sydney Morning
Herald, 1 April 1999. This report suggests that Elliott has
been appointed the ACM's national campaign director. The
distinction between the two is unclear as yet.
Appendix
9: Educational Organisations
Constitutional Centenary Foundation (CCF)
The CCF is an independent but (Commonwealth and
state) government-sponsored organisation committed to public
education on constitutional questions.(1) Founded after a
Constitutional Centenary Conference in April 1991 it maintains a
secretariat in Melbourne and has close links with Professor Cheryl
Saunders' Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at
Melbourne University. Saunders is deputy chair and the driving
force. CCF's current chair is the ABC chair, Donald McDonald, who
replaced Sir Ninian Stephen early in 1998.
The CCF is strictly neutral and non-partisan. It
produces educational materials, such as an annotated
constitution,(2) and conducts public forums and historical
re-enactments. It pioneered the idea of modern constitutional
conventions. As well as floating the idea of a people's convention,
prior to its adoption by the Liberal Party, it has sponsored and
conducted schools conventions for a number of years and local
constitutional conventions around Australia in 1997-98.
In 1998 it conducted a competition to design a
new Preamble, and launched its ideas at the National Press Club on
24 February 1999.(3) The CCF's report was later presented to the
Prime Minister.(4)
Issues Deliberation Australia (IDA)
IDA is an organisation, established to
facilitate public consultation and debate about major political
issues, that will conduct a Deliberative Poll on the referendum
issue in Canberra on 22-24 October. It was founded by Dr Pam Ryan,
an Adelaide academic with over 13 years experience working at the
University of Texas with Dr James Fishkin, the originator of the
idea of deliberative polling.
This event, Australia Deliberates: A Republic.
Yes or No?, will involve a random sample of about 300 Australian
citizens who will spend a weekend discussing the issues with each
other, experts and political leaders. Their opinions will be
surveyed before and after to see what impact the discussion has
had. The event has the support of both the YES and NO
organisations, will be televised by the ABC, and is also supported
by The Australian newspaper and the Australian National
University.(5),(6)
Endnotes
-
- J. Warhurst, 'The Constitutional Centenary Foundation and the
politics of constitutional reform', Australian Quarterly,
vol. 67, no. 3, Spring 1995, pp. 40-51.
- The Australian Constitution, Annotated text by Cheryl Saunders,
Constitutional Centenary Foundation, Melbourne, 1997.
- Constitutional Centenary Foundation, 'We the people of
Australia ... Ideas for a new preamble to the Australian
Constitution', CCF, February 1999.
- Contact: Constitutional Centenary Foundation, Level 2-723
Swanston St, Carlton, Victoria; 3053, Telephone: (03)-9349 1846
Facsimile: (03) 9349 1779
Email: ccf2001@ibm.net Web Site:
http://www.centenary.org.au
- Issues Deliberation Australia, News Conference, NSW Parliament
House Press Gallery, 2 May 1999; M. Steketee 'Educated guests
welcome the debate', Australian, 3 May 1999;
G. Greene, 'Forum may point way to a republic', Age,
4 May 1999.
- Contact: Pam Ryan: Ph: 08 8295 6112/0414 295 611; Email:
pamryan@aol.com
Issues Deliberation Australia, 28 South
Esplanade, P.O. Box 19, Glenelg, SA, 5045.
Appendix 10: Some
Additional Public Figures
There have been a number of important
contributions to the debate from persons not aligned to a
particular community organisation. They include:
-
- Professor Alan Atkinson, of the Department of History at the
University of New England, is the author of The Muddle-Headed
Republic (1993), which stresses the distinctive Australian
character of the monarchy.(1)
-
- Dr Mark McKenna, author of The Captive Republic
(1996), has been a significant advocate of the YES case in
newspaper articles and public addresses.(2) He has contributed to
the debate about the Preamble and his contribution was one of those
chosen by the CCF's Preamble Quest.(3) He is a member of the
Political Science Program at the Research School of Social
Sciences, Australian National University.
-
- Sir Anthony Mason, formerly Chief Justice of the High Court,
joined with McKenna and four leading legal scholars to propose to
the Attorney-General a model for the public nomination process.(4)
He is a Visiting National Fellow at the Law School, Australian
National University.
-
- Mr Les Murray, the distinguished poet, was asked by the Prime
Minister to assist him in drafting the preamble. Murray has long
been a republican and was a contributor to G. Dutton ed,
An Australian Republic? (1977).(5)
-
- Dr Jocelynne Scutt, feminist barrister, is a direct election
republican who has not joined the Real Republicans. Rather, under
the banner of Real Republicans, she advocates writing 'YES to a
directly elected president' on the ballot paper.(6)
-
- Rt Hon. Ian Sinclair, former Speaker of the House of
Representatives and former Leader of the National Party, has spoken
in favour of the republic.(7) He subsequently agreed to chair the
National Convention of Republicans in February 1999.
-
- Mr David Solomon, political and legal commentator, has
advocated a directly elected, US style president for almost
twenty-five years, since he wrote Elect the
Governor-General!(8)
-
- Professor George Winterton, Professor of Law at the University
of New South Wales, was an appointed delegate to Constitutional
Convention. He is the author of the classic text on Australian
republican government, Monarchy to Republic: Australian
Republican Government (1986).(9)
Endnotes
-
- Oxford University Press, 1993.
- E. G. M. McKenna, 'How the PM hijacked the soul of the
republic', The Age, 11 March 1999; 'Rhetoric obscures
wisdom of bipartisan model', Australian, 20 January 1999.
- CCF, 'We the people of Australia', p. 15.
- M. McKenna, Sir Anthony Mason, A. Stone, G. Williams, J.
Williams and G. Winterton, 'President must be the people's choice',
Australian, 16 December 1998; M. McKenna, 'Picking a
chief: chapter and verse', Canberra Times, 26 December
1998.
- L. Murray, 'The Flag Rave', in G. Dutton, ed., Republican
Australia?, op. cit., pp. 106-19.
- S. Powell, 'Ms Republic', Australian, 10 March 1999.
- 'Sinclair prods PM over the Republic', Sydney Morning
Herald, 24 December 1998.
- D. Solomon, Elect the Governor-General!, Nelson, 1976;
Coming of Age, University of Queensland Press, 1998.
- Oxford University Press, 1986; Reprinted with a new
introduction, Oxford University Press, 1994.