On Wednesday March 3, The Australian published a Newspoll. It was a wake up call to Republicans right around the country. The Newspoll suggested that 51% of Australians want a Republic, but that 55% will vote NO in November because they don't like the Republican model on offer.
In early November all enrolled Australians will have to vote in a Referendum. That Referendum will ask two things.
First, it will ask whether you want to adopt into the Australian Constitution a new Preamble. That preamble will be written in coming months by John Howard.
Second, the Referendum will ask whether you want to adopt into law the Bipartisan Appointment of a President model for a Republican Constitution.
Under that model, on 1 January 2001 Australia will become a Republic with a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament. The name put forward to that sitting must come from a list compiled from nominations by the public. This is known as the Bipartisan Appointment Model.
Many commentators have suggested that this model does not deliver the opportunity for democratic input that the Australian public want, and that it will be soundly defeated in the November Referendum.
Australia's present constitutional arrangements are safe. If safety is all you are interested in, then vote NO.
If you are interested in updating our constitutional arrangements to reflect who Australians are today - democratic, inclusive and egalitarian - then vote for a model that is both safe and achieves these reforms. Vote YES.
The Bipartisan Appointment will achieve these reforms: it will make our constitutional arrangements, our system of government reflect who we are: democratic, inclusive and egalitarian?
How?
First, by replacing the fundamentally discriminatory institution of
monarchy with a system of appointing our Head of State based on merit. Our
current system reserves that position for the oldest male of the Windsor
family, provided he is Anglican. Failing that, a Princess might get a look
in. This system is based on discrimination by age, sex and religion. It is
undemocratic, exclusive and discriminatory.
The Bipartisan Model offers a system of appointing the Head of State based on none of these criteria. It also avoids the pitfalls inherent in the Direct Election model while retaining and improving on the democratic input elements it involves.
In the Direct Election model, the public directly elects the President. One of the central problems with this model is the kind of Presidential candidate it would produce. Only the ALP and the Coalition have the political infrastructure and money that would be required to run such a campaign. A few wealthy individuals might have the money, but as the results of Independents (like Ross Perot) in American Presidential Campaigns have shown, money is nothing without polling-booth workers, on-the-ground support and general political infrastructure. So inevitably the Direct Election model would produce professional politicians as Presidential candidates. And yet 70% of Australians (another Newspoll) insist they do not want a 'politician' as their Head of State.
The Bipartisan Appointment model will not produce a professional politician as President. The President will be appointed by a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament. To get that support, a candidate must have the support of both major parties and some minor parties. No candidate aligned with any of those parties is ever going to get such multipartisan, across-the-board support. Nor has a government ever, in the history of Federated Australia, had the numbers to get one of its own up in this manner. The candidate has to be neutral.
If you want a party-political President, with all the political uncertainty that brings, then vote NO. If you don't want a politician, vote YES in November.
The Bipartisan Appointment model also has the beauty of creating a central shift to more inclusive democracy at the heart of the Australian system of government.
First, it provides a two-tiered reinforcement of existing democratic inputs. It allows for direct participation by the public in nominating candidates for the Presidency. It utilises our existing institutions of indirect democracy by involving our elected representatives - Federal MPs - in the selection process.
Second, it encourages multipartisan negotiation over the final choice for the Presidency. In practice, the Prime Minister will have to consult with at least the Leader of the Opposition - and probably the leaders of the minor parties - before putting a name to a joint sitting. This encourages inclusive, consultative processes at the heart of our system of government by forcing opposing parties to work together on such an important issue.
Third, there is an added bonus, a secret sweetener hidden within the YES model. The Government has agreed, that, as recommended by the 1998 Constitutional Convention, there will be another Constitutional Convention held 3-5 years after Australia becomes a Republic on 1 January 2001, if the YES vote gets up in November. This will provide an opportunity for ongoing democratic constitutional reform, for ordinary Australians to have their voices heard in the same way as they were heard in Canberra in early 1998.
This Daughter of ConCon will allow Direct Electionists to have another go at constitutional reform. Even after all the reasons above you may intend to support Direct Election, and vote NO in November. It may not be important to you that there is no united Direct Election model (in fact the proposals range from the complete Americanization of our system of government to reforming it modestly along Irish, Indian, French and even German lines). But voting NO on this basis insures that we remain with an inherently discriminatory, defunct system. It also throws away an opportunity for ongoing reform.
For Direct Electionists, voting YES will at least ensure a step in the right direction. It will ensure that we have an Australian, appointed on the basis of merit, as our Head of State. That is why, with an eye at further reform later, many Direct Election supporters - like Natasha Stott-Despoja and Dorothy McRae-McMahon - have already announced their intention to vote YES in November.
There will be, after all this discussion, some voters who will vote NO in November in the belief that this will register their disapproval with being asked such a question in the first place.
For some of these people, they will be annoyed because they think the YES case is the product of a political elite. It is not. In NSW the YES Case is run by a committee including these people:
The YES Case has broad support across the Australian population.
Other people will vote NO to register dissatisfaction with Australian politics in general. This Referendum is not about Australian politics in general. We are going to be asked a question about our principles: do we want to continue to support a sexist, ageist, sectarian institution as the hub of our constitutional arrangements? Is that what we are all about? The last time we were asked such broad questions about our identity was in 1967, when Australians were asked whether they wanted to support constitutional arrangements which required discrimination against Aborigines.
Still others will vote NO because they think the money could have been better spent elsewhere. That argument can always be run. If we always followed it, no good reform would ever be seen through. Voting YES won't give us the answer to drug problems. It won't reduce unemployment. It won't stop youth suicide, or defeat VSU. Neither will voting NO.
Voting YES in November will insure that our system of government is updated to reflect who we are and the values to which we aspire. Further reform may be required: there are opportunities provided for it in the YES model. Voting NO will not simply be a maintenance of the discriminatory, exclusive, undemocratic status quo, but a step backwards. The Republic will be off the political agenda. It's time to vote YES.
James Cockayne is NSW Co-Convenor of Young Australians for a Republic, and a founding member of The NSW YES Coalition. For more information you can contact him at [ jdc@tcm.com.au ].
Join the YAR Mailing List @ ListBot.
