Lindsay Fox Address to the Constitutional Convention Old Parliament House, Canberra Wednesday 11 February, 1998 Lindsay Fox is an ARM Delegate from Victoria

A couple of months ago, I drove a B-double truck from Melbourne to Adelaide. It was a Kenworth truck with 525 horsepower, an 18-speed gearbox, a total length of 75 feet and a gross tonnage of 72 tonne. I departed from the Melbourne depot at 5.30 in the morning with my co-driver - a fellow called David Spencer. We got out on the highway towards Ballarat and pulled up at Pykes Creek Reservoir. At Pykes Creek Reservoir there was a little roadhouse. David said, "We should go in there. It's a good place to eat and have a cup of coffee." So we pulled up this big rig and stepped into the roadhouse. In the corner was a little old truck driver who had been driving up and down the highways of Australia for the last 30 or 40 years. He was just finishing his bacon and eggs. He looked. We came in. We sat down. He picked up his cup of coffee, looked at me and said, "Things must be tough at Linfox if you've got to be driving." Perception often overtakes reality.

One of the assets in my business is my education by practical experience rather than by my having an academic career. I want to put you people to a test and also you people up in the gallery. Most of the customers I deal with start with the letter 'c' - Coles, Coca Cola, CSR, Caltex, Carlton United, Castrol - and we are currently in a Constitutional Convention. I would like you to pick up your right hand and make the letter 'c'. You people in the gallery as well, because this is for you more than for anyone else. It is not difficult. Would you please lift your right hand and make the letter 'c'? Watch me closely. Come on, it is not hard. Now, touch your chin. Come on. What did I tell you to do? I told you to touch your chin, but you related to what you saw and you touched your cheek, not your chin.

We have a huge obligation to try to show in the simplest manner to the Australian people a story that they can follow; not about what they need to read but about what they can see and understand. I came to this Convention with a view that the Australian people wanted a republic. This is also my position. To achieve this end, I looked at what I believed was a simple approach. Firstly, the Queen to be replaced as head of state by an Australian. Her or his title could be Governor-General or President. We have now agreed that 'President' should be the title. Secondly, how to appoint or dismiss the Governor-General or president to and from office. In essence, that the Governor-General's job should be transferred to the office. Thirdly, changing the Constitution to allow the implementation of that simple change.

If I had a toothache, I would go to a dentist. If I needed surgery, the first thing I would ask is who the best surgeon was to take the scalpel and fix what I needed. Here we have the best constitutional lawyers in the land. They should be able to come up with the appropriate answer because, if I were doing these three processes in my own business, I would have them well and truly covered in a very short period of time without using 152 people to come up with that outcome.

That means that the issue to resolve is the appointment or the dismissal of the president. I believe this would involve a joint sitting of the House of Representatives and the Senate to elect the head of state. I guess this is the model most favoured by the Australian Republican Movement. A candidate would be nominated by the Prime Minister and seconded by the Leader of the Opposition, possibly after many hundreds of names were submitted by the public and state and local governments and organisations, and considered by a special parliamentary committee. The head of state would need to be elected by a two-thirds sitting of the parliament and this would mean that, to become head of state, the nominated person would need a majority of the representatives of the Australian people to support him or her.

As for the dismissal, there may be extraordinary circumstances in which it is necessary for the head of state to be removed. The favoured ARM position is for removal of the president by a simple majority of the House of Representatives on a motion from the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister's action would need to be presented to a meeting of the House of Representatives for ratification within 30 days of the removal of the president. This ensures that the Prime Minister's action must be ratified by the people's House. This model deserves our full consideration and it is up to us to choose the one which best suits the constitutional arrangements.

Let me tell you about the judgment of Solomon - not my mate Solly Lew, or Solomon Lew, of Coles Myer fame, but from 1 Kings, chapter 3, verses 16 to 28. Two women were arguing about the rightful ownership of a child. "Bring me my sword," said the King. A sword was brought into the King's presence. "Cut the living child in two," the King said, "and give half to one and half to the other." The first woman said, "If it please you, my Lord, give her the child." The other said, "She will belong to neither of us. Cut him up." Then the King gave his decision. "Give the child to the first woman and do not kill him. She is his mother." All Israel came to hear of the judgment that the King had pronounced and they held the King in awe, recognising that he possessed divine wisdom in dispensing justice.

Over the next few days, we need to act with the wisdom of Solomon and the commitment of the first woman, who was prepared to give up the child rather than let him be cut in half. We need to create an outcome in the interests of all Australian people, and some of us need to take a leaf from the first woman. Let us go forward with a republic for Australia and make our two-week commitment well worthwhile.