GENERAL JEFFREY GOVERNOR-GENERAL

By John Warhurst
The Canberra Times
27 June 2003

Major General Michael Jeffery is the first Australian born Governor-General from a military background. Though there were several such appointments from Britain. But military men have been common choices as state governors.

Jeffrey was governor of Western Australia from 1993 to 2000.

Former military officers have dominated state-level appointments. Chris Coulthard-Clark's study of the impact of the military on Australian politics, "Soldiers in Politics" (1996) calculated that 44% of the 96 occupants of the position of state governor from 1901-1995 were former full-time military officers. If part-timers are counted the figure of ex-military rises to a seemingly improbable 77%. The ex-military Governors-General are much fewer, and Coulthard-Clark counts only two: Gowrie and Slim. In that sense, Jeffery is not quite the blast from the past as Governor-General that some commentators have suggested.

Interestingly, Coulthard-Clark concludes his discussion of military Governors-General by predicting that: "the likelihood of further military appointments seems slender. The reason cannot be said to have been poor performances. Nor is it simply a case where a smart uniform, a straight back and good manners are judged no longer sufficient qualities in the position, notwithstanding that undoubtedly there has been considerably less emphasis on pomp and finery since the days of British appointees... The real reason appears to lie in the concerns created by the events of 1975, which have invested the governor-generalship with heightened sensitivity and profile."

Clearly times have changed. General Peter Cosgrove, the current Defence Force Chief of Staff was also mentioned as a possible Governor-General. This appointment is a measure of how much Australian attitudes to the military have altered in these troubled international times.

Michael Jeffery's military background is the primary consideration. But there are others. He is the first state governor since Gowrie to come to the position. The leap is an enormous one, equivalent to the difference between state and federal politics. It is not just a question of scale per se. It is more the range of issues and the profile of the job. The difference between governor and governor-general is probably greater even than the difference between premier and prime minister. Jeffrey is better off for the state experience but it is like going from state league footy to the national league. Some succeed. Others don't.

Jeffery is Western Australian born. The occupants of the senior national positions such as Prime Minister, High Court Judge and Governor-General
rarely come from outside the East Coast. So it is a positive step towards geographical diversity. This point is worth making given that in other ways, primarily the failure to appoint a woman, John Howard has consciously declined to strike a blow for diversity.

What difference does his military background make? The common word 'background' is particularly weak in this context. Saying that Dr Hollingworth comes from a church background would be equally insufficient. Rather it is more useful to say that Jeffery has spent all his adult life until retirement in 1993 living in a military culture. The military life is all encompassing, just like the religious life. Indeed in that sense they are quite similar. They begin in a similar fashion. The Australian Defence Force Academy, in its regimentation, discipline, hierarchy and organisation, is more like a seminary than a university.

Like priests, soldiers live together, work together and inculcate common values together. Religious leadership in a hierarchical church is much like military leadership because obedience is taken for granted. That is why bastardisation is a problem within the military, especially in training establishments. That is why, like religious leaders, military officers often have difficulty adapting to the consultative demands of leadership in a democracy.

Jeffery may be an exception. Indeed, there have been suggestions that he was notable as a dissenting voice within military circles on strategic matters. And he seems to be an affable person, though one with very strong opinions.

The military are generally conservative. This applies to matters to do with the monarchy and the republic so it is not surprising that he has declared himself to be a monarchist. During the 1999 republic campaign I was told at a meeting in Queanbeyan by the spouse of a serving member of the forces that they were suspicious of the republic because of the special loyalty of the military to the Crown. Republicans have never expected majority support from within the services for changing the constitution and have probably not fully recognised the particular needs of that sector of society.

A recent invitation to speak at ADFA led to several relevant factors being raised with me by staff and students. At a superficial level there is what I would call the 'pomp and ceremony' factor. This is an integral part of service life. Furthermore, apart from general military conservatism, many in the military do come, like Michael Jeffery, from a rural background. A disproportionate number of officers are country kids and may be more socially conservative than the general population even before they start their ADFA training. They also give greater attention on a day to day basis to the royal connection than any other sector of Australian society. Their daily life includes uniforms adorned by crowns and rituals and ceremonies punctuated by references to royalty. It would be interesting to note how often, for instance, the governor-general attends Duntroon in any one year compared to the ANU. The civilian style of a university is much further removed from vice-regal office than the military style of the defence forces. Republicans need to remember these differences and to make sure that their conversation with the military continues.

John.Warhurst@anu.edu.au
Professor Warhurst is chair of the Australian Republican Movement