TEN CRITICAL QUESTIONS IN THE REPUBLIC CAMPAIGN

John Warhurst

NOVEMBER 2003

CONTEXT: Senate Inquiry into the Republic; ARM has no preferred model; ARM advocates a plebiscite process

1. Why should there be another republican referendum?

Answer. Both sides in 1999 said there should be. It was voters' expectation. The NO case "vote no to this republic" slogan means that it is dishonest of them not to give the Australian people another referendum. What's more the public want a second referendum. A "Newspoll" last November reported that a majority want a referendum within five years.

2. Why don't republicans just accept that they lost in 1999 and give up and go away?

Answer. That's not how democracy works! Federation had its ups and downs in the 1890s. More recently taxation reform needed fifteen years and three attempts before it was successful.

3. Don't we already have an Australian Head of State in the person of the Governor-General?

Answer. No. The GG is the Queen's Representative. The Queen is our Head of State. We have only had an Australian GG regularly since the 1960s. They are a good thing and the more effective they are the better. But they are no substitute for the real thing. This will be an important issue since more Australians (95%) want an Australian Head of State than want an
Australian republic (70%). Work that one out!

4. Why doesn't the ARM just choose a model and get on with selling it to the Australian people?

Answer. It is more democratic to allow republicans to choose via a plebiscite. The plebiscite process will give the legitimacy that is necessary for the referendum to pass. That is, it might just convince most republicans to vote for the preferred model on the grounds that there has
been sufficient public discussion of the alternatives.

5. If a republic is inevitable why not just wait for it to happen painlessly and without effort?

Answer. An Australian republic is achievable but not inevitable. Nothing in politics or life is inevitable. Strike out the word inevitable. The republic has to be worked for. That is what the ARM is doing. The idea of inevitability has not served republicans well (since Bob Hawke said a republic was inevitable in 1991). It is just a get out clause for luke-warm republicans and a device for monarchists to hide behind.

6. Why not wait for the death of the Queen, the anniversary of Gallipoli, or some other "trigger"?

Answer. No. This will prevent necessary community debate prior to the decision. Our opponents will criticise any attempt to link the republic to a time-table, as they did in 1999. It is also another excuse for lethargy.

7. Why not just wait for a spontaneous republic in the absence of a groundswell?

Answer. This just won't happen. It is a version of the 'inevitability' argument. Democracy doesn't work that way. Public opinion has to be informed and the community has to be engaged in debate. That's how a successful campaigns operates. We have no reason to be apologetic. We already have majority opinion on our side. We have to ensure that
parliamentarians know that.

8. Will any republican model do?

Answer. No. But any responsible and popularly endorsed model will do. This may involve codification of the powers of the president and certainly involves careful consideration of the details. Our "Six Models" paper begins the job of careful consideration of the strengths and weaknesses of various models. Republicans must be prepared for this hard work.

9. Why not go straight to a referendum and forget the plebiscites? Isn't the plebiscite just a trick?

Answer. No. A plebiscite is not a trick. It is a democratic mechanism to ensure that the people get to choose. It is a way for the community to say to the parliament that we want them to treat this issue of a republic seriously. It is a threshold question. It can be used with other democratic mechanisms such as a constitutional convention.

10. Isn't constitutional reform too expensive? What about the cost?

Answer. Democracy is sometimes necessarily expensive. There are many other constitutional reform proposals, such as Senate Reform or Reconciliation, on the table. All nations sometimes change their constitutions and Australia does it by constitutional referendum. Nevertheless the ARM must consider all reasonable opportunities to moderate costs. This will in the future involve consideration of issues such as electronic voting and holding plebiscites and referendums concurrently with federal elections.