Achieving the Republic

Speech to the 118th National Convention of the Australian Workers Union, Jupiters Casino, Gold Coast, Queensland

John Warhurst
25 February 2003

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Australian Republican Movement's principle aim is for Australia to replace the monarchy with an Australian head of state. It suffered one defeat but it has rebuilt itself since that 1999 referendum loss. It has reflected upon the reasons for that loss and it is now a grass-roots community organisation determined to convince the Commonwealth government to give Australians the second chance that they want. The ARM's first priority is a plebiscite on the general question of whether Australia should become a republic with an Australian head of state.

The trade union movement has been a supporter of the republican movement. But no leading trade unionist has yet played a particularly prominent role in our campaigns. Furthermore it is almost certain that in 1999 only a minority of trade unionists voted Yes. The Yes campaign failed to win those safe Labor seats in which trade unionists predominate. These deficiencies in the republican movement must be rectified if success is to be achieved.

The trade union movement has much to offer the republican movement. First, it can create a more knowledgeable citizenry among its own members Secondly, it can assist in reinvigorating the Labor Party's republican commitment. Thirdly, it can participate energetically in forthcoming campaigns for the republic. Finally, individual unionists are much needed as members of the ARM.

ACHIEVING THE REPUBLIC

Introduction: the republic and trade unions

The republican movement needs the support of trade unions and individual trade unionists if we are to achieve our goal of an Australian head of state. There can be no doubt about that because trade unions represent such a large segment of the Australian population.

The Australian Republican Movement (ARM) has had that support in the past from trade union leaders. For instance, Australian Council of Trade Unions president, Jennie George, was elected on the ARM ticket in NSW to the 1998 Constitutional Convention. Another union leader, Peter Sams, was a nominee of the Commonwealth government. At the 1999 republic referendum the trade union movement supported the YES case. Furthermore through the Labor Party affiliated trade unions have had a commitment since 1991 to an Australian republic.

But it is fair to say that no trade unionist has yet been at the forefront of the modern republican movement, either within the ARM or elsewhere. More importantly, the evidence suggests that unionists as a whole probably did not support the republic in 1999. Certainly the Yes vote failed to carry those safe Labor electorates in which blue-collar trade unionists are strongly represented.

The Australian Republican Movement

The ARM has been a success story since the defeat of the Republic referendum because we are not only still alive but we are thriving. Since November 1999 we have recreated ourselves, maintaining the best features of our movement while doing many things somewhat differently.

We have grown from a small 'ginger' group into a national community organisation over the twelve years since our creation in Sydney in 1991. We are now a fully democratic grass-roots movement reliant for its active existence on its membership base.

Where have we come from? The ARM was conceived in late 1990 and made its first public appearance in July 1991 (Turnbull 1993). Its first committee was chaired by the writer Thomas Keneally, and comprised fourteen Sydney-based republicans, including the most well-known Malcolm Turnbull. In April 1993 Paul Keating, recently re-elected, announced that Turnbull would chair a Republic Advisory Committee (RAC). That committee reported in October 1993 (Commonwealth of Australia 1993).

The 1990s were a heady period for the ARM. The Keating government committed itself in 1993 to a republic by 2001 and the then ARM chair, Turnbull, lawyer and merchant banker, became a government insider when he was chosen to head the RAC. After the Howard government took office in March 1996 the ARM no longer had a sympathetic ally in Canberra. But it operated in an invigorating campaign environment with elections in November-December 1997 for the membership of the Constitutional Convention, the Convention itself in February 1998, and finally the Republic referendum on 6 November 1999 (Turnbull 1999; Vizard 1998; Barns 2002; McAllister 2001).

The three years since then have been very different. The government remains
unenthusiastic and the Prime Minister has discouraged discussion within the
Coalition parties. The Labor Opposition, formally committed to a republic, did propose a series of plebiscites on the Republic as part of its platform for the November 2001 federal elections. Nevertheless the issue has featured only sporadically on the public agenda. For many the issue is dead though public opinion polls continue to show that a clear majority of Australians are republican in sentiment (Australian 15 November 2002). In fact 95% of Australians want an Australian head of state and a majority want to revisit the issue within five years.

Rebuilding the ARM as a Community Organisation

After the 1999 defeat the ARM went through a searching process of introspection and rebuilding. The first six months of 2000 were spent debating the future and agreeing on the constitutional structure of a new organisation. Everything was on the table including the name of the organisation. Eventually it was decided to keep the 'brand name' but the new constitution produced a new structure. The organisation, now smaller, was managed by a new national director, Jim Terrie, operating with the support of volunteers out of a pro bono Sydney office. Terrie remains the only paid ARM employee.

Elections for a new national committee were held in August 2000. The national committee now comprised 8 members directly elected by the whole membership, a youth member elected by the whole youth membership and 8
ex-officio state and territory conveners heading elected state and territory councils. The new committee was representative of a broader range of republicans, including a number of 'names', such as Rev Tim Costello, then Democrats' deputy leader Natasha Stott Despoja and young lawyer Jason Li, from outside the former ARM. The new chair, Greg Barns, had been director in 1999. He believed the ARM now had to listen to the community and debate the issues "in church halls, rotary groups, shop-fronts and party meetings. Its going to be a whole lot of work and not a lot of glory" (Steketee 2000). The two deputy chairs were former Labor senator Susan Ryan and young DFAT officer Anne Witheford, the ACT convener and Constitutional Convention delegate. Other significant new leaders included the NSW state convener, Rev Dorothy McRae McMahon. Witheford was later replaced by Richard Fidler, now director of comedy at the ABC.

The ARM needed to rebuild its membership, which had fallen from about 8, 000 to 1500 and was still below 3, 000 in August 2000. The strategy had to be to grow the grass-roots. It also had to be inclusive of all republicans. The first step in achieving this was a change in objective from a single parliamentary appointment of the president model to a decision to leave the choice of model to the Australian people. The ARM now aims to build bridges and to represent all republicans.

The next step was to develop a new image. The new slogan, "Our Republic: The next step" was build around the Centenary of Federation year in 2001.
The ARM emphasised the comparisons between the struggle for Federation in
the 1890s, with its defeats, lulls and pitfalls along the way and the struggle for an Australian Head of State in the new millennium (see the ARM membership leaflet distributed today and the Arm web site www.republic.org.au).

Barns personally undertook to take the ARM's message to rural Australia through 'barn-storming' tours accompanied by a journalist from The Australian newspaper. In April 2002, for instance, he visited Mackay, Bribie Island, and Toowoomba as well as Brisbane and the Gold Coast on a single short visit to Queensland.

In September 2002 a second election was held and a new executive was elected. John Warhurst, professor of political science at the Australian National University, became the new chair and Jason Li joined Susan Ryan as a deputy chair. Neither Barns nor Turnbull stood for those elections and so
ceased to be members of the National Committee. A sea change of sorts had
occurred.

Changing National ARM Strategies

The decision to change our strategies was driven by a number of factors. First, we thought through the implications of the defeat of the referendum in 1999. The ARM had been accused of being elitist. This was an unfair criticism when you compare us to our opponents. But was difficult to shake off and trade unionists were probably among those put off by it. This public perception had to be changed. While we would always value and need prominent supporters, we also had to ensure that there was an equivalently strong base of support in the community.

One of the other lessons from 1999 was that we were strongest in inner metropolitan seats and weaker in outer metropolitan, provincial and rural electorates.

Furthermore republicans were divided. In particular there was the trio of Phil Cleary, Ted Mack and Clem Jones known as the Real Republicans. Mack and Cleary were members of the official NO committee. There had to be reconciliation among republicans for there ever to be success.

Secondly, the environment was now quite different. There was no campaign as such to run. And there was no money other than any we raised through
membership fees, fundraising functions and donations. There could be no paid public relations though there were PR professionals among the membership who were happy to be called upon.

Thirdly, there were new activists within the organisation more attuned to the grass-roots strategies of the new social movements, such as the women's
and green movement. These new members were probably inclined towards direct election of the president.

Current ARM Strategies to Achieve the Republic

Current ARM strategy has a number of elements. Our first priority is to continue to build our grass-roots organisation. Our particular focus is on those parts of Australia outside the inner metropolitan areas (where our level of support is high and virtually impregnable). Where possible we set up new branches in outer-metropolitan areas, like Parramatta and Cronulla in Sydney, and in regional areas like Armidale in NSW. We have a very strong branch here on the Gold Coast. We are also aware of the need to build greater support among women and young people. In 2003 we have made young people our first priority.

Secondly, we continue to maintain contact with Commonwealth parliamentarians, in whose hands the immediate future of the issue rests. We do this both formally through submissions to committees where possible and informally by working with back-benchers. It is helpful to have one sitting Liberal MP, Senator Marise Payne, and two former Labor MPs, Susan Ryan and Chris Schacht on our National Committee. We remain absolutely non-partisan as a matter of basic principle and we are in the process of forming a cross-party parliamentary group in Canberra.

In trying to achieve our goal of a republic we have tried to balance the longer term with more immediate goals. Our immediate goal is a plebiscite, rather than a referendum, at the soonest possible date (realistically this will not occur until after the 2004 federal election, but we are pressing the political parties to declare their policies for that election). This plebiscite or non-binding vote would ask the general question whether or not Australians support becoming a republic. The longer-term goal of another Republic referendum realistically will not occur much before 2009, a decade after the previous referendum.

There are a number of limitations to what we can do. The first is relative poverty. Raising money through donations in the absence of a campaign is not easy. We still need more members to balance our books. This lack of money can be overcome by all of the usual unfunded activities, such as visiting schools, letter-writing and holding community stalls. Another strategy is to participate in alliances or in activities organised by others. There have been two recent examples of such activities. The ARM took up the invitation issued by the organisers of The Peoples Conference at Corowa in December 2001. Barns spoke officially and many ARM members participated. Only last November the ARM jointly sponsored a major conference in Brisbane with The Australian newspaper and Griffith University on Australian Constitutional Futures: The Nature of our Future Nation.

The second difficulty is trying to take advantage of media opportunities without being trapped into misrepresentation of our core message. Recent events involving the Royal Family and the Governor-General are minefields for us because cheap publicity can be tempting but dangerous. It is counter-productive if mainstream Australia is offended and it also upsets our members. Even opinion pieces by ARM writers are hostage to headlines and accompanying cartoons that distort the message. For instance, my first opinion piece as ARM chair was illustrated by a cartoon linking the republic to Prince Charles and the Queen in a way the text had not done (Warhurst 2002)

A third issue surrounds the use of the Internet for communication in a grass-roots organisation. The Internet is much cheaper for us to use but communicating with members by e-mail tends to disenfranchise a significant minority who do not have Internet access. We maintain an uneasy compromise on this matter by mixing paper newsletters with e-mail lists.

Summary of the Situation

The ARM is a medium-sized organisation rich in talent and enthusiasm among
its members but poor financially. We are tagged as elitist and our membership is heavily inner-metropolitan and white-collar. We are still identified with the 1999 loss. Our goal has the support of the Labor Party, the Greens and the Democrats but not yet of the two Coalition parties. But we represent the view of the clear majority of Australians even if the support of many of them for an Australian Head of State is unenthusiastic and lethargic. They are our strengths and weaknesses.

Our strategy is to build an organisation with the spread and strength to campaign effectively whenever another opportunity comes. At the same time we want to do our bit to bring about that opportunity as soon as possible through encouraging our parliamentary supporters to act. Initially this must be in the Senate.

While circumstances such as world events and Australian political leadership remain unhelpful to republicans the ARM will take the opportunity to rebuild. We need a larger membership, especially in those electorates that voted No in 1999. We need majority support in all major political parties. We need a continuing presence at all levels in the community. While we understand that an Australian head of state is a long-term project, we are committed to the achievable short-term objective of a plebiscite to confirm majority community support for the idea.

Final Appeal: what can trade unions do for the republican movement?

Trade unions, including the Australian Workers Union, have a great deal to offer the republican movement at a number of levels. In return I would hope that the ARM stands for a goal, a non-hereditary head of state open to Australians only, that appeals to the trade union movement.

So what do unions offer republicans? First, unions offer an avenue for citizenship education in general and education about the republic in particular. Until Australians know more about our current system of government then republicans will find it extremely difficult to make the argument for change. This applies to trade unionists. Our organisation stands willing to participate in such civics education. You just have to ask us. We can provide educational materials and we can provide speakers.

Secondly, unions are extremely well placed to invigorate republicanism within the ranks of the Labor Party. The ARM would like to see debate within the party about all the aspects of the republic debate remaining so far unresolved. The outstanding matters include the type of republic, especially whether our head of state should be elected or appointed, and the means by which we should reach another referendum, such as a plebiscite, another constitutional convention or another parliamentary committee. Perhaps it will be a mixture of all three.

Thirdly, the ARM hopes that the campaigning resources of the union movement will be activated to support republican campaigns as they support Labor campaigns. The first campaign is likely to be a plebiscite. While the final and crucial campaign will be a second referendum. We believe that should occur no later than 2009.

Finally, the ARM needs unionists as members and leaders. I would be absolutely delighted if some of you choose to become committed to our cause.

References

Barns, G 2002 "The 1999 Yes Case", in J. Warhurst and M.Mackerras (eds), Constitutional Politics: The Republic Referendum and the Future, University of Queensland Press

Commonwealth of Australia 1993 An Australian Republic, The Report of the Republic Advisory Committee, 2 volumes

McAllister, I 2001 "Elections without Cues: the 1999 Australian Republic Referendum", Australian Journal of Political Science, 36 (2)

Steketee, M 2000 "Republican Heirs", The Australian, August 19-20

Turnbull, M 1993 The Reluctant Republic, William Heinemann Australia

Turnbull, M 1999 Fighting for the Republic, Hardie Grant Books

Vizard, S 1998 Two Weeks in Lilliput, Penguin

Warhurst J 2002 "Republicans must commit themselves to a long haul", Sunday Telegraph, September 22