Australian Republic Constitution
Australian Flag News Get Involved! Events Resources
Main Menu
ACM Home
About ACM
ACM News
Anthems
Afghan Court Martial
Book Reviews
The Commonwealth
Contact ACM
Convenor's Column
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Cost of Republicanism to the Taxpayer
Crowned Republic
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Event News
Federalism and the Mining Tax
Fiji
Flag: Keep The Flag
Governor of New South Wales
Head of State
Keating-Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
Knights & Dames
Latest News and Opinions
Links
Mate for a Head of State
Media and monarchy
Nile Inquiry
Opinion Polling
Orthodoxy and Monarchy
People's Republic?
Plebiscites
Prince Andrew
Prince Charles
Prince Harry
Prince Philip
Prince William & Catherine
Prince William In Australia
Prince William: The Early Years
Racist Republic?
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Resources
Return the Governor
Royal Commissions
Royal Finances
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
The Succession
2020 Summit
Join our Mailing List
See our selection of videos from across the world:-
ACM Videos
AussieCrownTV - ACM's own TV channel:
Aussie Crown TV
Follow ACM on Facebook:
Facebook
Self Funded Monarchy
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Finances
Royal Finances
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Head of State
Prince Philip
Prince Philip
Special Caribbean Report: Crown & Commonwealth

      Crown

The Commonwealth
The Commonwealth
Prince Harry
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Prince Andrew
Knights & Dames
Knights & Dames
The King's Speech: read the book, see the film.

The King's Speech

Watch the 2010 Neville Bonner Oration: Tony Abbott.
Tony Abbott
Nile Inquiry
Royal Commissions
Royal Commissions
Opinion Polls

 

Plebiscites
Plebiscites
2020 Summit
2020 Summit
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Afghan Court Martial
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Mate for a Head of State
Mate for a Head of State
Racist Republic?
Racist Republic
A People's Republic?
A People's republic?
Keating Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
The Keating Turnbull Republic
Crowned Republic
Crowned Republic
Polls
Republicans' Best Asset?
Is David Flint ( National Convenor since 1998) the republicans best asset, as some claim?
ACM Home arrow Reserve Powers of the Crown arrow Would our constitution have been different?

Would our constitution have been different? Print E-mail
Written by John Paul   
Monday, 10 October 2011

[In this fifth instalment of his essay on the 1975 dismissal of the Whitlam government, John Paul examines, with the benefit of Australian precedents, whether our constitution would have been different had it been drafted after 1911 when the power sof the House of Lords were curtailed.]


Image

 ...if The Constitution Had Been Drafted In 1911 Or Later?


It is a great shame that the Australian constitution was not written in 1911 and not prior to this,” argues a contributor to the ACM Facebook page

His presumption is that the Founding Fathers would have treated Westminster
s Parliament Act of that year as their lodestar and consequently the Senates powers respecting Money Bills would have been drafted to replicate those of the House of Lords from 1911. 

I would not be so confident. 

I would contend that the fears entertained by the smaller colonies at being overwhelmed by the larger colonies in any federal compact would still have been a potent force driving them in their insistence on a Senate as powerful as the one enshrined in the Australian Constitution proclaimed in 1901. 

And in any case if the federation of the Australian colonies had been deferred for more than ten years,  there might not have been any kind of agreement to federate. 

Alfred Deakin contended that the federation of the Australian colonies as he had witnessed it had been secured by
a series of miracles and these might not have come into play in 1911 and thereafter. 

A noted historian of the Conventions in the 1890s, Professor John La Nauze, once claimed in my hearing that if the Australian Labour Party had been able to exert a more powerful influence than proved to be the case in the 1890s but was very much the case in 1911 there might well not have been any kind of agreement to federate.





....some compelling Australian precedents....



There were moreover precedents in the Australian States for an administration in control of the Lower House bowing to the will of an Upper House which, empowered to deny Supply, did so. 

In each case the Lower House was dissolved.  This occurred in Victoria in 1947 when the Labor Premier, Mr John Cain, felt he had no choice but to go to the people.  It occurred in Tasmania in 1948 when the Labor Premier, Mr Robert (later Sir Robert) Cosgrove, felt he had no choice in similar circumstances but to follow John Cains example. 

And it was repeated in Victoria in 1952 when the Country Party Premier, J. G. B. (later Sir John) McDonald, governing with Liberal Party support from the corner benches, advised a dissolution when the Legislative Council, controlled by the Labor Party and some dissident Liberals, denied Supply to his administration.[1] 

The subsequent election, which Labor had been instrumental in forcing, gave that party in Victoria its first opportunity to govern without being dependent on other parties or Independents. 

Whitlam himself set his own precedent in 1974 by obtaining a double dissolution on the strength of six Bills which the Senate had failed to pass and which were thought to have fallen within the provisions of Section 57 of the Constitution.  When the Appropriation Bills were before the House of Representatives on 4th April Whitlam declared:

If the Senate rejects any money Bill . . . I shall certainly wait upon the Governor-General and I shall advise the Governor-General not merely to dissolve the House of Representatives but to dissolve the Senate as well. . .  . . .  If the Senate rejects them [the Appropriation Bills], not only is there a powerful argument of those matters which the Senate has already twice rejected and been twice passed by the House of Representative but also there will be the additional powerful argument for the Prime Minister to give to the Governor-General that the Senate is deliberately withholding Supply. . .  [2]  (Squared parenthesis supplied)


When the Senate on 10th April 1974 moved an amendment only to allow Supply to his administration upon the Government submitting to an election for the House of Representatives, the Government Leader in the Senate, Senator Murphy, moved

That the question be now put adding:  "If that motion is defeated, the Government will treat that as a denial of Supply.  If that motion is carried and this absurd amendment is carried, the Government will treat that also as a denial of Supply.  In either event, the Prime Minister, who is conversant with the absurd proposition which has been put here, will call forthwith upon His Excellency the Governor-General.[3]

While Murphy attacked the motion and the amendment as
absurd he did not question the consequences of a denial of Supply by the Senate any more than the Gorton Government in 1970 could have avoided the consequences of the Labor Partys opposition to the carrying of that Governments Budget if a sufficient number of Senators had joined them in rejecting it. 

Furthermore neither Whitlam nor Murphy asserted in April 1974 that the Appropriation Bills had to be brought to a vote rejecting them outright and defeated on that vote before there could be any question of the Prime Minister seeking a dissolution.  This was a spurious argument favoured by Whitlam in October-November 1975.
    


[1]               Sir John Kerr discussed all these three denials of Supply followed by dissolutions in his Matters for Judgment, (1978), pp. 126-32.  This author also discussed them specifically in a chapter entitled “Governors and Politicians:  the Australian States principally in the 1940s and 1950s”, in D. A. Low (ed.), Commonwealth Heads and Political Crises:  Commonwealth Episodes, 1945-85, Macmillan 1988, pp. 37-56.

[2]               Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. H. of R. 88, p. 1054.

[3]               Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. S. 59, p. 893.

 
< Prev   Next >
ROYAL VISIT 2014

Image

The Book Depository
Image
Image
Prince William: The Early Years
Prince Charles

Prince Charles

Constitutional Monarchies & Republics Compared

Image


Defend the Constitution and Flag
Australian Election Watch

10th Anniversary Neville Bonner Oration

11th Anniversary and Appeal

Crowned Republic 

   Keep The Australian Flag
Return the Governor to Government House
The Succession
The Succession
The Governor of New South Wales
Governor of New South Wales
Fiji
Fijian soldier
Media and Monarchy
Media and Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
Royal Yacht Britannia
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Events
December 2017 January 2018
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 48 1 2
Week 49 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Week 50 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Week 51 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Week 52 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Week 53 31