The first duty of the members of parliament chosen at the election is to ensure the orderly transition of government. As a new government emerges, the most important consideration to bear in mind is that our sound and sophisticated constitutional system has within it the means to ensure that this orderly transition of government is done peacefully and fairly, all the while ensuring the will of the people will prevail.
In the meantime, the suggestion the Governor-General has a conflict of interest because of her daughter's marriage to Bill Shorten, a parliamentary secretary, is at least premature and probably cannot be sustained.But because this has been raised, the Governor-General has, quite correctly, sought legal advice on the claim.
[ Governor-General Lord Gowrie: importnat precedent ]
When and if she comes to act under the discretionary powers of the Australian Crown (the reserve powers) she will no doubt act in accordance with that advice.In the unlikely event the legal advisers conclude there is a conflict of interest, she may stand aside as Governor-General.She may also do so for more abundant caution and to protect the office. Peter Hollingworth did.
The powers of the Crown would then be exercised either by one of the senior state governors acting as administrator of the commonwealth under his or her roving commission from the Queen, or another person, such as a deputy appointed to act on her behalf.Under the Constitution, the executive power of the commonwealth is formally exercised by the Governor-General, and accordingly, Her Excellency will play a significant role in the formation of the next government.
But we are at some distance from the Governor-General being required to act under the reserve powers in the unlikely event this occurs.
For some time, and at least until the parliament meets, which could be as late as November, the Governor-General will no doubt act on the advice of the caretaker prime minister.
[To continue reading this, click on the "read More" link below ]
In 2009 Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) held our inaugural Neville Bonner Memorial Prize, a speaking competition for schools. The competition is an integral part of our Eduction Project, of which this site is the centre piece.
[ Neville Bonner, our first Aboriginal Australian Senator]
Held last year only in Sydney, this year we are expanding the competition across the country. Competitions will be held in the major cities as well as regional areas (wherever volunteers can be found).
The winner of each regional competition will be eligible to participate in the national competition to be held at ACM's National Conference on the 27th of November 2010 at The Menzies Hotel in Sydney.
The national winners' prizes will be presented by ACM's first Executive Director, The. Hon. Tony Abbott MHR, at present Leader of the Opposition.
Please contact the National Office on 02 9251 2500 02 9251 2500 or
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
for further information or to secure your school's place.
Australian National Flag Day will be celebrated across our nation on Friday, 3 September, 2010.
This day commemorates the first occasion when our national flag was flown, on 3 September 1901 when Prime Minister Edward Barton announced the winning design from a public competition to select our new nation’s flag. 32,823 entries were received with five of the designs being identical.
The winners, three teenagers, a woman and a man shared the honour of creating Australia’s chief national symbol, the Australian National Flag.
I encourage you to conduct or to participate in an Australian flag raising ceremony to celebrate this day, the 109th anniversary of our national flag of “Stars and Crosses”.
The main Sydney ceremony, with Woolooware High School big band will be held at lunchtime on:
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL FLAG DAY,
Friday lunchtime, 3 September
Martin Place Amphitheatre,
11.45am to 1.30pm
WAVE YOUR FLAG!
Our flag represents our nation when it is flown both in Australia and across the world. This day is a wonderful opportunity for us to reflect on the how our flag unites us as a nation and our pride in our achievements.
Recognition will be given to the symbols of Australia's history and heritage evidenced by The Flag. The Southern Cross representing our geographical position in the southern hemisphere; the Commonwealth Star, emblem of our federation of States and federal territories and the three crosses, St George, St Andrew and St Patrick representing the principles on which our nation is based including, parliamentary democracy, rule of law and freedom of speech.
Information about Flag Day around Australia can be found on the web site for the Australian National Flag Association at www.australianflag.org.au HOME OF THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL FLAG.
John Vaughan
National Spokesman and Vexillographer
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL FLAG ASSOCIATION INC
245 Castlereagh Street, Sydney - T 02 9264-8188 –
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
With all the gloom and hysteria about a hung parliament, this election is providing one clear benefit.
It will probably break the authoritarian control a majority government can exercise in the House of Representatives. This has been a flaw in the Australian adaption of the Westminster model, and thus in our constitutional system.
I cannot recall the House of Commons ever being degraded to the supine assembly that the House of Representatives too often became in recent years.
[ Will it be like this?]
With its powers removed and its members made impotent, the chamber too substituted infantile abuse for serious and robust debate. Question time would often be an embarrassing charade.
School children are sometimes brought to Canberra to see the Parliament. Would they have seen the behaviour and the obvious lies in question time as the way to behave?
...appalling question time...
The practice of a government member asking – often reading - questions which he or she claims untruthfully to be without notice brings contempt on Parliament.
So is the practice of a minister of the Crown reciting the time wasting formula: “‘ I thank the honourable member for his /her question,” followed by reading a far too long political campaign answer.
The Standing Orders should require members not to read their questions, answers or speeches and that any paper they are referring to be available to be tabled if any member calls for this.
One of the worst practices on both sides is the control by the whips as to which members may ask a question. That any member actually submits himself or herself to this control casts doubt on his or her independence.
If a minority government achieves anything it will make the House a genuine part of the legislature, not a rubber stamp of the executive which as we know from recent experience can be as small as a four person politburo.
...proposals for reform...
[ To continue reading this column, click on "Read more" below ]
It seems that three independent MP’s may decide who will form the Federal government. They are Bob Katter, the member for Kennedy in Queensland, and the NSW independents, Tony Windsor, the member for New England, and Robert Oakeshott, the member for Lyne.
They all represent electorates which were strongly opposed to the 1999 referendum on the politicians’ republic. Kennedy recorded a 70.21% vote against the republic, New England 67.39% and Lyne 61.59%.
[ Bob Katter, Tony Windsor & Robert Oakeshott ]
I had some dealings with Bob Katter a few years ago: he is an impressive MP, on top of the issues, and prepared to adopt unfashionable positions, for example in relation to agricultural trade. (They are positions which are curiously unfashionable only in Australia and are established government policy in the US, EU, Japan and other countries.)
...republican...
As far as I know, only Mr. Oakeshott is a republican, and challenges the proposition that the Governor-General is Head of State . But in 1997, he told the NSW Parliament "I am a passionate member of the National Party,” the National Party being a staunch supporter of our constitutional system.
Incidentally he told The Australian’s Imre Salusinszky (6/8/08) that the reason for his decision to leave the NSW Parliament and contest Lyne as an independent was because of " his repeated sightings in Sydney recently of a man he has never met - academic, monarchist and former Australian Broadcasting Authority head David Flint."
"He's high up in the Liberal Party and it was like a ghost telling me to stand as an independent," Mr Oakeshott said.
(I would think that the leaders of the Liberal Party would be surprised to know that I am “high up”.)
I again had an opportunity to attend and participate in the 2010 Western Region Schools’ Constitutional Convention. The Convention is organised every year by John Vithoulkas, a teacher at Taylors Lakes Secondary College, with the assistance of staff and students. The Convention is part of the Schools’ Constitutional Conventions program which started in 1995.
The Schools’ Constitutional Convention program is aimed at increasing younger Australians’ knowledge and appreciation about the Australian Constitution. Participants of the regional conventions can apply to attend a State Convention at State Parliament in October 2010. Participants of the State Conventions can apply to attend a Federal Convention in Canberra in March 2011.
A feature of the Convention is a debate between two speakers – one supporting the Australian Constitution and the other supporting a change to the Constitution (and therefore a change from Australia status as a constitutional monarchy to a politicians’ republic). This year I spoke again in favour of retaining Australia’s current Constitution while Simon Bateman, Convenor of the Australian Republican Movement in Victoria, spoke in favour of constitutional change.
After the debate, as in previous years, students are asked to vote on Australia’s constitutional arrangements as would occur in a referendum. This year – as in previous years – students voted overwhelmingly (over 71%) to retain the Australian Constitution and defeat a politicians’ republic (whatever model that may be).
The result this year was similar to that of previous years where students (it should be noted from a variety of backgrounds) voted by a significant margin to retain the current Constitution. My experience this year confirmed, once again, to me that young Australians are able to critically think about the Constitution. In addition, young Australians are genuinely interested in the Constitution and Australia’s future and understand that the two are inextricably linked.
[This is a column written by the dynamic young Dominion Chairman of the Monarchist League of Canada, Robert (Bob) Finch. He recently met The Queen on Her Majesty's recent homecoming to Canada. Mr.Finch describes this as a "truly special moment in his life". Australians will understand that. ]
I couldn't help but ask myself what on earth are Australian republican politicians afraid of when it comes to championing their supposedly-beloved cause? In case you weren't aware, Australians are in the midst of a federal election campaign pitting Prime Minister Julia Gillard (a republican) vs. Tony Abott (a monarchist, who is the former executive director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy).
It's become obvious that republicanism is no longer the chic thing it used to be Down Under. Those advocating an end to the time-tested monarchy have replaced their "I am a republican" mantra with "I am a republican, but..." Call 'em republican-lites.
[ A truly special moment ]
Of course, republicans in Canada (yes, we've got a few here, too) also cite the end of The Queen's reign as the time when they think Canadians will all of a sudden wake up and magically become republicans. Their thinking is flawed.
Republicans in both Australia and Canada are counting on one thing and one thing only: an unpopular Prince Charles. Their assumptions are based on the idea that people will reject Prince Charles as their king. The problem with this strategy is simple: who says Charles will be unpopular when becomes King?
When the sad day comes and The Queen passes on, Charles will become King of the 16 Commonwealth Realms immediately. Sorry, no time to debate and change the constitution in that brief second of transition.
[ The photograph which Canadian readers of this column saw]
Nobody can predict the emotional state of the people during this time. No doubt, there will be profound sadness at the passing of the only Sovereign most of us have ever known.
And, I suspect many people will have an enormous amount of sympathy for the Prince of Wales and will be impressed with the way the he and Prince William present themselves during what will surely be a difficult period of time.
Ultimately, there will be less hostility and more sympathy - coupled with a "let's give this guy a chance" mentality.
If republican politicans were true to their words, they would champion their cause now instead of putting it off. In other words, don't talk the talk but rather walk the walk.
Could it be that they are afraid that their cause is simply doomed to failure? Yes. They're scared. So, they cling to a flawed strategy that pays lip service to the declining republican movement while allowing them to still boast, "I am a republican" - sorry "I am a republican, BUT..."
As National Flag Day approaches why do the republican movement try to hide the fact that if we were to become a politician’s republic, the flag would have to go?
Before the referendum they were quite open about this, as the illustration below about an ARM supported exhibition shows. Most of the flags were of the beach towel variety, but one was outstanding. It had this charming invitation emblazoned across it: "F*** OFF BACK TO FAGLAND"
The ARM is embarassed to be reminded of this. But even their supporters in the media, for example The Age, agree the Flag could not survive Australia becoming a politicans' republic.
[ Campaign to bring down the Australian Flag supported by the Republican Movement ]
...new call for flag change...
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph on 19 August 2010, Greg Grant of Hurlstone Park in New South Wales gives the republican movement's game away, just as The Age has.
He criticises Tony Abbott for not wanting Australia to become a politicians’ republic. Tony Abbott says we are already a republic, a crowned republic.
Indicating the republican movement’s misunderstanding of the constitutional position he says we are the world’s 13th largest economy, “and we still don’t trust ourselves to run our country. “
Apparently Mr. Grant is unaware that on 21 August the people will be deciding precisely that.
Mr Grant ends his letter with this telling question:
“When will Australians have the courage to forge our own way forward under a flag we can all be proud of?”
The men in the illustration below were proud to serve under our Flag in the First World War, even if this republican in Sydney's inner Western suburbs is not.
At the time of writing the result of the election seems to be that the Gillard Labor government has lost its majority, but that the Liberal National Coalition led by Tony Abbott is just ahead, but also does not have a majority.
Both Ms. Gillard and Mr Abbott have indicated they are prepared to lead a minority government. Such a government must enjoy the confidence of the House of Representatives; that is the essence of the Westminster system.
[Government House Hobart ]
Recall that the Speaker cannot join in an expression of confidence; he or she only enjoys a casting vote when the House is equally divided. Andrew Bolt suggests Mr Abbott invite Kevin Rudd to be Speaker. If this occurred one Labor vote would be neutralised.
Under the Constitution, the executive power of the Commonwealth is formally exercised by the Governor-General, and accordingly Her Excellency will play a significant role.
...and in Hobart...
The vice-regal involvement in the formation of a minority government arose after the recent elections in Tasmania. His Excellency the Honourable Peter Underwood published his reasons for re-commissioning the outgoing Premier David Bartlett to form a government in controversial circumstances. The Governor-General will no doubt find this useful.
The Governor said it was his duty as The Queen’s representative to protect and maintain the Constitution and representative parliamentary democracy. He had to ensure that elections were conducted in accordance with the law and that there is an orderly transition of government. The duty obliged the Governor to find the person who can form a stable government which will have the confidence of the House of Assembly.
The Governor stressed that the commissioning of a person to form a government was entirely his prerogative.
...constitutional irrelevance...
He dismissed two arguments, one of which is being raised now in the formation of the next Federal government. Ms. Gillard today relied on the size of the two party preferred vote as a reason for her to lead a minority government. The Tasmanian Governor dismissed similar arguments about the size of the Liberal vote as “constitutionally irrelevant to the issue of who should be commissioned to form a government.”
(Mr. Abbott has referred to the fact that 400,000 more people voted for the Coalition rather than Labor, but has not directly claimed this as justification for appointment. That too would be constitutionally irrelevant.)
..not in anyone's gift..
The other matter the Governor ruled irrelevant were the statements and promises made by the Premier. Before the election the Premier had said that if Labor did not gain an overall majority he would advise the Governor “that Mr Hodgman ( the Leader of the Opposition) should have the opportunity to form a Government in the first instance”. Mr. Bartlett so advised the Governor.
In addition Mr. Bartlett had made statements before the election that “his party would not vote against legislation appropriating supply, nor would they (sic) wantonly move or support a no-confidence motion in the government.”
But when asked by the Governor, he declined to undertake to support Mr. Hodgman in the House.
The Governor ruled that the Royal prerogative to commission the Premier “is not within the gift of any political leader to hand over, or cede to another political leader the right to form a government, whatever the result of the election.”
...constitutional obligation....
The Tasmanian Governor found on the facts as presented to him that the Opposition Leader Mr. Hodgman was not in a position to form a stable government. Consequently, he was obliged to send for Mr Bartlett, who still held a commission to form a government. He reminded him that as Premier, he “had a constitutional obligation to form a government so that the Parliament could be called together and the strength of that government tested on the floor of the House of Assembly.”
Mr Bartlett accepted that he had this obligation and the process of forming a new government proceeded.
The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall paid tribute to the bravery, dedication and sacrifices of those who fought for their country in the Second World War in a commemoration of the 65th anniversary of Victory over Japan Day (VJ Day) in London on 15 August 2010.
Their Royal Highnesses met and spoke with veterans of the conflict and their families, along with representatives from the three Military Services at a reception hosted by the Burma Star Association, after the service.
The commemoration service celebrated the achievements of the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth and the Allies in their victory in the Far East, and paid tribute to the 580,406 UK and Commonwealth Forces and 67,073 UK civilians who lost their lives during the Second World War.
Elderly servicemen, many wearing their campaign medals, came together at the Cenotaph at Westminster to remember their comrades who did not come back from the war.
The half-hour remembrance began with prayers, followed by the Last Post and a minute’s silence.
The Prince of Wales laid a wreath at the base of the Cenotaph, as did Prime Minister David Cameron and representatives of the Armed Forces and veterans from Second World War Associations.
After the National Anthem, veterans and Standards of the Second World War Associations marched past the Cenotaph to warm applause from the crowds.
At the reception, Their Royal Highnesses talked with veterans as they were served refreshments.
[ Japanese surrender on USS Missouri ]
The Prince of Wales has always held the bravery of those who fought in the Far East in the highest regard. In 2005 as part of the 60th anniversary of VJ Day, The Prince made a speech at a reception in London (Follow the link at "Read More " below).
He said: “Yours is such a special generation – stoical, loyal, indefatigable and dutiful. You have been the bedrock of this country for all these years and it will not be the same without you. We salute you with all our hearts.”
Kevin Rudd as Speaker? This was the proposal of Andrew Bolt on the ABC’s Insiders on the morning after the election. Under the Constitution, the Speaker has a casting but not deliberative vote. In particular he would not be able to vote on a motion of no confidence. He suggests Tony Abbott propose Mr Rudd. He also proposes the Speaker's powers be enhanced and that he or she be made as independent as the Speaker is at Westminster.
The latter is important but on another matter, if all this came to pass, we do hope that Mr. Rudd restores the The Speaker's traditional robes and wig. This would empahsise his separate role, his authority, his independence and the antiquity of his great office.
[ Hon Archie Cameron Speaker 1950 - 1956; probably the nation's most independent Speaker ]
Under section 35 of the Constitution, the House of Representatives must, before proceeding to any other business, choose a member to be the Speaker of the House. Under section 40, the Speaker may not vote unless the numbers are equal, and then he shall have a casting vote.(mosimage)
