The Australian Republic Issue

A Guide

(Convention and Blueprints)

This page has been updated as of 10 December 2003.

[Republic Issue (top level page)]
[Issues & Analysis] [Opposing Opinions] [The Republic Post-1999] [The 1998 Convention] [1999 Blueprint] [Other Blueprints]
[Other Relevant Papers] [Other Related Material]

Caution: this is only a subpage of my Republic Guide site. Links should be made instead to http://www-personal.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/republic.html

The 1998 Constitutional Convention
The constitutional convention was held on the following dates: 2-6 February 1998 and on 9-13 February 1998. For the final communique of the Convention, plus the final results of the ballots and details of the model they approved, see the 1999 Blueprint section.
The Legislation	Constitutional Convention (Election) Act 1997 The Act of Federal Parliament setting up the procedural mechanisms for appointing and electing the members of the proposed Convention. On the Federal Attorney-General's legal database server. (Another copy is available here at the AustLII site.) From the Department of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library: A Bill Digest (A "Bill Digest" is a "brief, plain-language explanation" of a bill prepared "as soon as possible after their introduction".) The bill itself (Third Reading, H. of R) (370K) (missing) Note: It's in Adobe Acrobat (not HTML) format. Explanatory Memorandum (missing) Note: It's in Adobe Acrobat (not HTML) format. Senate Committee Report into the bill Not in HTML format, unfortunately, but in your choice of (zipped) Microsoft Word 6 or Rich Text (RTF) formats. Speeches in Parliament on the Convention Bill: Senator Marise Payne (Liberal Party) Given 10 November 1997.
The Convention Online	ABC's Convention Coverage Ongoing coverage & updates throughout each day. If you've got the Real Audio plug-in, you can even hear the debates live by a streaming audio feed from ABC radio. The Age Convention Coverage (missing) Ongoing coverage & updates throughout each day. Live from 9am each day. Also has a vote-for-new-flag option. Note: Beware of bad links! When I paid my visit, a couple of its more prominent pages were missing. The Constitutional Convention "Reports and Analysis from The Pleiades." Also intends to archive "any useful commentary on the convention" found on the aus.politics newsgroup. (Note: seems to have vanished from the Net.)
The Convention Proceedings (Hansard) (and other records)	Agenda of the Convention Also includes the rules of debate & other matters. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. The Convention's Hansard Read what the delegates said in their own words. The following sites have copies: Constitution Convention: Hansard PDF (Adobe Acrobat) format only. At the Australian Parliament House site. Constitution Convention: Proceedings In both PDF and HTML formats. At the Foundation for Democratic Renewal site. Includes a speaker index linked "to their major contribution". The Proceedings of the Convention In both PDF and HTML formats. At the Democratic Alternative site. Transcript of Proceedings (Hansard) In PDF & HTML formats. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Notice Papers and Speakers Lists At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Minutes of Proceedings of the Convention At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Records of the 1998 Constitutional Convention Describes the National Library of Australia's holdings (MS 9214) on the Convention. Also contains a brief "historical note" on the Convention itself. ("The records were collected by National Library Information Services staff prior to the 1998 Constitutional Convention, and when located at Old Parliament House during the Convention to provide reference services to delegates. As the records were collected from a number of sources before and during the Constitutional Convention, the series arrangement reflects the source of the material and within this, pre-Convention and Convention processes.") Working Papers of the Convention Working group reports and resolutions. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site.
Final Report of the Convention	Online version of the report in two volumes. Held at an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Volume 1 The main body of the report, plus five "attachments" on various matters. Volume 2 Various appendices, such as the rules of debate and a list of those who made public submissions. The final two volumes contain the (day-by-day) convention hansard in PDF & HTML formats.
Info About	Background to the Constitutional Convention Chapter 3 of the online version of Final Report of the Constitutional Convention at an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Constitutional Convention: Outline Outline of the Convention's composition, agenda, and public information campaign. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. The Convention Election's Voting Process (missing) General information, counting the votes, etc. At the AEC site. The Convention Election's Voting System At the Democratic Alternative site. Outline of the Constitutional Convention "A note issued by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, Senator the Hon. Nick Minchin." At The Monarchist League in Australia's site. Other Taxation (missing) Mostly deals with unrelated matters, but starts off with one snippet of interest to Convention election candidates: "Constitutional Convention election expenses". Tax Deductibility of Campaign Expenses ("Keep records--and keep receipts!") At the Democratic Alternative for the Australian Republic site.
Opinion Polls	Roy Morgan Support For A Republic Stable, However Australians Divided On Three Constitutional Convention Options Poll # 3054. Face-to-face interviews on February 4 & 5, 1998. A very wide-ranging series of questions asked.
Republican Models Proposed at Convention	The Four Proposed Models Voted on by the Convention Together with the names of supporting delegates who proposed them and the results of the ballots at the Convention that eliminated all but one and the voting procedure they used. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site.
Speeches (at the Convention)	ACM at the Constitutional Convention (removed) At the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. The ACM's convention policy, list of delegates, plus the texts of their speeches at their Convention. Formal Addresses by ARM Delegates The texts of their speeches at the Convention addressing the general question "Should Australia become a republic?" At the Australian Republican Movement site.
Comment or Discussion (pre-convention)	Note: this subsection only covers pre-Convention and during-Convention discussion. Post-Convention discussion and reflection is in a separate section below. All of the various media outlets with webpages have some content on the Convention. The more promising or interesting or useful ones I've come across I have added to the Convention Online subsection above or to the Newspaper Article Archives section below.
Comment or Discussion (pre-convention)	17 Ungrouped NSW Candidates Put people back into the Constitutional Convention (missing) A media release from 17 NSW ungrouped candidates. ("The Convention must not be confined to a confrontation between the Australian Republican Movement and the Australian Constitutional Monarchists.") ABC Radio National Previewing the Convention Cheryl Saunders, Anne Mullins, Damien Carrick, and John Waugh talk to Susanna Lobez about the Convention, then only a week away, on The Law Report (27 January 1998). A panel of delegates from the Constitutional Convention talk with Susanna Lobez Greg Craven, Chris Gallus, and Jason Yat-Sen Li talk about the Convention to Susanna Lobez on The Law Report (10 February 1998). Note: you will first have to skip over a brief discussion of Justice Ian Callinan. Australian Republican Movement Constitutional Convention Diary By "B.J". A day-by-day diary. Subtitle: "What really went on at the convention!" At the Australian Republican Movement site. Australian Studies Centre, Thailand The Republican Debate Author not stated. In the Aurora Australis newsletter, October 1997. ("While Thais were cheering the recent adoption of a new constitution by parliament in September, Australians also had constitutional matters on their minds--seeking to change their Head Of State from a monarch to a president.") Senator Nick Bolkus The Constitutional Convention And The Fight Against Voluntary Voting (missing) Speech. An ALP view on February 1998 Convention. At the ALP site. Judith Brooks Round One to the Republic: Now down to the nitty gritty Paper delivered to The Women's Constitutional Convention on 29 January 1998. A look at the then forthcoming (men's and women's) Constitution Convention of February 1998 by an ARM member. Stored at an archived copy of The Women's Constitutional Convention site at the National Library of Australia. Christian Science Monitor The Queen's Defenders Down Under Constitutional Centenary Foundation The People's Convention (120K) (missing) From the Spring 1996 issue of Round Table, the magazine of the CCF. A somewhat dated but quite detailed examination of Howard's proposal for a Constitutional Convention ("Why does the Convention matter?", "What do we know about the proposed Convention?", "The Agenda", "Convention procedures", "Is Legislation Needed", "The public and a Convention", "The Role of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation", "Will it really happen?", etc. Includes CCF admin. & other non-relevant stuff . However, once you get past the admin stuff, there then follows "A Century of Conventions" (on the pre-Federation & 1970s/80s conventions).) Greg Craven Greg Craven--Viewpoint Part of a collection of viewpoints by various "prominent Australians" at the ABC's 1998 Convention website. They were asked "to write...on the theme of the [1998] Convention--that is, about the Republican debate, the Constitution, or the questions of national identity that the debate raises." The Dean of the College of Law at the University of Notre Dame Australia offers his perspective on what the Convention might achieve and the paths available to it. "Whether the present Convention is of the same calibre as the Conventions of the 1890s is questionable. But perhaps Founding Fathers only look good after they are safely dead." Also includes a link to "Education Notes" (also at the ABC site), prepared by Bryan Moloney, on his viewpoint. Democratic Alternative for the Australian Republic The convention from a Queensland perspective. Includes: A list of Queensland Candidates in ballot box & alphabetical orders, together with an assessment of their orientation (monarchist, republican, uncommitted; directly or Parliamentary-elected President, etc) and other details. Preference Ticket Anomalies of the Qld candidates. Direct Democracy Forum (aka Ian Green) Constitutional Convention (missing) ("What's it all about?" ,"What's it really all about?", "Why doesn't Direct Democracy have any candidates?", "Who should I vote for? [if you live in Victoria]"?, "Who I have not voted for?") Senator John Faulkner The Constitutional Convention And The Fight Against Voluntary Voting (missing) An ALP view on the voluntary voting issue raised by the Convention vote. At the ALP's National Herald site, from the July 1997 issue. Richard Fidler Richard Fidler--Viewpoint Part of a collection of viewpoints by various "prominent Australians" at the ABC's 1998 Convention website. They were asked "to write...on the theme of the [1998] Convention--that is, about the Republican debate, the Constitution, or the questions of national identity that the debate raises." An ABC-TV "personality" gives an idiosyncratic perspective. "Our constitution is like one of those giant, clunky computers from the fifties, with vacuum tubes, knobs and levers that took a team of experts brought in from somewhere else to operate. It's time to upgrade to a constitution that would be, to quote a phrase, for all of us." Also includes a link to "Education Notes" (also at the ABC site), prepared by Bryan Moloney, on his viewpoint. Professor Murray Goot The Push for a Republic "Why the Convention ballot shows that it's not all over bar the voting." A look at the national vote for the 1998 Convention. At the ALP's Labor Herald site, from the February 1998 issue. Mike Head Dire warnings at Australian Constitutional Convention 10 February 1998. At the World Socialist Web Site, "[p]ublished by the International Committee of the Fourth International". "One theme has dominated the Australian government's Constitutional Convention, continuing this week in Canberra. Speaker after speaker has warned of widespread hostility toward politicians and the existing political system." Law Society of NSW Interesting outcomes for lawyers in Constitutional Convention Ballot--Viewpoint (restricted access) Report in the Law Society Journal on the outcome of the 1998 Convention's election for lawyers. Irene Moss Irene Moss--Viewpoint Part of a collection of viewpoints by various "prominent Australians" at the ABC's 1998 Convention website. They were asked "to write...on the theme of the [1998] Convention--that is, about the Republican debate, the Constitution, or the questions of national identity that the debate raises." The NSW State Ombudsman gives her perspective. "I think it is vitally important to the well-being of our nation that young people participate in decisions and discussions about our government." Also includes a link to "Education Notes" (also at the ABC site), prepared by Bryan Moloney, on her viewpoint. Gerard Newman Constitutional Convention Election 1997 A research note of the Department of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library. Turnout, stats on the election, etc. Adam Spencer Adam Spencer--Viewpoint Part of a collection of viewpoints by various "prominent Australians" at the ABC's 1998 Convention website. They were asked "to write...on the theme of the [1998] Convention--that is, about the Republican debate, the Constitution, or the questions of national identity that the debate raises." An ABC "personality" offers his perspective. "DON'T CALL THEM A PRESIDENT! Let's come up with our own, uniquely Australian term for the position. In the same way that 'Governor-General' is laden with British overtones, 'President' immediately conjures images of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and crass tourists shouting 'USA'. We should observe the pride with which the Irish refer to their Prime Minister as 'the Taoseach'..." Also includes a link to "Education Notes" (also at the ABC site), prepared by Bryan Moloney, on his viewpoint. Women's Electoral Lobby (WEL) Australia Not Another Men's Convention! By Marian Sawer, Judy Downey and Kim Rubenstein. Discussion paper. "Australia currently has a Constitution which might have been significantly different if women had been involved in its drafting." Wants men & women to be appointed/elected to the proposed convention in equal numbers. See also the Addendum to the paper. WEL's submission to the review of the Constitutional Convention (Election) Bill by the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee. Women and the Constitutional Convention Joel Wright Joel Wright--Viewpoint Part of a collection of viewpoints by various "prominent Australians" at the ABC's 1998 Convention website. They were asked "to write...on the theme of the [1998] Convention--that is, about the Republican debate, the Constitution, or the questions of national identity that the debate raises." A broadcaster (and "descendant of the Gunditjamara people of Victoria") gives his perspective. "I believe nothing of substance will be achieved for indigenous political aspirations and charge the convention with the continuance of Anglo-constitutional elitism." Also includes a link to "Education Notes" (also at the ABC site), prepared by Bryan Moloney, on his viewpoint. Young Women and the Republic Debate (A "joint presentation" to The Women's Constitutional Convention on 29 January 1998. Stored at an archived copy of The Women's Constitutional Convention site at the National Library of Australia.) Convention in Crisis: a Student Perspective on the Issues of the Upcoming Constitutional Convention By Amrita Dasvarma. Say it loud, I'm young and I'm proud: Young women and the Republic debate By Melissa Yuan.
Comment or Discussion (post-convention)	I've gathered here those essays, papers, etc dealing with what happened at the Convention and its results. Those dealing specifically, or mainly, with the Bipartisan Model, will be found in the The 1999 Blueprint.
Comment or Discussion (post-convention)	Festival of Light God and the Constitutional Convention (missing) Part of a current (Christian) issues page. Features "highlights from speeches on Christian themes" at the 1998 Convention. Brigadier Alf Garland The Monarchist League in Action At the The Monarchist League in Australia's site. After a brief recapitulation of Paul Keating's role in the republic issue, gives a short account of the Convention & the Monarchist League of Australia's role in it. Jennie George Jennie George's Republic Update At the Workers Online magazine's edition on the republic. (Issue 11, 30 April 1999) Mike Head Australian Constitutional Convention: A lesson in capitalist democracy 21 February 1998. At the World Socialist Web Site, "[p]ublished by the International Committee of the Fourth International". A socialist perspective on the Convention. "Throughout the convention, various self-styled 'radical republicans' such as Phil Cleary, Ted Mack and Pat O'Shane sought to sow the illusion that an elected presidency, combined with references to social justice in the Constitution's Preamble, would represent a more progressive system. But the debate on the Preamble only highlighted the chasm between the convention and ordinary people." Kerry Jones Speech, 7 March 1998 An address to an Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy luncheon. Discusses the convention and the model proposed by it. "We were subjected to the same wheeling and dealing. The midnight phone calls, the meetings in corridors, the tantrums of the Resolution Group. Prominent supporters of the status quo tried to convince us to back the McGarvie Model, arguing that surely we would want to enter into the least worst minimalist model (just in case). When we refused, we were described as 'ostriches with our heads in the sand'." Dale Kreibig Republic Models at the 1998 Constitutional Convention--Strategic options or happenstance? (RTF) Academic paper. Presented to the Year 2000 Conference of the Australasian Political Studies Association (APSA). At the APSA2000 website. "Figure 2" referred to in the paper is available as a separate (RTF) file here. (Note: the graphic in this latter file may not viewable by older versions of some word processing software.) "This paper argues that the Hayden direct election republic model was a strategic option (rather than a bona fide republic model) which was designed to ensure that the 1998 Convention did not reach a consensus that entailed direct election of a president. This model split the direct election vote sufficiently to ensure that the direct election option was eliminated early." "This was not the first time that a government or an opposition captured an opportunity for constitutional change to serve its own ends. ... The difference in 1998 was...that federal Labor and the Coalition were united in their aversion to direct election of a head of state." The Monarchist League in Australia Interim Report on the Constitutional Convention By Philip Benwell. 7/2/1998. Fairly brief. Final Report on the Constitutional Convention Author not stated (but most likely Philip Benwell. 13/2/1998. Brief. Catherine Moore What Really Happened at the Constitutional Convention (missing) Reflections and anecdotes on the 1998 Convention by a Greens NSW delegate. Includes an issue-of-the-day section for each of the 10 days. "So it's all over. That must have been one of the most intensive, exhausting, nerve-wracking, frustrating and interesting experiences I'm ever likely to have." Pam Ryan The Constitutional Convention: The Beginnings of the New "Commonwealth of Australia"? (missing) At The ALP Society of North America's site. Dated February 1998. Mostly a survey of what went on at the convention, with the ALP's views of the republic impinging near the end. David Smith A Funny thing Happened on the Way to the Referendum A behind-the-scenes look at the February 1998 Convention. Paper presented to the Samuel Griffith Society in August 1998. Reflections of a Constitutional Convention Delegate A monarchist looks back at the February 1998 Convention and the arguments of the republicans. An address to the Cook Society on 27 March 1998. At the The Monarchist League in Australia site. Karin Sowada God and the Republic Paper delivered at "The Trinity in Australia Today" conference, at Macquaries University, 8/7/1998. At the Anglican Media site. Reflections on the Convention by a Christian delegate. UNSW Law Journal Forum (Online issues site: at AustLII) "The 1998 Constitutional Convention: an Experiment in Popular Reform" I have gathered here those papers from that issue that have not found another home elsewhere on this page. Conservative Republicanism, the Convention, and the Referendum By Greg Craven. Seeks "briefly to analyse three areas of crucial concern to conservative republicans arising at and out of the Convention: general perceptions of Australian constitutional democracy; the fate of the Preamble to the Constitution; and the most appropriate reaction to the Convention's republican model at the 1999 referendum." The Constitutional Convention and Deliberative Democracy By John Uhr. Observations of the convention and its aftermath. The Constitutional Convention from an Ethnic Australian Perspective By Jason Yat-Sen Li. "Was it all Chinese, Greek, or Double Dutch?" How Important was the Convention? By Cheryl Saunders. The title is somewhat misleading. Not so much a look at how "important" the Convention was, as a look at how it performed, especially in comparison to the conventions of the 1890s, and how this affected the results. "In many ways, the [1998] Constitutional Convention worked well" but "More sober reflection two months later...reveals defects in the convention process which have...left their mark on the model produced by the Convention." "It is possible...that, whatever changes are made, the model will prove unacceptable to the electorate. Despite predictions, that is not a lay down misere, if the parliamentary stage is open and constructive and if voters are given information which helps them to understand what the model means and why this model was chosen. If the referendum is rejected, however, and if the reason for the rejection is dissatisfaction with the model rather than opposition to a republic, the Convention process will have failed in its central purpose." Of Conventions and Constitutional Change By Andrew P Stockley. The Australian process for achieving a republic (a convention) vs New Zealand's process for achieving electoral reform (plebiscites). A People's Convention By John Gava. "The media hype surrounding the Constitutional Convention masked yet another failure for the Australian people in determining our constitutional structure. Until a genuine people's convention is held where all the delegates are popularly elected, politicians are kept out and all of our Constitution is open for discussion, constitutional change is going to remain hostage to elite groups and their interests." The Politics of the Constitutional Convention? By Mike Steketee. ("It became clear during the proceedings that John Howard wanted to avoid a plebiscite at all costs because it would give people a chance to cast a vote for the option which opinion polls showed was their overwhelming choice but also the one to which he, together with many other members of the political establishment, was most strongly opposed: direct election of the president by the people. ... Howard in effect moved the goal posts....") Preparing a Preamble: The Timorous Approach of the Convention to the Inclusion of Civic Values By Alex Reilly. Takes exception to those parts of the Convention's final resolution specifying that any new preamble "not be used to interpret the other provisions of the Constitution". "The determination of the resolutions of the Convention not to give the Court more textually based values on which to base its decisions reveals a deep suspicion of the High Court's role of interpreting the Constitution." A View from the Fringe By Moira Rayner. "The ghost of Sir John Kerr, and what he did on 11 November 1975, haunted the whole Convention. If a governor-general could dismiss an elected government, so can a president. As a result, the Convention was not a confrontation between constitutional monarchists and republicans, but a struggle among the republicans on the breadth of constitutional change." Alasdair Webster Christian Presence at the Australian Constitutional Convention At the Family World News site. March 1998. A look back at the Convention by one of the delegates. George Williams The 1998 Constitutional Convention: First Impressions (73K) A current issues brief of the Department of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library giving an overview of the Convention, brief assessment (plus the texts) of the four models voted on, the text of the final communique, etc.
Candidates in the Convention Election		Moved to a separate page.
Delegates	Appointed Delegates	"As well as the 76 elected delegates, 76 people are to be appointed by the Government as delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Of these, 40 will be from federal, State and Territory parliaments. ... The remaining 36 appointed delegates are non-parliament appointments." (AEC)
	Appointed Delegates	Chairman & Deputy Chairman The announcement of Ian Sinclair and Barry Jones as the chairman & deputy chairman of the Convention. (Note: the two of them do not get a vote at the Convention.) 36 Non-Parliamentary Delegates The AEC's List (missing) The PM's list Brief Biographies of the 36 Non-parliamentary appointees to the Convention Press release. At the Australian Prime Minister's site. 40 Parliamentary Delegates Dept. of the Prime Minister's list (removed) David Moss's list At his Australian Politics Resource site. List of all 76 Appointed Delegates List (formerly) at the ARM site At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia.
	Elected Delegates	The AEC's List (missing)
	All Delegates	Composition of the Convention Brief essay. Chapter 4 of the online version of Final Report of the Constitutional Convention. One "attachment" gives a full list of delegates. A second gives a photograph plus short biographical notes of each of the delegates. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Constitutional Convention: Delegates Includes a pic and brief bio of each delegate. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. List at the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site (missing)
The Election	Results	Unofficial At the ARM's Site (missing)
	Timetable	Timetable for the Constitutional Convention's Election from the Australian Electoral Commission.
	Voting (and other details)	1997 Constitutional Convention [Election] Report and Statistics The AEC's official report. Content is in PDF format. At the AEC website.

[Republic Issue (top level page)
[Issues & Analysis] [Opposing Opinions] [The Republic Post-1999] [The 1998 Convention] [1999 Blueprint] [Other Blueprints]
[Other Relevant Papers] [Other Related Material]

Caution: this is only a subpage of my Republic Guide site. Links should be made instead to http://www-personal.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/republic.html

The 1999 Blueprint
The Convention's Model	The Model The Parliamentary Election Model Voted by the Convention The resolutions passed by the Convention for a model for an Australian Republic. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. The Convention Endorsed Republican Model At the ARM site. The Convention's Final Communique to the Federal Government At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. (Another copy here at the ARM site.) Convention Votes Convention Republican Model Ballots Results of each round. At the ARM site. Results of all Final Ballots at the Convention Includes details of which way each delegate voted. At an archived copy of the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's Convention website now hosted at the National Library of Australia's site. Guides to the Model (see below for Guides to the Republic Bills) Referendum on a Republic A factsheet from the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. After a brief introduction covering "What is this about?", it gives the arguments for and against two main issues: "should Australia become a republic?" and "is this model satisfactory?" At an archived copy of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site at the National Library of Australia. The 1999 Referendum on the Republic By the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. This is a brief rundown of the main changes of the model approved by the 1998 Convention, the arguments for and against, and other matters. At an archived copy of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site at the National Library of Australia. What Kind of Republic? (missing) By the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. A dispassionate analysis of the model approved by the 1998 Convention before the bills were drafted. (You may want to compare what was written here with the similar analysis done later by the CCF on the draft bills (see below).)
Implementation	Public Participation Document Archive Maintained by David Latimer. Documents of assorted kinds relating to possible public participation in the presidential nomination process under the proposed bipartisan appointment model. Among them are the minutes of two public meetings discussing that process, and in particular a proposal for a Standing Nomination Society. Australian Presidential Nomination On-Line Demonstration version of one mechanism for encouraging "public participation in presidential nomination and the selection process" had the Bipartisan Model been approved. Commonwealth Law Ministers Informed on Referendum on an Australian Republic Press release from the Attorney-General Daryl Williams dated 9 May 1999 regarding a meeting with law ministers of the Commonwealth of Nations in Trinidad. At the Attorney-General's website. ("The majority of members of the Commonwealth are republics. Of the 54 members, 33 are republics, 16 are constitutional monarchies and 5 have their own national monarchies.") Expert Panel for the Public Education Programme for the Referendum on an Australian Republic Press release by the Federal Attorney-General & the Special Minister of State announcing the appointment of Sir Ninian Stephen, Professor Geoffrey Blainey, Dr Colin Howard, Professor Cheryl Saunders, and Dr John Hirst to "to consider materials prepared for a neutral public education programme that will support the referendum on the republic". 29/4/1999. At the Dept. of Finance & Administration website. From Constitutional Convention to Republic Referendum: A Guide to the Processes, the Issues and the Participants (185K) By Professor John Warhurst. A research paper at the Federal Parliamentary Library site. "This paper provides the background necessary for an understanding of the context of the republic referendum to be held on 6 November 1999. Its purpose is not to critically examine the contending arguments being put by monarchists and republicans, as this has been done already by the participants and others, but rather to provide a guide to the processes, issues and participants." Covers (amongst other things) "the contemporary evolution of the monarchy-republic debate", the "pattern of public opinion", the positions adopted by the major political parties and by Commonwealth and State government leaders, and "the likely dynamics and shape of events over the final six months before the referendum". How the Australian Republic Will Work The ARM's vision of how the Bi-partisan Model will work in practice. Author unknown. At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Joint Select Committee on the Republic Referendum The webpage for Federal Parliament's joint select committee examining the republic referendum bills. Includes the text of its resolution of establishment, list of committee members, etc. In addition, some of the submissions made to the committee (in Adobe Acrobat--ie PDF--format) can be downloaded from this site, including those by the NSW branch of the ARM (supplementary submission only), Harry Evans, Michael Lavarch, and George Williams. The Committee's Hansard In PDF format. Parliamentary Appointment or Direct Election: Why the Conventions Matter Speech by Michael Lavarch given at the ANU Seminar Series, The Republic: What Next? on Monday 20 April, 1998. At the ARM site. An analysis by a former Attorney-General of that part of Daryl William's speech of April 6 (see the link below) on the implementation of an Australian republic dealing with the codification of the powers of a president. The Process Leading to the Republic Referendum Address by Daryl Williams QC MP given to the Local Constitutional Conventions Forum, 29 April 1999. At the ARM site. Not only gives the process by which the republic will be implemented, but also explains various aspects of the two proposed constitutional amendment bills (the establishment of republic one and the preamble one). "The substitution of a President for the Governor-General and the Queen, and the removal of monarchical references scattered through the Constitution, would not have significant consequences for the day to day workings of Parliament or government. The Republic Bill would not have the same practical consequences as previous constitutional amendments that have been accompanied by much less fanfare." Realising the Republic: The Government's Perspective Speech by Daryl Williams QC MP given at the ANU Seminar Series, The Republic: What Next? on Monday 6 April, 1998. At the ARM site. The thoughts of the Federal Attorney-General on what needs to be done (post-convention) to achieve an Australian republic, including some on how to resolve the reserved powers issue. Republic Referendum: The Process Leading to the Referendum Video address by Daryl Williams QC MP given at the National Convention of Republicans, February 1999. At the NCR website. Outlines what steps the Government is taking to implement a republic. Writs issued for a Referendum on an Australian Republic and a New Preamble Joint press release from the Attorney-General Daryl Williams & Special Minister of State Senator Chris Ellison dated 1 October 1999. At the Attorney-General's website.
Official Sites	Australian Electoral Commission AEC's older Referendum Site (missing) Basic info on referenda in general, including information for overseas voters, a scrutineers handbook, etc. Referendum 1999 (AEC) An Australian Electoral Commission site. Hosted a "virtual tallyroom" on referendum night, with results posted "live" to the website. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 15 December 2000.) Government Referendum Taskforce (missing) The texts of the bills being to put to referendum,their associated explanatory notes, etc. At the Dept. of the PM & Cabinet's site. Referendum 1999 Your choice of standard and "flash" versions. (The latter requires the flash plugin.) Basic info about the referendum campaign devised by an independent committee. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 3 November 1999.) The Two Sides The YES Side Yes Committee for the Republic Referendum The official "Yes" committee site. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 20 December 1999.) The NO Side Vote No (removed) The official "No" case text, "how to vote no", etc. Note: do not confuse this site ("www.voteno.COM.au") with "www.voteno.ORG.au", another anti-republic site, but not the official one for the "No" case committee.
Texts of & Commentaries on the Republic & Preamble Bills	The list here is far from complete, particularly in the case of the preamble & nomination committee bills. It consists in the main of those files I had the foresight to take a copy of before they were pulled from the now defunct DMPC referendum site. The "exposure drafts" were the versions as originally proposed and made available for public comment in March 1999. A "bill digest" is a commentary on a bill by the parliamentary library, providing an "independent perspective on government legislation, complementing the legislative material provided by the Executive" (viz. the explanatory memoranda).
Texts of & Commentaries on the Republic & Preamble Bills	Constitution Alteration (Establishment of Republic) 1999 (The bill which would have altered the Constitution to establish a republic) Exposure Draft Text of draft bill (PDF) Explanatory Memorandum (PDF) The Bill as submitted to Federal Parliament Text of draft bill (PDF) Explanatory Memorandum (PDF) Attorney-General Daryl William's speech in Parliament when introducing the bill At the ARM's site. Bill digest Author uncertain. At the Dept. of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library's website. Dated 10 June 1999. Parliamentary Amendments Text of Senate amendments (PDF) Text of Senate amendments the House of Representatives disagreed with (PDF) Final version Text of bill (PDF) Explanatory Memoranda Main (PDF) Supplementary (PDF) You need to read the two together. The first covers the bill as a whole but does not include the final Senate amendments. The second only deals with amendments made by the Senate which the House of Representatives agreed to. Clarifications Military Pension No Bar to Presidency By Attorney-General Daryl Williams. Press release. 26/10/1999. At the Federal Attorney-General's site. Brief. Clarifies a technical point about s44 of the Constitution. Constitution Alteration (Preamble) 1999 (A bill to insert a proposed preamble into the Constitution) Exposure Draft (The original version, published in March 1999, for allow for public comment) Text of preamble (HTML) Text of the preamble in a press release issued by the Prime Minister's office. (Another copy of the press release can be found here at the PM's website.) The Bill as submitted to Federal Parliament Text of draft bill (PDF) Explanatory Memorandum (PDF) Bill Digest At the Dept. of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library's website. Final version Text of preamble (HTML) Text of the preamble in a press release issued by the Prime Minister's office. (Another copy of the press release can be found here at the PM's website.) Presidential Nominations Committee Bill (The bill which would have established the nominations committee had the Establishment of Republic amendment been approved) Exposure Draft (The original version, published in March 1999, for allow for public comment) Explanatory Memorandum (PDF) The Bill as submitted to Federal Parliament Text of draft bill (PDF) Attorney-General Daryl William's speech in Parliament when introducing the bill At the ARM's site. Bill Digest At the Dept. of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library's website. Referendum Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 A "bill digest". The legislation in question set up the machinery details for the 1999 referendum. (The digest also contains some brief background details.) At the Dept. of the (Federal) Parliamentary Library's website. Dated 11 March 1999. Commentaries on the Republic Bills The Republic in Plain Words (missing) By Michael Legg of the Law Society of NSW's Australian Constitutional Issues Taskforce. A "straightforward explanation intended for general readers of the main elements of the legislation to create a republic".
Guides to the Republic & Preamble Bills	1999 Referendum Draft Bills--Analysis (missing) By the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. Ignore the window title ("CCF - Preamble Quest"). This is a dispassionate blow-by-blow analysis of the two main republic bills (the Constitutional Alteration (Establishment of Republic) Bill and the Presidential Nominations Committee Bill) broken down (after a brief introduction) into sections (eg "The Office of President", "The Powers of the President"), with each section subdivided into 4 subsections: "What the ConCon said", "What This Means", "What The Bills Say", and "Comment". Essentially a new version of the paper "What Kind of Republic?" (see above). Archive: The 1999 Republic Referendum (missing) By John Pyke, at his Australian Constitutional Information Site. A tabulated listing of the proposed changes, with the existing provisions side-by-side for comparison. The Proposed Australian Constitution (missing) By Peter Ballard, at his homepage. The Constitution as if would look if the proposed model was passed. Note: only incorporates the republic bill's amendments (ie not the preamble bill's as well).
Analysis	An Australian Republic? By Peter Janssen. The legal arguments, is there a viable alternative model, the ghosts/lessons of 1975. At his solicitors website. ("It is precisely because Australians don't want a 'Yes' man to be their President that they'll probably vote 'No' on Saturday.") If the campaign is lost the war is still won By Graham Young. A week before the referendum, the editor of Online Opinion analyzes the problems and strengths of the two sides, sometimes with uncanny perspicacy. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site. "The 'Yes' case has...failed to learn the lessons from recent election results. The electorate is in a rebellious mood. Tell it what to think and it will do the opposite. It feels excluded and marginalized, and resents the clever middle class, particularly that part of it that resides in Sydney and Melbourne. Yet the 'Yes' case is full of celebrity marketing, particularly by people who live in Sydney and Melbourne, and politicians."
Preamble Bill Views In Favour	"We the People": The new Preamble and the YES Campaign Address by Mark McKenna. February 1999. At the NCR website. Not so much argues for a particular preamble, but rather that the preamble be dealt with by a separate question at the November 1999 referendum. ("The referendum should contain two questions. One on the Bipartisan appointment model and one on the Preamble. To combine these two questions would indeed encourage confusion and give scaremongers greater opportunity to derail the referendum. The only fair and honest way is to ask 2 questions.")
Preamble Bill Views Against	Letter: The Pramble By Noel McDonald, dated 26 April 1999. At his Liberty Australia site. (The link to it on the site's "Letter's" page offers the more provocative title: "John Howard's Treacherous Preamble".) Brief, but does not deal only with the proposed preamble. Also offers a point of view of another matter that I would label "idiosyncratic" (or perhaps "neo-Murphonian") if I had not had other indications that the view expressed has a certain currency out in at least some parts of the community. (The view in question is expanded upon in other letters of his at this site.) Responses by the Women's Electoral Lobby (WEL) and Australian Women Lawyers (AWL) to the Prime Minister's Draft Preamble At the National Women's Justice Coalition site. URGENT CONSTITUTION ALERT: Proclaim God as Sovereign Lord of this Nation (missing) A little late to put this one up, but I'll do so for the sake of completeness. Not an essay or a letter but a call to arms by the Australian Christian Coalition on one aspect of the proposed preamble. Vote No on the Preamble By Andrew Jakubowicz. At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. The title says it all. Much opinion on peripherally related matters is offered. "We have a society which is overgoverned, in which government is fundamentally unrepresentative. I did a little search today on the Internet to try and work out who the executive of government actually is, and as you probably know it's primarily made up of well-educated (some more than others) Anglo-Protestant men. They are all white. There is one woman in cabinet. And this is what we get under the current Constitution as the outcome of representative democracy."
Republic Bill: Views In Favour	ACTU Executive Supports Australian Republic (missing) Brief. Possibly a press release. At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. As Parkes might have said, it's time (missing) By Bob Carr, Premier of NSW. Dated 25 October 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. Mostly about Sir Henry Parkes and Federation, but also with a view or two on the republic issue. "...the [NSW] Parliament will debate the republic on Wednesday. The debate will make one thing very clear: A 'no' vote is just that. It is for keeps. If 'no' wins, there will be no second chance--not in this generation, not in the next. If the people say 'yes' to the incremental change before them--building naturally on our existing Constitution and keeping every element of our system of government absolutely intact - then there will be room for future changes, but only if the people want them. But 'no' means 'never'." An Australian Head of State...A Small, Yet Symbolic Step By Andrew Robb at an address to the National Press Club on 29 March 1999. Stored at the ARM site. An Australian Head of State: Questions And Answers On Why It's time Author unknown. At the ALP's "Yes" case site. The Australian Independent Republic (missing) By Chris Travers. An Australian expatriate more or less "shanghai's" the website of a "leading New York area consulting firm" to spread the message. ("Throw off this Colonial chain; the time to rid ourselves of those who claim superiority and dominion over us is now. There are no guns needed, just the will of a confident independent people. Do not let our country enter another century under the rule of a foreign power.") An Australian Republic By Amanda Vanstone. Speech at Adelaide Town Hall 17/9/1999. Stored at her website. An Australian Republic--A Guide For the Perplexed By Sir Zelman Cowen. 2nd Annual Hawke Lecture, 9 June 1999. At the ABC site. The title is a trifle disingenuous. Not so much a guide to an Australian republic per se as a guide to the author's thinking on the issue. (Another copy can be found here at the ARM's site, and yet another here at the official website for the Bob Hawke Prime Ministerial Centre.) "The question that must then be asked is whether someone capable of fulfilling the very considerable demands which will be made on a President is more likely to be found by election by at least two-thirds of the Parliament, or by direct popular election? I myself have no doubt of the answer." An Australian Republic--it's all about our future The official "Yes" case argument written by the Members of Parliament who voted in favour of the proposed law to change the Constitution. At Senator Kate Lundy's website. (Note: beware of bad links at this site. Senator Lundy's site has moved address, but not all the internal links for her site have reflect the change. I you come across a link that doesn't work remove the ".dynamite" in the URL and it ought to start working again.) The Australian Republic: John Warren's Views By John P. Warren. At his own website. ("I believe that as an independent country, Australia should provide its own symbols of sovereignty. The offices of Head of State and Prime Minister should both be filled by Australian citizens. I think that it is important that the President not be directly elected by the Australian people, as with a direct mandate the President could become a political power, with significant implications for change in the political system we currently have.") The Australian Republic Referendum By Tim Seifert. At his website. A series of personal reflections. Includes a brief postscript on the result. "I'll vote 'yes' because we should be a republic, and I'll just hope that it gets done right." Australia, the Republic and Leadership By Malcolm Turnbull. At the ARM site. Speech at Corowa on 1 August 1999. Turnbull defends the model, particularly the dismissal procedure, and especially against the direct electionists. "Mr. Mack is a royalist in two ways. First, by advocating a No vote he is working his hardest to ensure that our Head of State remains the Queen of England. Second, the "real" republic he advocates is best described as a right royal republican mess and one that the Australian people would never, ever accept if they were told what it actually involved." Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne Appeals to all Australians vote "YES" for an Australian Republic (missing) Media release. Dated 3 November 1999. At the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne's website. The Choice Before Us: Thoughts on the November Referendum By Sir Zelman Cowen. National Press Club Telstra Address, Canberra, 15 September 1999. At the ARM site. "I believe the proposed [dismissal] procedure is no worse than, and probably better than, the current system in which the Queen may remove the Governor-General on the advice of the Prime Minister. As things stand, the Prime Minister is under no obligation to explain such an act to Parliament, or to ascertain that he or she, retains Parliamentary support." Cohesion & Responsibility--The Promise of the Republic By Babette Smith. At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. "Becoming a republic means we will have to choose our elected representatives with extra care. And more of us must stand for office. For the first time in Australia's history becoming a member of parliament must be a matter of pride in the role and in the institution. We must abandon our cynicism about politicians and begin to trust and support our chosen representatives in their responsibilities on our behalf. In an Australian republic, it will not be good enough to sit back and whinge." Conservatives for an Australian Head of State Business Luncheon By Amanda Vanstone. Speech at Adelaide Town Hall 28/10/1999. Stored at her website. Direct Election Republicans who say YES...and MORE! Author unknown. Brief. At the Workers Online magazine. (Issue 27, 20 August 1999.) "[T]he NO side argues that a win for the referendum would close off any further constitutional change. This flies in the face of the broadly supported decision of the 1998 Convention that a second Constitutional Convention, with 75% elected delegates, should be held within 3-5 years of the passage of the 1999 Referendum. A 'YES' win, accompanied by a loud demand for more change, is a more certain pathway to comprehensive constitutional renewal than a NO." Dismissal Mechanism Keeps the PM in Check By Malcolm Turnbull. Turnbull defends a key aspect of the "Bipartisan Appointment of the President Model". At the ARM site. First published in The Australian newspaper on 10 July 1998. Don't risk division and radical change--vote YES By Andrew Robb. Address to the Sydney Institute, 8 June 1999. At the ARM site. ("To me it seems ridiculous that we are agonising over whether our head of state should be one of us, or the ruler of another country. The issue will not go away. We have the opportunity now to resolve it in the best possible way. Let's do it--and move on.") Final Yes Campaign Speech By Gough Whitlam. Delivered 1 November 1999. Stored at the ALP site. The Forthcoming Republic (missing) By Neville Wran delivering the Whitlam Lecture. Stored at the ACTU site. There are two somewhat different versions of this lecture delivered to different universities in different States on different days: 14th September 1999 at the University of Western Australia (missing) 15th September 1999 at the University of South Australia (missing) Gough Whitlam's Case for Yes By Gough Whitlam. Originally published in The Australian on 3/11/1999. At the Whitlam Institute site. How the republic will improve our system of Government By the Australian Republican Movement. A table compares the existing system with the one proposed by the model to be voted on in November. At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Impartial Umpire? (missing) By Alex McGavin. Essay at the Canning Electorate Forum of Western Australia site. Opposes direct election ("If we were to directly elect our President...what would emerge would be a politician who would be elected through either the Liberal or Labor party political processes.") It's Time By Neville Wran. Address for the Ben Chifley Memorial Lecture Bathurst, 19 September 1998. At the ARM site. Hard to know whether to file this one here or in the Opposing Opinions. It seemed best to file it here even though much of the address deals with Ben Chifley and matters more to do with the issue of an Australian republic generally than with the model to be voted on in November 1999 in particular. (The main exception is the forthright statement excerpted below.) "I am not going to beat around the bush. I myself strongly support the bipartisan model. And I do so for these reasons. First, it is desirable that the Constitutional links between the President and the Parliament should be as close and direct as possible. Second, it is desirable that the Presidency should be open to as wide a range of our full citizens as possible. Third, it is desirable that the Australian Head of State should be a focus of national unity, and to have bipartisan support." It's Time to Bite the Bullet By Samuela Harris. In The [Adelaide] Advertiser, 3/11/1999. At Louise Nordestgaard's Australian Referendum on the Republic site. "It is my belief that people who say they are republicans but are voting no are not republicans. Republicans want a republic. They do not want an interminable game. Let's be clear about one thing. There will not be another crack at becoming a republic in the foreseeable future." It's Time: Why You Should Vote YES in the November Republic Referendum By James Cockayne. At the Young Australians for a Republic site. ("Voting YES in November will insure that our system of government is updated to reflect who we are and the values to which we aspire.") Keeping Our Eyes on the Prize (DOC) By Lindsay Tanner. Article in The Age, 5/8/1999. At Tanner's own website. "Over the last few months the republican debate has been sidetracked by a number of secondary issues. Almost everyone has been engrossed in sideshows while the main event is starting. It�s time to shift the focus back to the one big question that Australians must answer on November 6th." Liberals for a Republic: FAQ Author unknown. Answers various questions about the "Yes" case from a conservative/Liberal Party supporter's perspective. (eg "Q. Does voting 'YES' indicate disrespect for the Queen and her family?") At an archived copy of their website maintained by the National Library of Australia. Liberals Speak Various statements by Liberal Party identities (and others) about the republic issue or the Constitution in general. At an archived copy of the Liberals for a Republic website maintained by the National Library of Australia. Looking Forward By Peter Lewis. August 1999. At the Workers Online site. "John Howard is the master of small politics. He showed it in 1996 and 1998, wrapping himself into a little ball of nothingness and taking the people with him, away from the Big Picture and the grand possibilities of an inclusive, progressive Australia at ease with its place in the world to a land frozen in apathy, self-interest and a misguided certainty. Now he's poised to do the same thing to the Republic, turning what should be a story about our independence into a pedantic debate between the lawyers. Playing on the divisions Republicans themselves created, he has manipulated his beloved Monarch into the frontrunner in November." Menzies Supports Fraser on PM's Powers By Malcolm Turnbull. Menzies gets drafted (along with the Queen) in support of the model's presidential dismissal powers. At the ARM site. First published in The Australian newspaper on 1 September 1999. The Monarchist Ghost and the Republican Fantasy (missing) By Frank Johan at http://www.therepublic.com.au (as opposed to the ARM's "http://www.republic.org.au"). The above title is not the one that appears on the webpage in question (that was a spare and uninformative albeit stark: "WARNING"), but one I have given in an attempt to be a bit more informative. It is based on the page's opening sentence ("On Saturday November 6 1999, you will be asked to make a suicidal choice between a 'monarchist ghost', and a 'republican fantasy'.") Monarchy's Time is Past (missing) Author unknown. Newspaper editorial. Dated 11 October 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. Apart from the final paragraph, mostly about monarchy, the republic, and national identity than about the proposed republic model. "The Republic, as proposed at the referendum on November 6, does not deny Australia's history. It reflects the reality of its present and allows for its hopes for the future. The change proposed--to replace the Queen with an Australian president--is both simple and profound. It is simple because it will not disturb the larger constitutional machinery of the Commonwealth. It is profound because it will help complete the accession to full independence by allowing the expression of Australia's true identity." National Convention of Republicans Held 6-7 February 1999. I have gathered here those speeches that have not found another home elsewhere on this page. Leading the Campaign for a Yes Vote Address by Kate Carnell MLA Address by Senator Natasha Stott Despoja A Constitution for the Future An address to the NCR by Senator Amanda Vanstone. Addressing the arguments for popular election Let's Leave Hysteria to the Monarchists--Pleas to Both Main "Brands" of Republicans Address by John Pyke. An even-handed look at the arguments for and against popular and parliamentary election. A Republican Head of State: Responding to Arguments for Direct Election Address by John Uhr. "For the purposes of this conference, I can be described as a 'direct electionist' who will be voting 'yes' at the November referendum." Addressing the Arguments for Popular Election Address by John Warhurst. "I never thought that I'd be campaigning against direct election republicans and rebutting the arguments for popular election." Making The Republic Important To a Majority Of Australians Address by Gatjil Djerrkura. "Seize the Day"--Winning the Referendum Address by Neville Wran QC. Why I Want Australia to be a Republic by 2001 Address by Frank Brennan. "I am one of those republicans who has some reservations about the proposed committee for the nomination procedure and about the dismissal procedure. But the proposals for nomination and dismissal are superior to the status quo (being more inclusive, transparent and democratic), and can be rectified in the years ahead." An Open Future Address by Kate Lundy. Youth, the republic, and the Internet. ("I believe that the referendum itself has the potential to constitute the symbolic launch of a youth movement to claim the future.") Recognising merit and achievement. An important feature of the republic and a potential asset for Australia Address by Marise Payne. The States in a Federal Republic: Moving Together Address by Robert Todd "The States, unlike the Territories, are thus not legally creatures of the Commonwealth. The States are sovereign to the extent of their powers, which despite reduction [under the Federal Constitution] remain substantial." Address by Glyn Davis "The issue is simply stated: how to coordinate abolition of the monarchy at the state and federal level." Address by Christina Gillgren A citizen from a "small" State (W.A.) looks at "Constitutional and Political Issues for the YES case in the states" ("Direct election would also provide an unfair and distinct disadvantage to our candidates who may not be so well known in the more populated and influential states.") Founding a New Vision of Community: The Value and Virtue of a Republic Address by Dorothy McRae-McMahon. ("We could, for example, set up a diverse and balanced group of eminent persons who could draft a process for engaging the people in a wide-ranging discussion of the nature of human rights which they believe would form a new community here.") A Voice of the Future Address by Natalie Weddel. A Natural Change to Republican Supporter By Wendy Machin. The Vice Chair of the ARM & former National Party MP explains why she became a republican, & why she supports a Yes vote at the November 1999 referendum. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. ("Frankly it seems to me that it is intellectually impossible to continue to support the notion that Australia must have a foreign monarch as its head of state. And judging by the reluctance of all Monarchists from the Prime Minister down to mention the Queen, they also find it impossible to mount an argument in support of this.") Negative Campaigning By Peter Lewis. October 1999. At the Workers Online site. "As the Monarchists pull every trick in the book to maintain the Crown, the Republicans find themselves trapped in a lawyers['] argument on the model of change, rather than the need to piss the British out of this part of the world once and for all. They find themselves being squeezed on one-side by the conservatives, the other by the radicals who say the minimalist model does not go far enough. In the process we have the bizarre situation where the Republicans are cast as the 'elitists' and the Monarchists advocate a No vote for the people's Republic." The No Case--Lies, Damned Lies and Ballistics By Greg Craven. Options #10, September 1999. At Christopher Pyne MP's homepage at the Liberal Party of South Australia's site. Criticisms of the tactics of the "No" case. "It has to be accepted that the standard tactic employed to defeat a referendum is to confuse the electorate. The more fuddled the voters are, the less likely they are to let go of nurse. Consequently, one hardly can feign surprise that opponents of the November 6 republican referendum are far from being models of clarity. In this, they merely follow a long, if not particularly up-lifting tradition." Parliament (speeches on the bills) Senator Andrew Bartlett (Australian Democrats) At the Australian Democrats site. Another copy here, at an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Notwithstanding a dislike of the proposed presidential dismissal process (as well as the existing one for Governors-General), the senator's "own view is, in many respects, not so much to get hung up on the model of parliamentary appointment versus direct election but to stress the need to continue Australia's evolution and to see this as a step in the right direction, providing a much greater opportunity to examine how the system will work, to see whether moving to a different model of appointment or election would work down the track.") Kim Beazley (ALP) At the ARM site. Robert McClelland (ALP) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("For the first time in our constitutional history, the bill will also enshrine in our Constitution the institutions fundamental to the workings of our democracy.") Roger Price (ALP) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Warren Snowdon (ALP) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Dr Andrew Theophanous (ALP) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("I believe that the bill before us, to provide for a republic with an Australian head of state and for the selection process involved, in general terms is a significant progression in constitutional terms. It will help us to overcome some of the causes of the 1975 crisis. ... There is, however, one provision in the bill which I, having said all this, have some concerns about. It is a provision which has the potential to create some serious difficulties for us in the future. I refer to proposed section 62 [presidential dismissal]....") Persevere, a republic is still possible--there's no need for pessimism in the YES camp By Anne Henderson. Published in The Australian, 6/8/1999. At an archived copy of the Women for an Australian Republic site maintained by the National Library of Australia. "At present, the news has the Howard ministry lining up in favour of a NO vote based on 17 of the 29 voting NO. Yet, this leaves another 12 in the potential YES camp and this in one of the most conservative ministries ever--good news for republicans. Moreover, the federal ministry is skewed by National Party figures not representative of the national balance." Footnote: 17 out of 29 is 58.6% of the ministry. At the referendum the proportion of voters voting against the republic was 54.9%. President's role will be to Guard, not Govern By Malcolm Turnbull. Turnbull defends the Bipartisan Model against direct election advocates. At the ARM site. First published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 30 December 1998. Referendum '99: The NO Case Debunked By Bryan Palmer. At his Oz Politics website. Offers arguments against the ten reasons given in the Official NO Case for voting against the republic proposal at the 1999 referendum. Referendum--Australian Republic By Paul A. Sorenson, State Secretary of the Australian Federated Union of Locomotive Employees: Queensland. At their website. A circular dated 15/10/1999. Reflections on the Republic? By Janet Holmes a Court. 21/9/1999. At the Brisbane Institute website. Reith, Mack and Cleary don't represent Youth A press release from Young Australians for a Republic. ("Phil Cleary, Peter Reith and Ted Mack don't understand that young people see the Bipartisan model as more democratic that the Constitutional Monarchy. Young people will vote yes, because we don't like a system with an English Head of State. We don't think it's fair that someone becomes a Queen or King just because they are born into the Royal Family.") The Republican Case: It's Time for Change (PDF) By Frank McGuire. May 1999. Published in Leadership Magazine. McGuire presents the case for a republic. At the Leadership Victoria website. "The reactionary defence of the status quo is the cliche, 'if it ain�t broke don�t fix it'. Our Westminster system of Government may not be broken, but it is badly in need of repair at the top. The simple question now is whether we have the courage to change our Constitution to have an Australian head of state." The Republican Debate And The True Course Of Constitutional Conservatism By Professor Greg Craven. Address to the Samuel Griffith Society on 10 July 1999. At the ARM site. Another copy here at the Samuel Griffith Society site. "...we must remember at every point that the object of a true constitutional conservative is to preserve the essence of our constitutional order, not to hold so tight to every one of its incidents that it is suffocated. Unless the Convention model is approved at the November referendum, the Australian Constitution will face the greatest and most dangerous challenge in its history. It will be presented with the prospect of the almost inevitable victory at some time in the future of a referendum proposing the popular election of an Australian head of state, a victory that will represent the destruction of our constitutional order." Republicans of the World Unite! One Small Step Forward is Far Better than Standing Still By Mark McKenna. At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. "I ask you all to imagine that a popularly elected Australian President is now about to walk into this room. At the recent presidential election 45 per cent of us voted against the President. The rest of us voted for the President with various levels of enthusiasm. As the President enters the room some of us stiffen, some faint, others yawn. This President, elected by a majority but equally spurned by millions of Australians, cannot possibly represent all of us. Only an appointed president, chosen by a two-thirds majority of Parliament after nominations from the people, can achieve this. Then we will have a head of state who is 'one of us' and who is 'for all of us'." The Republic Referendum Greg Craven explains to Susanna Lobez on the ABC's Radio National's The Law Report (26 October 1999) "why he believes the Turnbull model safeguards, and even improves, the checks and balances in our current system." The Republic Referendum Committee: Report By Michael Danby MHR. Speech in the House of Representatives by a member of the joint federal parliamentary committee which reviewed the 1999 republic bill. Date uncertain, but most probably late 1999. Note the title listed on the website (and which I have given here) is somewhat misleading in that this is not so much a "report" about what the committee did as an expression of a (highly) partisan point of view. Stored at his own website. "Let us be clear about this. The situation we have is the Queen Team forcefully arguing that, if we become a republic, it can only be with a directly elected President. Why? There is no issue of principle. The republic haters say, 'Well, that is what the people want or so say the opinion polls.' This begs the question: when was the last time an opinion poll showed Australians supporting the continuation of the monarchy? If opinion polls are so important to the Queen Team, you would think that they all would have ridden off into the sunset by now." The Republic Referendum: The Facts Address by Daryl Williams QC MP given to the Constitutional Centenary Foundation Youth Launch, 22 August 1999. At the ARM site. The Federal Attorney-General defends the bill implementing the proposed republic model. "The Republic Bill has been designed specifically to avoid any dramatic change in the day to day operation of our system of national government. ... It is...intended to present the people of Australia with a safe, workable proposal for a republic that continues our tradition of stable, parliamentary democracy." The Republic Report to the [ACTU] Executive (missing) By Jenny Doran. Dated February 1999. At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. Begins with the text of a resolution from the ACTU Executive (in which it "reaffirms its support for an Australian Republic and in so doing urges affiliated unions to campaign actively for a 'Yes' vote in the republic referendum"), followed by the report itself, which provides background information on a number of issues. Approximately half the Report per se deals with the proposed preamble. Shorter sections cover the proposed republic model, the referendum, and "direct election proponents". The Republic--Yes! By Neville Wran. Advocates a YES vote. At the ALP's Labor Herald site, from the June 1999 issue. Sack the President at Your Peril By Greg Craven. Argues the case for the dismissal procedure in the proposed republic model. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. ("The starting point here is that any presidential dismissal must be approved by the House of Representatives. Opponents of the model scoff, saying that this is nothing more than requiring that the Prime Minister's actions be approved by his mates. But think again. Any parliamentary motion for dismissal will be moved in front of the glaring lights, cameras and note-books of every journalist in Australia, and will be debated by the opposition until every salacious drop of political embarrassment has been extracted. This is the sort of ghastly political set piece that any Prime Minister would chew his own leg off to avoid.") A Small, Yet Very Important Step By Andrew Robb, dated 3 September 1999. Stored at the Conservatives for an Australian Head of State site within the ARM site. Another copy can be found here. ("Our children can aspire to be anything in Australia, except our head of state. That is what this referendum for a republic on November 6 is all about.") Taking the Final Step By Andrew Robb, dated 3 September 1999. Stored at the Conservatives for an Australian Head of State site within the ARM site. ("My assessment is that probably three-quarters of all Australians have a disposition in favour of moving to an Australian as head of state. In their hearts they feel we are ready to make the move, to take this final step.") This Change is a SAFE Change By Alex Blomfield. At the Young Australians for a Republic site. ("In this referendum campaign republicans need to reassure many Australians that the model proposed is not only a important symbolic change but also a safe change.") Transcript of [an] Interview Kim Beazley MP answers questions put to him by an unnamed journalist on Radio 96FM in Perth, WA. At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Interviewed dated as 17 August, 1999. ("Look, I think people naturally, instinctively want an Australian Head of State. I don't think there's a single monarchist in Australia who does not believe we will one day be a republic. Well, why not bite the bullet, take the step now; we've got a safe model. And a safe model that can be built on in the future if people want to. But let's get that Australian Head of State now.") Transcript of an Address to the Conservatives for an Australian Head of State By Peter Costello. On 27/10/1999. Stored at Federal Treasurer's website. "A directly elected presidency, in my view, will open the way to money politics in a way that we haven�t yet seen in our country. We have seen in the United States--it�s sometimes held up as a model for direct elections--Elizabeth Dole has just retired from the race because she�s only been able to raise $1 million against another challenger who�s now got $56 million. True Lies Author unknown. "Lies about the proposed model" vs "the truth and reality". A rebuttal of various concerns & statements about the proposed model. At an archived copy of the Liberals for a Republic website maintained by the National Library of Australia. Voting Yes for a Republic Vote "YES" for the Republic By Attorney-General Daryl Williams. Press release. 29/10/1999. At the Federal Attorney-General's site. ("Voting 'no' will not give the people a chance to vote for direct election of the President. There are no proposals for another referendum on a direct election model if this referendum on is unsuccessful.") What's Happening to the Republic? (missing) By Jennie George. At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. Title somewhat misleading. Deals only partly with the "what's happening" side of things. Also takes a stand in support of the proposed model, while much of the later half is spent providing "compelling reasons why a directly elected President would not be suitable in the Australian context". Why all Australian republicans should vote "Yes" in November 1999 (missing) No author given (but the ARM website identifies the author as a "Geoff Kelly"), and the Geocities site it's sitting in appears to be otherwise vacant. The title is somewhat misleading. Expends more space on "Who Wants to Vote for President?", "Constitutional Amendment Process", and "The problems with a Directly-Elected President" than on providing reasons for a "Yes" vote, let alone a defence of the Bi-partisan Model. Why an Australian Republic? By Ian Sinclair. Options #10, September 1999. At Christopher Pyne MP's homepage at the Liberal Party of South Australia's site. "The Bipartisan Election of a President model which will apply to an Australian President requires the submission and consideration of names from the wider community. The Selection Committee is broadly representative and while the final name may be determined by the Prime Minister the obligation to consult with the Leader of the Opposition and the Selection Committee and the appointment by a two thirds vote of both Houses ensures a more democratic process." Why I'm Voting YES By Imelda Fleming. Published in The Canberra Times, 2/10/1999. Originally stored at the (now defunct) Women for an Australian Republic website, but now stored at my own website. Why Queensland Should vote Yes in November By Malcolm Turnbull. 29/6/1999. At the Brisbane Institute website. Why the Convention Model Works By Malcolm Turnbull. Address given at Deakin University on 6 August 1998. At the ARM site. Approximately the first half addresses the subject matter foreshadowed by the title. The second half assesses the other models proposed at the 1998 Convention (or various aspects of them) (offering the occasional insight along the way into behind-the-scenes manoeuvring at the Convention). Women and the Republic By Karin Sowada. At the Young Australians for a Republic site. ("Voting Yes in the referendum on November 6 is not only a vote for our country, it is a vote for women. It ensures that if we become a republic, Australian women will have an opportunity to aspire and be appointed to the [top] job....") "Yes--and More": Growth of our Republic By Rev. Tim Costello. A confessed convert from direct election argues the case for the proposed republic model. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. Note: comments by Senator Murray concerning the "Yes & More Coalition" can be found in the "Republic Bill: Views Against" part below. "This referendum is not a once-and-for-all event. We need an ongoing opportunity to monitor our decisions and to go on to consider important possibilities like the introduction of an Australian Bill of Rights,and that is the goal of the 'Yes--and More' campaign. All that a supporter needs to do is to vote 'Yes' in the referendum, and then write 'AND MORE' somewhere on the ballot sheet." "Yes" is a vote of confidence (missing) By Neville Wran. Dated 27 October 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. "If this referendum fails, it will be many years, maybe generations, before a government is prepared to submit the republic issue to another referendum. A 'no' vote will be construed as a vote for the Queen. A 'yes' vote is a vote of confidence in our country, in ourselves, and in the future." Yes, It's Time Kim Beazley launches the ALP's "Yes" campaign. An address made on 24/10/1999. At the ALP's "Yes" case site. (Another copy here at the Workers Online site.) Yes, It's Time Not an essay or speech, but a jingle! At the ALP's "Yes" case site. The words, the music, and the video. Note: the multimedia downloads available from the above page require appropriate software (specifically, Real Player G2, the Windows Media Player, or MP3 software) to be on your computer. Yes, Our Australian Republic (missing) By John C. Kellett. A brief opinion from out on the Net. ("What every country needs is an elected benevolent dictator, with the power to set things right, without the restrictions of the past dragging the country down. What the referendum offers us is a simple version of a Republic, in which the office of Governor General continues to be controlled by the establishment, while he or she assumes the title 'President'. That kind of Republic is better than nothing.")
Republic Bill & Model: Views Against	1999--The Year of Constitutional Viagra By Tony Abbott. Speech to NSW Young Liberals, 17/1/1999. At his website. "Malcolm Turnbull has rather airily suggested that people should vote for his republic (regardless of whether they think it's any good) and only then debate whether it's possible to improve the model. At the very least, a republican constitution subject to almost immediate 'fine-tuning' risks looking as dated as hot-pants and caftans. Bad constitutions are far harder to change than bad laws or bad governments. Yet people who wouldn't let their kids go to the beach without sunscreen and hats now seem to think that Australia should play Russian roulette with its constitution." 51 Criticisms of the Convention Model (missing) "40 of them by republicans". Extracts of the views on the Convention's favoured model from such people as George Winterton, Greg Craven, Harry Gibbs, Cheryl Saunders, Jason Yat-Sen Li, and others with comments from Mr Gibson. At Philip Gibson's No Republic Home Page. Alice in Wonderland (missing) By Professor David Flint. Speech to an ACM Luncheon, Parliament House, Sydney, 9 December, 1998. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. (The speech title is taken from a table of contents page.) "Determining that a person is 'Head of State' has very important consequences. It tells us where he or she sits at official banquets! When he or she is to be toasted! How many guns should be fired in a salute when he or she lands at a foreign airport! Can the Australian people be persuaded to believe that this Alice in Wonderland term is of some moment?" "We have heard of the many adva[n]tages of becoming a republic--in terms of trade, jobs, greater cultural achievements, overcoming the difficulty a dictator may have in understanding our Constitution, reversing the brain drain etc. Clearly the ARM leader Mr Turnbull (Sydney Morning Herald, 19 October 1998) does not accept these claims. 'The change,' he admits, 'will only be symbolic.'" The Annotated 1998 Convention Model (missing) By Author unknown. The final communique of the 1998 Convention with comments interspersed. At the No Republic (Chatswood) site. Appointment of an Australian Head of State A fact sheet from the ACM. " Constitutional Monarchy Vs Republic". Compares the existing model to the proposed bipartisan model's method of appointment. Australian Battle Royal Over Phony Republic By Allen Douglas. "Australian battle royal over phony 'republic'". Stored at a website titled Global Financial Collapse Info & Links. Has less to say about a republic than about some curious viewpoints concerning the Constitutional Centenary Foundation ("The CCF and its personnel dominated the Constitutional Convention, which the CCF, no doubt with a typically sadistic British chuckle, refers to in its printed literature as, the "Con Con".), Samuel Griffith and other "Anglophiles" ("Written by fanatical Australian Anglophiles such as Sir Samuel Griffiths, a favorite of the Colonial Office, the Australian constitution was secretly sent back to London to be rewritten to, as one Colonial Office official put it, 'remove any residual American tendencies.'"), Hindmarsh Island, Kerry Packer, and globalisation (not necessarily in that order). Australia's Constitution, Crown, and Future By the Rev. Kameel Majdali. Looks at (amongst other things) the role of the Crown in Australia and "the implications of a successful referendum" (on the republic). "In our time the term 'republic' can be used for democracies, dictatorships, and one-party states alike. While most nations on earth are republics, there is nothing superior or more desirable with that form of government than a constitutional monarchy." Best to Vote NO NO in November's Referendum By Rona Joyner. At Rona Joyner's Constitutional Information Site. More a series of thoughts about some of the provisions of the republic bill. "...the first section to be repealed by Clause 1 of the [Republic] Bill is Section 59, which gives the Queen the power to refuse to assent to any bad law submitted by Parliament for Her signature, particularly if that law were in breach of the Constitution or of the great Charters of English liberty - Magna Carta, our 1689 Bill of Rights, or the Habeas Corpus Act, etc. ... With Section 59 repealed, the people have no way of forcing Parliament to reverse bad or repressive laws." (Note: Section 59 is the provision which allows the Queen to annul federal laws within one year after their enactment. Section 60 allows the Queen to assent to certain federal laws submitted to her by the Governor-General under s58.) The Bungled Australian Referendum By Nigel Jackson. At the website for Spearhead magazine. "We monarchists have laboured under several handicaps during the year preceding the referendum. The media have almost totally excluded from the main public forums the Australian Monarchist League...and the Australian League of Rights.... Pro-monarchy articles, far fewer in number than pro-republic articles, are invariably written by journalists, politicians or members and associates of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, a group which has adopted a peculiarly limited set of arguments in its campaigning, but which has had the vital financial support of the federal government." A Clash Between Yes Theory, No Reality By Richard E. McGarvie. Article published in The West Australian, 1 November 1999. At the author's website. A rebuttal of an open letter by an ex-Governor-General and two former Chief Justices of the High Court in which they declared the preferred republic model "safe and an improvement". "The great republic clash is between a Yes case strong in theory and a No case strong in practical reality. ... [M]ost Yes supporters are trying to keep the debate to that symbolic issue of an Australian for head of state, where they are strong. They are successfully avoiding debate on the impact of their model on our democracy--the issue on which they are clearly weak. This keeps public attention away from the fundamental flaws the so-called Turnbull model would introduce into our constitutional system. The three jurists, Sir Zelman Cowen, Sir Anthony Mason and Sir Gerard Brennan, are to be commended for being prepared to argue the democracy issue. However, their open letter is strong in theory but not in practical reality." The Coming Referendum By Justice Ken Handley, NSW Court of Appeal. Speech to an ACM Christmas Luncheon, Parliament House, Sydney, 25 November, 1998. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. (The speech title is taken from a table of contents page.) "Some ARM Republicans and their apologists are already suggesting that these proposals should be approved because they can be changed in a few years time. They took 6 years to come up with this mess. How long will it take them to come up with something better? ... Years ago I bought a wall plaque for my children which read, 'If you don't have time to get it right the first time, when will you have the time?' We plan for 100 years floods and design for 100 year cyclones. Sir Owen Dixon, our greatest High Court Judge, said that a Constitution is to be interpreted as an enduring organic instrument of government. It should be framed accordingly and not on a 'she'll be right mate' basis." Comments on the 1999 Referendum Bill to Establish a Republic By Dr Glenister Sheil. At the The Monarchist League in Australia's site. The bill commented on is the Exposure Draft version. In spite of the title, I've filed this one here on account of its openly partisan content. "The Exposure Draft of this Bill is misleading in every major particular. For example it purports to 'alter' the Constitution, but in reality it represents the complete demolition of the Constitution." Confound Their Politics (missing) By Albert Langer. Also published in the May 1998 issue of Quadrant magazine. The WWW version is at the Neither! site. "The trouble with the Australian Republican Movement is that they are so monarchist. They actually believe Australia needs a 'Head of State' as a sort of unifying national symbol at the apex of society." The article's title is drawn from a line in the 2nd verse of God Save the Queen: "O Lord our God arise, Strike down her enemies, And make them fall: Confound their politics, Frustrate their knavish tricks, On thee our hopes we fix: God save us all!" Convention: Young and Refreshing Thoughts (missing) By Heide Zwar. In Vol 1 Issue 2 of the ACM's online "newspaper" Australian Constitutional News. Mostly anecdotes of her experiences at the Convention, but it does conclude with her assessment of the Bipartisan Model. Criticisms of the Proposed Model (missing) Speech by David Flint to the ACM on 25 July 1999. At the Young Australians Against This Republic's website. Note: the title I've given it here is my own. The webpage itself has none at all. "In effect the ARM is giving the term Head of State a constitutional meaning and application never before known in Australia. There is an 'Alice in Wonderland' flavour about this. As Humpty Dumpty said 'When I use a word', said in a rather scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less': (Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.) Head of State, like the word republic, is a term which lacks precision. The fact is in our legal system the term Head of State is reserved only for international law matters and in diplomatic relations. To determine such important questions as who sits where at official banquets. To ascertain who actually is a Head of State, we are normally informed by the Department of Foreign Affairs of our country or of the foreign country." A Dangerous Plan By Richard E. McGarvie. Article published in The Age, 11 October 1999. At the author's website. The title is somewhat misleading since the danger warned of is not made clear in the article. "The manner of appointment and dismissal largely determines how a governor-general or president will act in the office." Debunking the Seven Deadly Myths of the Republican Debate By Bronwyn Bishop MP. Speech to an ACM Luncheon, Parliament House, Sydney, 2 February, 1999. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. (The speech title is taken from a table of contents page.) Dessert: Some Statements by Republicans (missing) At Philip Gibson's No Republic Home Page. Statements by republicans with comments from Mr Gibson. Discussion on a Republic with a Directly Elected President Transcript of an interview with Clem Jones on 27 September, 1999. Presenter: Greg Cary of Radio 4BC. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. "They say this referendum is our only chance for a republic. What nonsense. They'd threaten anything to stop us electing our own president. The right to elect our president is fundamental to a real republic." Dispelling the Multicultural Myth (missing) By Heidi Zwar. At the No Republic Victoria site. Mainly a rebuttal of the ARM's "strategy of attempting to win support for their position by representing a vote against their republic model as a vote against multiculturalism." The Easy Guide to the Republic Proposal (PDF) (421K) By Kerry Corke. A 13-page, blow-by-blow critique at the main provisions of the proposed republic bill by a "legislative lawyer". An IPA Backgrounder from the Institute of Public Affairs. At the IPA's website. A brief summary can be found here. "According to the modern fable, a camel is a horse designed by a committee. The proposed republican amendments to the Commonwealth Constitution...very much creates a constitutional camel." The Elite Wins Round 1 (missing) Author unknown. At the SEARCH foundation site. ("What was once called a 'People's Convention' largely became the 'Prime Minister's Convention'. An undemocratic alliance within it decided that any constitutional change must protect the power of the Prime Minister, rather than spell out the power of the people.") Faith, Hope, and Self-Interest: The President in the Future Republic By John M. Williams. A critique of the 1998 Convention's proposed model, especially the appointment and dismissal process. Published in the UNSW Law Journal's thematic issue on the 1998 Convention. This online version is stored at the AustLII site. "While there would be political damage to be weathered with the 'sacking of the umpire', the prime minister's survival requires nothing more than party solidarity in the Lower House. Similarly the president, holding all the current reserve powers of the governor-general, can dismiss the prime minister in the manner of 1975. The proposed republic institutionalises suspicion with limited checks on that suspicion." Half Good Is Not Good Enough By Bill Hayden. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. Address to an ACM luncheon, Parliament House, Sydney, 9/8/1999 (the ACM's speech index page claims 18/8/1999). (The webpage presently linked to has no title. The one used here was that used at the original site I found the text.) "Malcolm's mob are running an elitist line. In this case, an elitist process which will be locked up and controlled by the politicians. That's the very opposite of the people's choice, of what is popularly preferred. By substituting 'populist' for 'popular' he, of course, means to have the idiomatic pejorative do some hatchet work for him, conjuring up unsavoury subliminal images. On those grounds we could dub him as leader of the unpopulist push, for what he is propounding is as publicly agreeable as a basket full of sun-stressed mullet in a public place. It's also quite implicitly disrespectful and dismissive of the good commonsense of ordinary Australians." "There was only one genuinely direct election recommendation brought before the convention. Only one authentically democratic proposition which respected the people's right to choose whom they wanted as their first public representative. I know because I moved it, and I am unlikely to forget the extraordinary response of delegates to that so-called People's Convention. The proposal that Australians should determine their own destiny, rather than have a small, elite committee take over the process completely, or at least critically regulate it, was gingerly pushed and prodded like an infectious dead cat lying on the carriage way, and then unceremoniously kicked aside. It only got six votes! Out of the total of one hundred and fifty-seven people's delegates, only six votes of confidence in the common sense and trustworthiness of the ordinary members of the Australian public could be mustered!" The heart says yes, but the head says no (missing) By Padraic McGuinness. Dated 5 August 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. An SMH subeditor has summarised the theme of this essay best: "If we can do without a British head of state, we don't need an Australian one either". "But the same Australian public has continually shown itself deeply divided about the proposal to have an appointed rather than directly elected president, and may well ultimately decide that no republic is better than one with so few safeguards." An Independent's Dissection of the "Elitist" Model (missing) By Ted Mack. At the Official "No" Case site. ("What the changes do is in effect to transfer the powers of the sovereign, not to the people as should be done in a genuine republic, but to the Prime Minister and executive government. In doing so it strikes down one of the outstanding and fundamental principles of the Australian Constitution--the doctrine of separation of powers.") Interview Face to Face (missing) Edited transcript of an interview of David Flint (of the ACM), Greg Barnes (of the ARM), & Phil Cleary (direct election republican) by Glenn Milne of Channel Seven's National News. At the ACM's website. Despite the presence of the ARM's Barns, the tenor is such that it seemed more appropriate to file this here. ("The big point is that this will be the only republic in the world where it will be easier for the Prime Minister to sack the President, than to sack his cook! Now this is an extraordinary proposition.") In [the] republic, some are more Australian than others By Tony Abbott. At his website. Article in The Australian, 17/9/1999. ("Becoming a republic is about giving every Australian the light to be head of State. Right? Well, no. Under the proposed republican model, close to 25 per cent of the Australian population will be barred from the presidency. As things stand, any Australian can be governor-general. But under the Turnbull-Keating republic, no one with dual nationality will be able to become president.") Kerry Jones: Remarks at "The November Referendum" Debate At the Sydney Institute, Sydney, 10 June, 1999. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. Letter to the Workers Online By John Passant. At the Workers Online magazine's edition on the republic. (Issue 11, 30 April 1999) A reader explains why he'll be voting "no". "The men and women of property--the people who run the ARM and its alter ego, Conservatives for a Republic--fear what they cannot control. Whereas they have learnt that they can easily control Parliament, they are not so sure about a directly elected President. There is no guarantee that such a President would be their reliable servant." Maintaining The Vibe In The Constitution (missing) By Julian Lesser. At the No Republic Victoria site. Various arguments against the Bipartisan Model. "On November 6 all Australians will have a chance to have their say about the Turnbull republican model which emerged from the Constitutional Convention. When people vote 'Yes' or 'No' to the referendum question they will not be voting for or against the notion of a republic but for or against this specific model of republic. Voting 'No' is a vote to acknowledge that Australians deserve a real debate where those supporting the case for change talk about the specifics of the model and do not gloss it over with slick spin doctoring." Minimal Change or Mayhem? Exposing the Myths of the "Yes Case" (missing) By David Hull. Address to the Leichhardt "No Republic" Branch, 13 October 1999. At the No Republic (Kingston) site. The "No" Case against a Republic and for a Constitutional Monarchy By Glenister Sheil of Queenslanders for a Constitutional Monarchy. At the at the Monarchists League of Australia site. "In days of yore the Crown represented total power. Today it represents the denial of total power. No wonder the republicans want to get rid of it in their grab for power." No Need for the "Elite" to Cringe By Ron Brunton. Originally published in the Courier-Mail 30 January 1999. At the Institute of Public Affairs' website. ("The worthies who try to browbeat us into supporting their unpopular republican model with the claim that the planned November referendum will be a test of 'national self-confidence' betray their own ambivalence and insecurity about Australia. People who feel confident about their place in the world rarely need to resort to grand symbolic declarations of their independence.") A Non-republican Republic: The Convention's Compromise Model By Harry Evans. The Clerk of the Senate comments on the 1998 Convention's proposed model at the "Symposium on an Australian Republic" held on 11 June, 1998. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. "A constant refrain of the official republicans in what has passed for a debate is that a republic can be achieved without a change to the system of government, and this is presented as a virtue of such a change. We must not change the system of government, therefore we must have the minimalist model, it is said. There are two obvious retorts to this: first, what is the purpose of changing to a republic if it means no change, and is not this a contradiction in itself; and secondly, why should the existing system not be changed? Preserving the system of government is frequently represented as preserving something called the 'Westminster system', and the use of this anaesthetising term adds to the contradiction." The No Republic Case: The Case for the Status Quo (PDF) By James Dunn. May 1999. Published in Leadership Magazine. Dunn presents the case for voting NO at the 1999 referendum. At the Leadership Victoria website. "Why are we so embarrassed at having the best system of government in the world? If in recognition of the freedom of Australia and Australians, this country�s inherent stability, its civil life, its pride in the rule of law and equality under the law, a harmless piece of symbolism is maintained, who could complain?" Not Quite the Road to Damascus By Graham Young. The editor of Online Opinion explains why he will be voting "No" in November 1999. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. ("I believe that we already have a Republic, that it is a cultural artifact in its current form of which we should be proud, and that over time it will and should evolve. But I do not believe that its evolution should lead to any of the Republican models that are on offer today, and when it evolves it should be because an overwhelming majority demand it, not merely to satisfy fashion on the cusp of a new century.") November 1999's Powerless President is a disaster that will threaten the Constitution (removed) A passionate opinion by someone who has (it seems) also published a book titled "The Popularly Elected President--a Demonstration Denied". "'The proposal that the Prime Minister would be held accountable to Parliament a month after dismissing the President is almost as laughable as William Wentworth's Bunyip Aristocracy ever was, to anyone who knows how long a month is in politics.'" Only our Constitutional Monarchy provides checks and balances against Dictators By Rona Joyner. At Rona Joyner's Constitutional Information Site. Note: some of the claims on this page about s116 should be taken with a grain of salt. "If the Queen goes, s.116 in the republican constitution ceases to have application to the Christian religion, the Parliamentary prayer, or the Oaths of Office that govern law-making under our Christian Constitution." Parliament (speeches on the bills) Peter Andren (Independent, MHR) At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. Another copy here, at an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. "On page 45 [of the publication, 'Discovering Democracy'] there are details about how important American founders regarded the separate election of the President. It says: 'The American founders believed all governments tended to threaten liberty.' It goes on to say how the American constitutional drafters believed that 'power must be dispersed. No one group or individual could then capture all the centres of power and each power centre would keep the others in check'. The American founding fathers were right when fearing that the placing of the executive and legislature together would threaten democracy. According to our founding fathers, by placing the executive in parliament the ministers were responsible to parliament and if ever they threatened citizens' rights, the parliament, elected by the people, would control them. Unfortunately, the founding fathers did not count on the discipline, the arrogance and the undemocratic nature of the political party process, with its adversarial two-sided debate and its one-sided executive dominance, reinforced by the winner-take-all, illegitimate, mandate argument." Senator Andrew Murray (Australian Democrats) 2nd Reading speech. Delivered: 10/8/1999. At the Australian Democrats site. Another copy here, at an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("What is remarkable about the process that has brought these bills before this chamber has been the dogged determination of most politicians to stop Australians having the choice of electing one of their own for President. The course they have pursued has flown in the face of all opinion polls on the matter--polls to which politicians are usually acutely attuned, but polls to which I suggest the Prime Minister has listened carefully and been assisted in the way in which he has devised this referendum. One suspects that only a perceived threat to entrenched power could have given politicians the courage to so brazenly defy the public will.") Dr Brendan Nelson (Liberal Party) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("Whilst I will be supporting the bill, I will not be voting for this bipartisan appointment of the president model endorsed by the Constitutional Convention communique, nor do I support Australia moving from a constitutional monarchy to this or any other model. ... I have noted that those who are fondest of pushing a republic seem not to have lived in one. Of the six oldest democratic nations, four have British origins and four are constitutional monarchies.") The Phoney Republic: An Unholy Alliance of Wheeler Dealers By Phil Cleary. At the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. Another essay, published in The Age on 28/7/1999, with the title "Yes and More? You must be joking, Moira" but incorporating some of the same arguments and parts of the same text can be found here on Cleary's own website, together with an abridged version of a second article. "It's no surprise that the community remains wedded to the notion of electing a President. The diminished power of the nation state in the face of globalisation and the unqualified subservience of Parliaments to free market policies have created deep disenchantment. And whilst it would be myopic to believe that the election of a President will as a matter of course cure us of these problems, it should come as no surprise that Australians wish to create a President with a critical public role in the life of the country." "What is it about contemporary life that ideas and deeply held views can be so easily compromised? What's the point of condemning rorts, brazen conflicts of interest and lack of transparency in Government, or standing shoulder to shoulder with an embattled Auditor General, only to climb the stump to defend a 'republican model' that enshrines executive power and exudes contempt for the people? Moira well knows that the escalating cynicism towards the major parties and politics generally has its genesis in the preparedness of glib politicians to trade in ideas, alleged to have been deeply held." Practicality, Not Ideology By Sophie Panopolous. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. ("We are legally, judicially and constitutionally independent. By borrowing ideas from the Westminster, the Swiss, the Canadian and United States constitutions, the founding fathers were globalists ahead of their time. We should not be embarrassed about our antecedents nor should we tread in the steps of imitative nationalism. Some republicans claim that those who support the present system are not patriotic. This is nonsense intended to dumb down the debate to a level where embarrassing national stereotypes define Australian national identity.") Presidential Models: Dismissal Procedures By Senator Andrew Murray. Senate speech, 16 Febuary 1999. Compares the dismissal procedure in the proposed model to those of wide range of other republics, including Ireland, India, the US, & Israel. At the Australian Democrats site. Note: the page itself was originally titled only "Presidential Models". It is present title "Senator Murray on the republic and possible Presidential models", but I've kept the original and added a subtitle to give a better impression of the content. "Dismissal of a President in the United States, as was recently seen, is subject to a carefully constructed series of legislative and judicial checks and balances. It contrasts starkly with the excessive powers proposed for the Australian Prime Minister under the Constitutional Convention's model. Contrary to claims made in support of it, this model did not enjoy an outright majority at last year's convention. But it was chosen by the Prime Minister to be put to referendum. And why wouldn't he like it? He would get powers under this model that no other Prime Minister in an advanced democracy could dream of." The Referendum: A Spot of Reading By John Passant. 8 October 1999. At the Workers Online site. Mr Passant reads the referendum pamphlet and the Constitution, and finds "[t]he yes case is deceptively well written. Wrong, but well written." while "the no case looks like it was developed by a group of conspiracy theorists." "There are certain qualifications a person has to satisfy to become President. The main one is that the President has to be an Australian citizen. No-one has satisfactorily explained to me why this is necessary. It's crass jingoism to imagine that someone born here or naturalised is somehow better qualified than other residents, or even non-residents, to open schools and fetes, sign legislation on command and sack uppity Labor Governments." Referendum Hijacked by Appointment Republicans (PDF) By Senator Andrew Murray. At his website. Originally published in the West Australian newspaper. Undated, but written after June 1999 and before the 1999 referendum. The story of what happened to Senator Murray's private member's bill which would have provided for a plebiscite on the same day as the republic referendum, asking the voters if they wanted to elect the president of an Australian republic. Republican Criticisms of the Proposed Model (missing) Various exerpted views from George Winterton, Greg Craven, John Hirst, Moira Rayner, and others. At the Young Australians Against This Republic's website. Moira Rayner: "We would not have agreed, prior to the Convention, on a model that gave more power to the Prime Minister, Cabinet and political parties.... Nor would we have agreed on a model that would allow a President to be dismissed by, or dismiss, a Prime Minister in what George Winterton witheringly dismissed as a game of 'constitutional chicken', depending on who first gave the other written notice." The Republic Betrayed! Maintained by Howard Teems. A site with a passionate opinion on the Bipartisan Model. Includes an Open Letter to Rex Jory of The Advertiser. The Republic Debate: Nationalism or Democracy (missing) By Ted Mack. A speech to the University of Western Australia 27/8/1999. At the Paddy's Place site. ("They even argue against democracy itself with the line you can't vote because you'll get a politician. This of course cashes in on the widespread dislike of politicians. It is a bizarre argument coming from politicians which says, in effect, 'you cannot be trusted because you voted for us. Therefore leave the decisions to us'. If a president is to represent Australia, he or she must be elected by and responsible only to the people - not the politicians.") A Republican "NO" Case By Peter Reith MP. The Federal Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business outlines his views on the proposed republic model. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. (An edited version titled There's no reason for us to rush on a republic can be found at another Real Republic site--scroll down past the links etc at the top, as well as here at the Sydney Morning Herald site.) "Many supporters of a republic would prefer for the debate to focus on the subject of their artificial deadline of 2001, rather than on the substance of their model. There is a major irony in the choice of the 2001 anniversary of federation, given that the first federation model was rejected in a referendum. What is often forgotten is that the act of federation required a long process of debate before an acceptable model was approved by the Australian people. There were no less than eight intercolonial conferences between 1863 and 1880. A draft constitution was first penned in 1891, an entire decade before federation. Every word and every expression was subjected to intense scrutiny. The draft constitution was then amended and redeveloped through a series of three major national Conventions. Most significantly, at the referendum of 1898, the original model for federation was defeated in New South Wales. A second referendum had to be held in all colonies, to get a modified model approved." Republic Criticisms from Clerk of the Senate By Harry Evans. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. A chapter-and-verse critique highlighting problems with the Constitution Alteration (Establishment of Republic) Bill and the Presidential Nominations Bill. (Another copy here.) Letter to Joint Select Committee on the Republic Referendum Apparently the covering letter accompanying the above submission to the joint select committee. Of interest for further (and frank) opinions relating to the proposed republic bill. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. "Leaving aside other defects of the Convention, of its 'model' and of the bills, there are two extremely serious problems with the scheme proposed by the legislation: The bizarre and dangerous provision whereby the head of state could be dismissed by the Prime Minister simply by the latter signing an unpublished document; The provision whereby the head of state would not have a fixed term but could remain in office indefinitely at the discretion of the Prime Minister." Republic or Constitutional Monarchy? By Arthur Tuck. At Rona Joyner's Constitutional Information Site. ("The most significant thing is that the Prime Minister may dismiss the President at any time without giving a reason. ... This is like giving the captain of the winning team in a game of football the power to dismiss the umpire at any time!") The Republic Referendum Richard McGarvie explains to Susanna Lobez on the ABC's Radio National's The Law Report (26 October 1999) why he'll be voting "no" on November 6 1999. Outlines "what he sees as the 5 fundamental flaws of the proposed model". The Republic Referendum 1999: what is at stake? By the Rev. Kameel Majdali & Dr David Phillips. The Principal of Melbourne's Harvest Bible College & the Chairman of the Festival of Light (SA) offer their views on the proposed republic bill. At the FOL's website. Published in Light magazine, August 1999. (Note: the webpage the above article is a part of also contains the text of other items dealing with other issues.) The Republic Referendum: Mere Symbolism or Substantial Change By Professor David Flint. Paper presented to the Samuel Griffith Society in July 1999. At their website. ("That the Keating-Turnbull Republic would involve the removal of a significant check and balance on the power of the Prime Minister is a message which must be proclaimed loudly and clearly to the Australian people. It may well be that Australians wish to give more power to the politicians and to the Prime Minister. Frankly, I doubt it. But if they do, let them do so with the full knowledge of precisely what they are doing.") Reserve Powers of the Governor-General and the Provisions for Dismissal By Sir Harry Gibbs. At the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. Looks at the "reserve powers" in general and in relation to the proposed republic model. In particular it looks at the two provisions which specifically refer to the "reserve powers": the new s59 and the proposed clause 8 of the new schedule 3. Resolving the Republic Issue by 2005 By Richard E. McGarvie. Originally published in 1998 in the Victorian Bar News. Stored at his website. Partly a critique of the "Turnbull Model" and partly a look at the prospects ("I consider that the referendum in 1999 will fail because Australians are instinctively a wise constitutional people") for a further referendum on the issue post-1999. Some Thoughts on the Constitutional Convention By Sir Harry Gibbs. Published in the UNSW Law Journal's thematic issue on the 1998 Convention. This online version is stored at the AustLII site. "The conventions held in 1787 in Philadelphia and in the 1890s in various Australian capitals showed, by their results, that great constitutional change can sometimes result from the deliberations of a convention. ... Unfortunately, providence did not extend its helping hand to the Constitutional Convention held in Canberra in February 1998. ... No model was endorsed by a majority of delegates, and that which received most supporting votes is singular in that it is patently defective in all significant respects." There's no reason for us to rush on a republic (missing) By Peter Reith MP. The federal minister explains in a press statement why he will be urging a "No" vote. At the No Republic (Chatswood) site. ("As I said on Meet the Press: 'I think the history of referenda in Australia has been decided by whether or not the proposition provides more power for the executive at the expense of the ublic at large.' Unfortunately, the republican model now the subject of the upcoming referendum, fails this test. The exclusion of the public from directly choosing the president will only reinforce that feeling of alienation in our society and I have always expressed grave concern about any endeavour to entrench rules by elites. In addition, the ease with which a president could be sacked would weaken, rather than strengthen, our democracy.") 'Till Dismissal Us Do Part: Dismissal of a President By Linda J. Kirk. A critique of the Bipartisan Model's dismissal procedure. Looks at an alternative to the ARM's model involving a "Constitutional Council". Published in the UNSW Law Journal's thematic issue on the 1998 Convention. This online version is stored at the AustLII site. Transcript of a speech to the Sydney Institute (missing) Delivered by Kerry Jones, 10 June 1999. . At the No Republic (Chatswood) site. ("It is very clear from consistent polling over the last few years that the thought of a republic has never captured grassroots Australia as a priority issue. Clemenger reports do not rank the republic in the top forty issues that Australians want time and money spent on. From this perspective key public names associated with the Australian Republican Movement such as Malcolm Turnbull, Neville Wran, Tom Keneally and Janet Holmes a Court have in my mind justifiably earned the stigma of elitist multimillionaires personally determined to get their type of republic almost at any cost. ... Mr Turnbull's republicans have now had a decade to capture grassroots Australian fervour. They have failed dismally despite the massive support given to them under the Keating federal government and the fuelling of their debate by a supportive media.") Turnbull's Camel By Kerry Jones. Speech to the Gordon/Frenchs Forest Luncheon, Sydney, 7 March, 1998. At the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. (The speech title is taken from a table of contents page.) Twenty-three and not Fussed on a Republic By Heidi Zwar. A 23-year-old former delegate to the 1998 Convention explains why she will be voting "No" on November 6, 1999. At Online Opinion's Australian Constitutional Reform site, Sept/Oct 1999 edition. ("...the debate is no longer about being a republican in principle: it is now about weighing up the merits of the proposed republican system of government, against the system of government presently provided for by our Constitution. I want a stable, working system of government for my children, and their children. The proposed republic just has too many flaws for it to be considered equal to our present Constitution, let alone an improvement.") Vote NO REPUBLIC The Debate Author not stated. At the Family World News site. October 1999. A list of six reasons for voting NO at the 1999 referendum. What a nice Referendum--Pity about the Debate By Sir David Smith. Paper presented to the Samuel Griffith Society in July 1999. At their website. In part a rebuttal to various views of Professor Greg Craven. "...only last month, the High Court, in voiding Heather Hill's election as a Senator, provided further confirmation that Australia is a sovereign and independent nation, and that the Queen of Australia is not a foreign Queen and is a separate legal personality from the Queen of any of her other fifteen realms, thus once again giving the lie to republican claims that we are not yet fully independent or that we are ruled by a foreign Queen." "Whose Constitution is it?": Three reasons to say NO to this Republic By David Hull. At the No Republic (Kingston) site. ("This referendum is not about the Queen or who opens the Sydney Olympics. Rather it is about whether we are going to hand over unfettered executive power to 'over mighty parliamentarians' (to use Senator [Andrew] Murray's well-honed phrase)." Why Australia Should Not Become a Republic By Kerry Jones. At the Family World News site. August 1999. Why Queensland Should vote No in November By Sir James Killen. 7/9/1999. At the Brisbane Institute website. Why the Referendum Proposal Must be Voted Down (missing) By Robert Ellicott. A speech to an NRV luncheon on 3 August 1999. At the No Republic Victoria site. ("To say that the referendum proposal is a minimalist solution, that apart from providing for the appointment of an Australian Head of State, it changes, or endangers nothing that is fundamental in the present Constitution, is a massive deception. Indeed, it causes one to wonder whether the obviously intelligent and experienced people who are supporting it realise the enormity of it. Their hearts, apparently, are ruling their heads.") Why Young People Should Vote No By Julian Leeser. At the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. ("I believe the republic is the Absolutely Fabulous baby boomers' last hoorah, their last tango in Paris, the zenith of a generation who value style over substance, to whom touchy-feely, kumbaya motherhood notions are more important than results. Whilst the baby boomer generation has made some achievements, like all great social movements, they have gone too far.") A Woman for President By Jocelynne A. Scutt. Stored at the Women for a Real, Real Republic website. "Proponents of the 'Prime Minister chooses, 2/3rds Parliament endorses' model contend it gives women not only an even chance, but a greater chance to be promoted to the post. This belies logic, history and present day reality. ... Prime Ministers have a poor record in appointing women to committees. ... Political parties have a poor record of preselecting women for safe and winnable seats." "Yes & More" coalition deluded By Senator Andrew Murray. A "strong advocate of direct election" from the Australian Democrats criticises "the so-called Yes & More coalition for November's Republic referendum". Describes his own attempts at holding a plebiscite on direct election at the same time as the November referendum. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. Possibly a press release. Note: The views of the Rev. Tim Costello, an advocate of the "Yes & More Coalition", can be found in the "Republic Bill: Views In Favour" part above. "The politicians have already rejected 'more'. ... In May [1999] Senator Murray released and widely circulated a Private Member's Bill to provide for a national plebiscite on direct election to accompany November's Republic referendum. The bill would have asked voters, on the same ballot paper, if they want[ed] a directly elected President. Should a majority vote 'Yes' to this, a convention of elected delegates would have been conducted to determine the best method--regardless of the outcome of the November republic referendum. Despite writing to and circulating the 'Republic (Consultation on Elected President) Bill' to all parliamentarians, the media and Republic campaigners, Senator Murray received no support whatsoever from the parliamentarians or the Yes & More coalition." Yes and never any "more"--No and much "more" By Senator Andrew Murray. The "Yes & More coalition", Senator Murray's proposed plebiscite, & own views on the proposed republic bill. At an archived copy of the Real Republic site. Possibly a press release. ("The republic on offer would deprive the Australian people of any meaningful input into their Republic. It would institute a system of government for the people, not of the people. Only direct election will provide for true sovereignty of the people.")
Other Criticisms of the Model	In here are filed those links which criticise one or more aspects of the proposed model without actually opposing the proposed model as such.
Other Criticisms of the Model	Detours on the road to a republic (missing) By George Williams. Dated 17 June 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. A critique of the drafting of the republic bills. ("The legislation to create an Australian republic does not include some of the key elements envisaged by last year's Constitutional Convention. ... [the] legislation departs significantly from the convention model in that the failure of the House of Representatives to endorse the sacking would not amount to a vote of no confidence in the prime minister.")
Other Criticisms of the Preamble	In here are filed those links which criticise one or more aspects of the proposed preamble without specifically opposing it as such.
Other Criticisms of the Preamble	Preambulations By Michael Warby. Paper presented to the Samuel Griffith Society in July 1999. At their website. "Do nations have purposes? Should nations have purposes? Does one drag out one's Oakeshott, and contemplate the difference between society as a civil association--a structure within which people pursue their own ends--and society as an enterprise association--something with a common purpose? Should nations have statements of national purpose?"
Mixed Views & Debates (includes non-committal views)	The 1998 Convention: A Reprise of 1898? By Sir George Winterton. Published in the UNSW Law Journal's thematic issue on the 1998 Convention. This online version is stored at the AustLII site. Looks at the Convention's favoured model (including, more favourably, the preamble provisions), as well as assessing some of the Convention's other aspects. "What is the justification for not re-instating a President found to have been wrongly removed? This will seem an ominous precedent to electors who are employees." Australia's "Republic" referendum reveals mass disaffection By Mike Head. 4 November 1999. At the World Socialist Web Site, "[p]ublished by the International Committee of the Fourth International". "The longer the official campaign has gone on, the more obvious it has become that the November 6 referendum on whether Australia becomes a republic, dispensing with the British monarchy, gives the broad mass of people no choice at all." Australia to hold "Republic" referendum--But no public discussion about the details By Mike Head. 3 September 1999. Much ado about the reserve powers provisions of the proposed republic bill. At the World Socialist Web Site, "[p]ublished by the International Committee of the Fourth International". I am for a Republic By Peter Costello MP. Options #10, September 1999. At Christopher Pyne MP's homepage at the Liberal Party of South Australia's site. "I am much more concerned that a President with support of two thirds of the whole Parliament will have a greater claim to legitimacy than the Prime Minister and therefore more power in checking (and interfering with) political aspirations than the current Monarch and Vice Regal representative. I am willing to hear an argument that the 'YES' vote will take some of the balance of power from the Prime Minister and his Government. It is completely disingenuous to argue the 'NO' case on the grounds that it will lead to less checks on politicians. It is a good populist argument, but it is a false one." Is change legally possible and desirable? Reviewing the Constitutional Convention Anthony Mason and Harry Gibbs talk about the outcome of the Convention to Susanna Lobez on the ABC's Radio National's The Law Report (17 February 1998). An edited version (with only Gibbs's portion) can be found here at the ACM site. A Just Republic and Sovereignty of the People By Pat O'Shane. At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. "In 1991, about six weeks after Paul Keating addressed the Evatt Foundation Annual Dinner, and proposed a republic for Australia, I presented a paper in an occasional address at the Graduation Ceremony of the University of Central Queensland. In that paper I spoke about the need for direct election of a president as just one expression, or one aspect, of the need for participatory democracy in this country. I was being neither cynical nor Hansonite when I put that issue forward and I don't resile from it now, notwithstanding some of the comments that I have heard this afternoon." Parliament (speeches on the bills) Petro Georgiou (Liberal Party) At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("Earlier this year I argued that there was a strong likelihood that a majority no vote would leave unanswered a fundamental issue--the issue of whether the no vote is a genuine affirmation of a constitutional monarchy or a protest vote by Australians who support a directly elected president but who do not have the option of expressing their view. The new-found alliance between the direct electionists and the monarchists has all but made that likelihood a reality. The alliance of the two groups is made possible because the current referendum process has failed to provide supporters of a direct election with any constructive avenue of expression.") Senator Natasha Stott Despoja (Australian Democrats) At the Australian Democrats site. Another copy here, at an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. ("The President of an Australian republic will be a unique figure, a constitutional umpire, and symbolic in his or her role as head of state. ... Beyond issues of natural justice, the Australian Democrats support the comments provided to the [joint select] committee [on the republic bills] by witnesses such as Professor George Williams regarding the impact that uncertain tenure will have on the independence and the status of the President. The evidence argued that the independence and status of judges has evolved from their security of tenure, and the Australian Democrats are equally anxious that the independence and status of the President be fostered and protected as much as possible.") Listing of MP Speeches on the Republic Bills At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. 77 House of Representatives and Senate speeches transcribed, though not necessarily from 77 different MPs! The June ones have separate entries on this page. The 69 August ones, however, are far too numerous. Note: the listed speeches include MPs from all parties, and both for and against the republic bill (or who have mixed feelings). Pity to lose a republic over a technicality (missing) By Robert Manne. Dated 16 August 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. A critique of the drafting of the republic bills. Although the sentiment is pro-republic, does not actually take a stand either way, which is why I've filed it here. Concentrates instead on other matters (as in fact the title hints). "As we approach the November 6 republican referendum, Australian opinion seems to be suspended, rather helplessly, between a once-authentic monarchial past which has died off in the country's hearts, and a potentially enlivening republican future which empty conservative fears, unrealistic radical hopes and corrosive popular political cynicism have come together, in an unholy alliance, to destroy." The Referendum By John Howard MP. The Prime Minister lists his reasons why he will be voting against the republic bill (but for the preamble bill) in the November 6 referendum in a newsletter to his constituents. A press release (issued 27/10/1999) at the Prime Minister's official website. "I will vote 'no' to Australia becoming a republic because I do not believe in changing a constitutional system which works so well and has helped bring such stability to our nation. The changes being proposed would not make Australia's constitution or system of Government any better or more effective. They are not as simple or as minuscule as their proponents would like people to believe." Two days earlier he issued a very much briefer press release foreshadowing the one above, but otherwise of little interest to this page except in one respect: he denied press speculation that he thought a republic inevitable. "Others may hold that view. I do not. Benjamin Franklin was right when he said: 'in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes'." Referendum: Vote for a Republic Published in The Guardian (a publication of the Communist Party of Australia). October 13, 1999. Recommends a YES vote for the republic by a NO vote for the preamble. ("The basic question before us in November is not so much the method of election of the new Head of State but whether or not we want a republic. This is the fundamental issue. Having a popularly elected Head of State and Parliament would lead to the formation of two possibly conflicting centres of power. The Parliament, elected by the people, must remain the prime institution in our political system.") The Republic Debate Summary of six views (3 YES, 3 NO) expressed in a debate on the republic on 6/10/1999 at Moreland City College, Victoria. In the Moreland City Council News, October 1999. At the Moreland City Council website. Republican Plumbing By John Daley. An "edited text of a talk given to the UK University of Melbourne Alumni". In Autumn 1999 issue of the Melbourne University Magazine. Brief. States and the republic. ("An Australian republic is an important symbol. It is also a complex technical challenge. But tinkering with constitutional structures is not like ringing a plumber who can be left to get on with the job. Apparently minor changes can have significant consequences which every Australian should think about.") Republic of Australia--A Forum: Statement by the Chairman By Sir Gerard Brennan. At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. "Constitutions are not the gift of government; they are the creation of the people governed. Our Constitution was brought into existence following the agreement 'to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth' by the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Tasmania joined later by the people of Western Australia. The Constitution is the people's grant of power to their organs of government. It is the right of the people to change their Constitution, not the right of the Government or even of the Parliament." Republic of Australia--A Forum: Summary of the Discussion At the State Library of NSW's Republic of Australia: A Forum site, which was held at the library on 14 August 1999. Summary of the audience questions and comments (and responses thereto) to addresses gicen by panel members. "Audience questions and comments arising from addresses given by members of the panel tended to cluster around a few specific issues, principally: a call for more detailed information relating to proposed changes; a desire to understand the differences between the proposed and the present constitutional system; the role of history in understanding present debates; the rights and responsibilities of citizens; a questioning of the apparent urgency in a call for change and the importance of ensuring that any and all constitutional change embodies the values and hopes of an Australian society." Republic yes, but the people must elect the president Probably a press release. At the Democratic Socialist Party's website on the referendum. Advocates a "Yes" vote, but... "Although the option of having the president popularly elected will not be on the ballot, Democratic Socialists advocate exercising such a choice anyway: by writing the words "elected by the people" on your ballot. Such an action would indicate opposition to the deliberate restriction of democracy and choice implicit in the republic referendum." Transcript of [a] Doorstop Interview Kim Beazley MP answers three questions put to him by an unnamed journalist. At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Interview dated as Monday 23 August, 1999. Does not take a stand on the republic issue (which is why the transcript is here.) "JOURNALIST: Mr Beazley, whose head would you like to see on Australian coins, if we ditch the Queen? "BEAZLEY: I would like to see the faces of ordinary Australians. We have the most interesting faces, I think, in the world--our multicultural Australia--and I would like to see us celebrate ourselves on our coinage and on our notes. ... we ought to, at our leisure, decide how best we want ourselves represented. But I'm going to vote for the ordinary Australian." We're not ready for republic vote (missing) By Bob Hogg. Published in the The Age on 20/1/1999. Argues other constitutional changes should be addressed first. Also proposes a schedule for achieving a republic. "The proposed referendum on the republic scheduled for November has all the hallmarks of a highly expensive travesty of democratic practice. Those voters who support a republic in principle will not be able to exercise a choice on the kind of republic they want, and nor will the monarchists be able to express a preference if their cause is lost, though that's unlikely because the referendum looks to be a futile exercise. The short-term interests of the major political parties and the varying interests of the pro-republicans appear set to clash and scuttle for some years the possibility of an Australian head of state." What about the Preamble? (missing) By Jenny Doran. At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. ("The Prime Minister's impertinance in taking it upon himself to write a preamble to Australia's constitution in itself is entirely unacceptable. As Gerard Henderson said; 'What is surprising is that Howard appears to have thought he could write a preamble to wide acclaim. That will remain unlikely. Until hubris freezes over'.") What Price a Just Republic? Peter Lewis interviews Pat O'Shane. 29 October 1999. At the Workers Online site. "Magistrate Pat O'Shane is far from happy with the republican model. But she till believes a Yes vote is her best chance for genuine constitutional reform." "[O]ur Constitution presently is in fact a description of an Act of a Parliament of a foreign power. It is no different a situation than if say, China or Mongolia or South Africa or Peru decided that they would legislate to give Australia a Constitution. That is what the situation is, it is that ludicrous. And it is that which those campaigning for the "no" vote are really asking us to accept. And I can't imagine that any self respecting independent-minded Australian would tolerate that situation any longer." Yes Men Up Against Precedents By Michael Warby. Originally published in The Australian 12 March 1999. At the Institute of Public Affairs' website. ("A history of constitutional change in Australia would be a very short book.")
News Perspectives	A selection of perspectives in the foreign press, and some from the domestic press which have not been filed elsewhere.
News Perspectives	Domestic Media Australia, Leadership, and the Republic Debate (PDF) By James Dunn. May 1999. Published in Leadership Magazine. Dunn talks to Wendy Machin of the ARM and Kerry Jones of the ACM about the then forthcoming referendum. At the Leadership Victoria website. The Last of the R-Word By Samuela Harris. In The [Adelaide] Advertiser, 5/11/1999. At Louise Nordestgaard's Australian Referendum on the Republic site. "One last sleep and then it will all be over. Won't we be glad to see the last of the R-word. Let alone the assorted associations which have emerged from 'yes' and 'no', those little words with big consequences." Real Issues in Republic Debate By Jonathan Strauss. 17/2/1999. At the the Green Left Weekly Home Page site. ("The biggest threat to the adoption of the parliamentary republic proposed by the Australian Republican Movement (ARM), which was passed by the 1998 Constitutional Convention and is supported by the ALP and many Liberal politicians and business figures, comes not from monarchists but from republicans who support a popularly elected president".) Foreign Media Allies split over referendum on republic By Andrew Nette. Dated 13 February 1999. At the website of Asia Times, a Hong Kong news service. Australia's image at stake in republic vote By Sonny Inbaraj. Dated 5 November 1999. At the website of Asia Times, a Hong Kong news service. Why Republicans Oppose an Australian Republic By Simon Orme. Dated 5 August 1999. The republican debate from a NZ perspective. At the website of Scoop, a New Zealand online news service.
Opinion Polls	Roy Morgan "No" Case Inches Towards Victory: In Republic Referendum Poll # 3247. Face-to-face interviews, Australia-wide, 2211 electors on the weekends of September 25/26, October 2/3 and 9/10, 1999. Republic Referendum 99: The Class War In Reverse Poll # 3249. Face-to-face interviews, Australia-wide, 2211 electors from September 25/26 to October 9/10, 1999. ("The push towards Australia becoming a republic is being driven by the nation's most wealthy and educated citizens, with 59.5% of Australians from households earning more than $80,000 per annum intending to vote 'Yes' to the November 6 referendum question on an Australian republic. And, contrary to republican experience of other nations throughout history, the most disadvantaged elements of Australian society are opposing change away from the Monarchy. More than half of Australians from households earning less than $30,000 a year intend to vote 'No' to the republic referendum....") Republic In Trouble In All States: "No" Case Set To Win Referendum Easily Poll #3250. Face-to-face interviews, Australia-wide, 1808 electors from October 16/17 and 23/24, 1999. ("With two weeks to go until the referendum on November 6, after the 'Yes' and 'No' cases launched their respective campaigns, support for the 'Yes' case for Australia to become a republic has fallen substantially, with victory for the republicans looking an increasingly forlorn hope.") Both Referendum Questions To Be Defeated Poll #3255. Face-to-face interviews, Australia-wide, 829 electors on October 30/31, 1999. ("With one week to go until the November 6 referendum, the 'Yes' case for Australia to become a Republic appears set to be rejected, both nationally and in a majority of states. More Australians surveyed (47%) say they intend to vote 'No' to the question on Australia becoming a republic with a President elected by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Parliament, than 'Yes' (41.5%), although a large proportion (11.5%) are still undecided.")
Submissions (on the exposure drafts or to the Joint Committee)	It seemed unfair to pigeon-hole submissions as for or against (or mixed), so I've set up a separate subsection for those which happen to be available on the WWW. (The exception is Harry Evans', which may require a word or two of explanation. The site I initially linked his submission from did not identify it as such (and indeed titled it "Republic Criticisms from Clerk of the Senate"); and given the content it was assigned a slot in the "Republic Bill: Views Against" area. The surfacing of the covering letter to his submission, however, clearly shows this view to be mistaken. His critique was actually part of his submission to the joint committee. Given that the submission wholly critical of the republic & Nomination Committee bills, and he makes no recommendations in it, it seemed more appropriate to leave it--along with the letter--where it is rather than move it here.)
	ACTU Submission on the Proposed Preamble (missing) At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. Submission on the Republic Bill (missing) At the ACTU Republic Campaign site. Peter Crayson Submission on the Republic Bills (197K) At his website. Law Society of NSW Submission on the Republic Bills At their website. Women's Constitutional Convention (steering committee) Submission on the Presidential Nominations Committee Bill 1999 At the Australian Women's Constitutional Network site. In addition, the steering committee also sent the Federal Attorney-General Daryl Williams a letter on 18 February 1999 on a related issue.
Other Transcripts (radio)	Parliamentary Debates Democrats Motion to Support Republic Carried 16-3 Unformatted transcript of a debate in the South Australian Legislative Council on 5 August 1998 during the committee stage. At the website for the South Australian branch of the Australian Democrats. Radio Broadcasts Interview Transcript: Peter Costello Interviewer: Jon Faine. On 3LO, Sydney, 8:30 pm, 4/8/1999. The republic, tax reform and other matters. Stored at Federal Treasurer's website. Interview Transcript: Tim Fischer Interviewer: Tony Delroy. On 2BL, Sydney, 11.06pm 14/12/1998. Mostly a discussion of Australia's trade prospects, but towards the end does touch on the republic issue, mainly about the timetable for it. Stored at Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade website. Republic Debate A debate on the ABC radio's AM program on 2 November 1999, chaired by the president of the Australasian Intervarsity Debating Society, Nick Purtell, and with Rebecca Graham as the adjudicator (& "who will be the chief adjudicator of the World University Debating Championships to be held in January [2000] at Sydney University"). There were six speakers: Malcolm Turnbull, Natasha Stott Despoja and Jason Yat-Sen Li for the YES case and Kerry Jones, Ted Mack and Julian Leeser for the NO case. What does a republic mean for Australia politically Sarah Macdonald of Radio JJJ interviews Sophie Panopolos and "Jason" (Yat-Sen Li?) on the then forthcoming republic issue. Exact date unknown, but in 1999. At the Triple J website. What does it mean for Australia's culture Note that the title does not seem to reflect the content. Sarah Macdonald of Radio JJJ interviews Ryan Heath of Young Australians for a Republic and Heidi Szar of Young Australians Against This Republic on their views concerning the 1999 model for a republic. Exact date unknown, but in 1999. At the Triple J website. Your Basic Guide to the Referendum Note that the title does not really reflect the content. Sarah Macdonald of Radio JJJ interviews Professor Cheryl Saunders of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation on the then forthcoming republic issue. Professor Saunders also fields questions from various callers. Exact date unknown, but in 1999. At the Triple J website.
The Campaign (YES side)	Campaign Diaries The diary of a Yes man (missing) By Greg Barns. Published in the The Age on 11/12/1999. Extracts (June 9 to November 6) from the diary of the campaign director of the Australian Republican Movement. Although published post-referendum, I've filed them here since they were written during the campaign. Interviews Interview: The Young Republican Jason Yat-Sen Li, co-chair of the Yes Coalition and a member of the Yes Funding Committee, talks to Peter Lewis about the forthcoming campaign and other matters. At the Workers Online magazine's edition on the republic. (Issue 11, 30 April 1999.) Kim Beazley: Interview with Dave Eller (missing) Kim Beazley discusses the forthcoming referendum on Coast FM Radio, Mandurah, Western Australia. Transcript. Hosted at the ALP site. Kim Beazley: Interview with Kerry O'Brien (missing) Kim Beazley discusses the forthcoming referendum on ABC TV's 7:30 Report, 3 November 1999. Transcript. Hosted at the ALP site. Miscellaneous Views Tarred With the Same Brush By Neville Wran, who "asks why it is that the most fervant monarchists are also the most eager union-bashers." At the Workers Online magazine. (Issue 31, 17 September 1999.) On the Road Neville Wran on the Yes Campaign Guest reporter Neville Wran writes for the Workers Online magazine's edition on the republic. (Issue 11, 30 April 1999.) "Already fifty-nine per cent (59%) of Australian electors are in favour of the preferred model." Websites (Non-official) (Websites specifically set up by "Yes" campaigners (ie they originally had their own DNS addresses)) www.liberalrepublic.com Liberals (as in "Liberal Party") for an Australian Republic. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 20 November 1999.) www.republic.org.au The Australian Republican Movement's main site. Now has a flash version of the site as well as a HTML one. www.yesandmore.org Advocates "you vote 'yes' for a republic in the November 6 referendum, and that you endorse your voting paper with the words 'and More!' to indicate that you support more far-reaching constitutional change". Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 5 November 1999.) www.yescoalition.org.au (missing) The Yes Coalition for the Republic.
The Campaign (NO side)	Interviews Directing the Monarchists (missing) Deborah Snow talks to David Elliott, the campaign director for Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy (albeit more about his career than about the republic issue). Dated 1 September 1999. At the Sydney Morning Herald's site. Transcription of Kaleidoscope George & Felicity Stevenson of the CBA network talk to Nick Hobson of the Australian Republic Unplugged website & book, 12 September 1999. At the No Republic (Kingston) site. Victory Speech Kerry Jones At the Convention Centre, Darling Harbour, Sydney, 6 November, 1999. Stored at the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy site. Websites (Non-official) (Websites specifically set up by "No" campaigners (ie they originally had their own DNS addresses)) norepublic.homepage.com (missing) No Republic Victoria. www.australian.referendum.com/ (missing) Australian Referendum for a Republic www.norepublic.com.au Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) www.realrepublic.com.au Real Republic Limited: a direct election group. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 5 November 1999.) www.voteno.org.au Vote NO Alliance. Note: not to be confused with "www.voteno.COM.au", the official NO case site. Note: the original site has vanished from the WWW. The above link is to an archived copy maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Archived: 8 November 1999.) www.yaar.org.au (missing) Young Australians Against This Republic
The Campaign (The Media)	Articles The Media's Coverage of the Republic Referendum Richard Aedy talks with David Elliot, Wayne Burns, Chris Nash, Hugh Mackay, & Max Walsh on Radio National's The Media Report (4 November 1999). (Beware of the occasional transcription blooper. Eg: "...an increasing conservatism and saneness [sic?] in the Australian media...") "Proponents of both sides and independent observers assess the media's coverage of the Republic Referendum. They agree the media has taken a position...and supports the Yes case." "Hugh Mackay: ... I think we're looking here at one of those classic cases where there's a gap between an agenda being pushed by the mass media and the community's agenda. ... The media are notoriously not converters and influencers of public opinion. They are great influencers of the public agenda, but not of public opinion." "Richard Aedy: So why is the media so far ahead of the public on this issue? Hugh Mackay: Well the public might say why is the media so far behind us on this issue?" News Websites The ABC (news) Archive of online news articles on the republic issue. The ABC (general) A more general site on the 1999 referendum, including lots of links to other ABC stuff on the republic issue.
Local, State, & Other Conventions (documents & sites)	A place for documents of interest from these events which cannot be satisfactorily pigeon-holed elsewhere.
Local, State, & Other Conventions (documents & sites)	*Debating Forums organised by The Australian* newspaper Ipswich, Queensland The Republic debate in the Ipswich Workers Club Transcripts of speeches, with commentary by Scott Balson. At GWB's news site. Deliberative Poll, Canberra, 22-24 October 1999 Issues Deliberation Australia: A Republic, Yes or No? Project Description IDA Operating Team Final Report Press Releases "On October 22 through 24, 1999, a random sample of...three hundred [Australian citizens], recruited through scientific random sampling, will come from all corners of our country, and from all levels of our society" to Old Parliament House in Canberra for Australia's first ever Deliberative Poll. "They will spend two days discussing with each other, with experts and political leaders, the issues associated with the November referendum about Australia retaining its current form of government, or becoming a republic." Has an impressive line up for their advisory group, including Malcolm Fraser, Bob Hawke, Ian Sinclair, Malcolm Turnbull (of the ARM & the "Yes" Campaign Committe), Kerry Jones (of the ACM), Don Chipp, Phil Cleary, and Dame Leonie Kramer (of the "No" Campaign Committee). Local Conventions (General) Local Constitutional Conventions At an archived copy of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site at the National Library of Australia. List of participating councils, communiques, etc. Queensland Constitutional Convention, Gladstone, 16-18 June 1999 Framework Document At the Queensland's Constitution Homepage site. Background to the Commonwealth, aims of the convention ("The purpose of the Queensland Constitutional Convention is to consider the options for the States if the Commonwealth referendum on a republic is passed; the processes that the States might follow; and some additional associated questions."), convention themes and topics, etc. Communique At the Queensland's Constitution Homepage site. School Conventions (General)** School Constitutional Conventions At an archived copy of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site at the National Library of Australia. Issue papers, program, and delegate list.
FAQs (etc)	Questions: Women for an Australian Republic "How many questions will there be in the referendum?", "Will the president replace the Prime Minister?", and so forth. At an archived copy of the Women for an Australian Republic site maintained by the National Library of Australia. Referendum Information Service (missing) By the Law Foundation NSW. Ask a question (via email using the online form) about the 1999 referendum and the legal experts of the Law Foundation will do their best to supply an answer. Questions can also be submitted by fax. Operational from September 16, 1999.
Voting and Electoral Information	Voting and Electoral Information (for the referendum) "When will the referenda be held?", "Where do I vote?", and other information, including information about Australian Electoral Commission interpreter services. At the ALP's "Yes" case site. You and the Referendum, and how the Referendum will work By the Constitutional Centenary Foundation. Ignore the window title. This is a brief rundown of what will happen before and on November 6, 1999, and what majorities the republic and preamble bills require to be carried. At an archived copy of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation site at the National Library of Australia.
Referendum Results	1999 Referendum Report and Statistics The AEC's report. Background, enrolment, statistics, etc. At the AEC website.

Caution: this is only a subpage of my Republic Guide site. Links should be made instead to http://www-personal.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/republic.html

Other (Unofficial or Defunct) Blueprints

Comparison Charts (Etc)

Comparison charts of the draft constitutions below (together with the existing system & the Keating plan for comparison).

Prepared by Stephen Souter

Presidential Power Charts: By Nick Hobson. A comparison using colour graphs of the presidential powers of the "Governor-General versus various presidential models" (viz. Turnbull, Teague, Winterton, Keating's). Another chart compares the "Governor-General/President versus the Executive Council."

Republican Models: By Bryan Palmer. At his Oz Politics website. Summarises the four models put to the 1998 Convention, plus the Keating model, an Republic Advisory Committee model, and a "USA model". Note the Bipartisan model one is the version proposed at the Convention, not the one put to referendum.

Draft Republican Constitutions

Simon Bastin's Draft (105K)

A Winterton-style republic, but with federal powers greatly extended, the rights of the people enumerated, and the conditions under which early elections might be held limited. The Queen is removed as head of state, and a Winterton-model President installed. (See also his other, much more radical draft (in the Radical Revisions section below.)

Dr John P. Costella's Draft

Overview (HTML)
Overview, Discussion, & Draft Constitution (ZIP+RTF)

Amongst the changes: directly elected president for life, Senate power to block Supply guaranteed, entrenchment of proportional representation for Senate elections, federal judges appointed for fixed terms (14 years in case of High Court justices), "Emergency Votes of the People" for dismissing presidents or dissolving either or both houses of Parliament, House of Representatives (not president) dismisses PMs & ministries, Australia Day becomes the 9th of May (see Dr Costella's "Discussion" file for why) and entrenched as a public holiday, while the Senate's President becomes the "Principal".
Note: the two main files I have for the present put online in compressed form due to their size (>500K). PC users will need WinZip or PkZip, Mac users will need something like ZipIt or StuffIt's Expander Enhancer to up-zip them, all of which are available from archives (eg Info-Mac) on the WWW.
I eventually hope to put them up in HTML, but time constraints forbid doing that right now. Unzipped, the files themselves are in RTF format, which should (hopefully) work for the majority of word processors.

Constitutional Reform in Australia
By Peter Crayson. A draft (minimalist) republican constitution, together with three variations. It includes:

A summary of the proposals
A chart comparing the main draft with the existing Constitution (and based on the one composed by me :) above).
Suggestions for amendments of a more substantial kind (expressed as amendments to the stage one proposals).

Also:

The ConCon Model
A draft of the Constitution incorporating changes "consistent with the communique issued by" the February 1998 Convention. (There is also a page of comments on the proposed new preamble.)
The ConCon Plus Model
Same as the Same as the "ConCon" model but "incorporating some additional ideas".

Leigh T Gillespie's Draft (missing)

Described as a "complete re-write of the Australian Constitution", though that is not perhaps quite correct. More of an incorporation of various ideas into the existing Constitution combined with a renumbering of the sections. (What happens to the covering clauses is unclear, but these are presumably repealed.) Includes a directly-elected President (NB: Senate's "president" renamed "chancellor", who becomes Acting President when need be), four-year terms, a new preamble, a bill of rights, etc.

See also Gillespie's essay Australia - A Republic? for a summary of what he believes should be the "minimum amount of alteration".

Palmer's Model Republican Constitution By Bryan Palmer. At his Oz Politics website. Overview plus draft of Constitution Act with the changes proposed incorporated into it. Stated to be a "minimalist model", but proposes what is in effect a (kind of) executive presidency based on the Westminster system (though s61 would seem to infer that the PM does not necessarily have to enjoy the confidence of the House of Representatives). No president per se, but the prime minister would become "the head of state and the head of the executive government" (s59), albeit like the GG he would be obliged to act on the advice of an executive council (ss60 & 127). Certain executive powers and functions formerly exercised by the Governor-General would be assigned to the High Court (s61). The Court would also be given a brand-new power: to be able to dissolve both houses. (Not to be confused with the s57 power; the power to dissolve both houses there is given to the PM.) References to State Governors in the Constitution would be replaced by ones to State premiers--with the notable exception of s15. Curiously, s64 appears to give the PM the power to appoint and remove himself! Section 61 would seem to infer that the PM can breach court orders (so long as such breaches are not "serious or persistent") and contravene provisions of the Constitution (so long as no "fundamental provision[s]" are among them). Which provisions are "fundamental" and what constitutes a "serious" breach are not defined. (That would presumably be left up to the courts and their court orders to discover.)

Steve Palyga's Draft of a Model (Republican) Constitution for Australia (63K) His introductory notes

"Someone's idea of a possible Australian Constitution"

Author unknown. Directly elected President and "Congress" (consisting of a "House of the States" and a "House of the People"), and directly elected (for 5-year terms) High Court. A Vice-President. Bill of rights. Bans compulsory acquisition of property (s6.3.3), makes State laws prevail over federal ones (s7.1.5), constitutional amendments require 2/3 majorities at referenda (s8.1.3) (and some classes of amendment are banned altogether (eg s8.1.1)).

Senator Baden Teague's Draft

At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Another copy is here.)

Malcolm Turnbull's Draft

At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Another copy is here.)

George Winterton's Draft Keeping it Simple: Winterton explains his draft constitution. At an archived copy of the Australian Republican Movement site maintained by the National Library of Australia. (Another copy, split into sections, is here at the real ARM site.) Independent Monthly version of Winterton's draft (missing) GIF scans of the draft (plus a postscript version of "Keeping it Simple") as it originally appeared in IM. A postscript version of the draft also available. Authorised by the publisher & the author.

Other Proposed Republican Models

The Keating Model

Articles & Other Essays
The Republic Advisory Committee: A Review
By Malcolm Turnbull (the Committee's chairman).
Imagining Constitutional Crises: Power and (Mis)behaviour in Republican Australia
By Glenn A. Patmore and John D. Whyte. An analysis of various aspects of the Keating model. In the Vol 25, No 1 (1997) of the Federal Law Review. Stored at the archived copy of the Federal Law Review at the National Library of Australia.
Speeches
Prime Minister Keating's parliamentary speech
Extracted from the on-line Hansard version. Another copy.
The then Leader of the Opposition John Howard's Response.
(Another copy here.)
Summaries (of the RAC report)
Australia as a Republic
Summary of the Republic Advisory Committee report. At the Irish Australia site.
Summaries & Outlines (of the model)
Point summary
At the ARM site. (Another copy here.)
Brief outline
At the ARM site. (Another copy here.)
Detailed questions & answers (44k)
At the ARM site. (Another copy can be found here and another here.)
Transcripts
The Place of the Crown
Keating is interviewed by A.B.C. Radio's A.M. programme on his plans for the republic. (Part of?) a transcript.

Australian Republican Movement
Six Models for an Australian Republic
Discussion paper. The six models are:
Prime Minister appoints the President
People nominate, Parliament appoints the President
Presidential Assembly appoints the President
People elect the President
People choose from Parliament's List
Executive Presidency

Andrew Cole
A Madisonian Republic for Australia: Model 7 (PDF)
Stored at my own site.
"[P]revious models for an Australian republic...assumed that the focus of change should be office of the Governor-General. This model assumes the focus of the debate concerning an Australian republic should in fact be the office of the Prime Minister."
The PM is "a directly elected Head of Government, forming and leading an Executive Cabinet, separated from the Parliament and exercising executive power vested by the Commonwealth Constitution in an appointed and non-political Governor-General as Australia's Head of State". Governor-General appointed by PM for 5 year term, dismissal (by PM) requires consent of Senate. GG has same reserve powers as at present but these would be codified.
An introduction to his university thesis (PDF) which the model was developed for is also available.

Ross Garrad's Model
"People's President"--The Best of Both Worlds
President chosen for a single 6-year term by Parliament (but by popular election if more than one candidate).
"This model provides an inherent motivation for the MP's to unite around a high-quality, non-political candidate, and thus avoid a full election."

Wayne Hall
Optional Executive Monarchy
A proposal for "presenting the public not with the choice between the sovereignty of Crown-in-Parliament and rule by a president or by parliament but the choice between the sovereignty of Crown-in-Parliament and the sovereignty of the Crown, i.e. an optional executive monarchy, always for a specific period and always reversible."

Ned Iceton
A Bipartisan Model for Choosing the President: A Possible Four-Stage Process
A suggestion for a four-stage presidential selection process that has both a parliamentary vote and popular election. At his website.

David Leed
David Leed's Model
Direct elections (with open nominations) produces a slate of five presidential candidates from which Parliament makes the final choice.

Yogi Marriot
States Head-of-State Selection (STATES) Model
Cautionary note: the STATES website is not unlike a jungle. Much of the prose is well-nigh impenetrable (eg "The gazetted details repetitive on a forever basis... In applying that sequence states will be referred to by the logical terminologies Provider-State, Elect-State and Standing-States") and some of the "roads" seem to be in a fragmented, semi-finished state marked by plagues of ellipses (the one in the example above, for instance, is the author's, not mine!). Patience would be a definite asset: some sentences need to be read several times before an inkling dawns. Trying to make head-or-tale of the model is an exercise I will leave to others.

Richard McGarvie's Model

By Richard E. McGarvie, former Governor & Supreme Court judge of Victoria. More papers by him relevant to his model may be found in the Issues section above.

[Note: The following papers are here because they describe (or debate various aspects of) McGarvie's model for an Australian Presidency ("a Constitutional Council to exercise the one power the Queen now exercises, appointing or dismissing the Governor-General; patriating to the Governor-General such powers of head of state as are now the Queen's rather than the Governor-General's; and making the Governor-General the actual head of state of Australia instead of the de facto head of state as now.")]

Bring the Republic Debate Back to Earth: Canberra Times article, 1 January 1998. Short.
Breaches in the Debate Avoidance Wall Adelaide Review article, December 1997. Largely a critique of George Winterton's views re the McGarvie model. "Our democracy depends on the sanction of dismissal and if it evaporates so will democracy."
Constitutional Council needs Women: Media release, 16 May 1997. ("A woman should be a member of the Constitutional Council to appoint the Governor-General in the system I propose if we go to a republic...") (Another copy here.)
The Future (of) Governorship: Keith Jones Memorial Oration, Mentone Grammar School, 16 May 1997. (Another copy here. Note: it's title omits the "of".)
Responsible Lawyers and the Republic Debate: Article originally published in the June 1997 edition of Young Lawyers. (Another copy here.)
Self-Sufficiency of the McGarvie Model: Adelaide Review article, February 1998.

The Public Policy Assessment Society Model
Moving from Monarchy to Republic
Draft paper by The Public Policy Assessment Society. Examines how the Federal Constitution might be modified to create an Australian republic. Draws in part on the Winterton model, though with one major difference: the president would be popularly elected rather than chosen by Parliament. (Also warns against the "package approach": viz. bundling with the republican referendum proposal miscellaneous amendments "not absolutely necessary to the achievement of a republic". In particular, any new preamble. Such matters, it argues, ought to be put to the popular vote as separate questions.) Another copy is available here at the Society's mirror site.

John Pyke's Model
Constitutional Alterations for a Real Republic
"Why Minimal Changes are Not Enough". At his Constitutional Convention campaign website.

The Republican Party of Australia
Preferred Model for the Republic of Australia: 15 Point Manifesto (PDF)
"Position paper". Popularly elected (by optional preferential voting) three-member "presidium" (with the one receiving the most votes to be president) for a president for a single 4-year term. Stricts caps on electoral expenditure (with fines and imprisonment for a candidate who goes over the limit).
Note: The present (PDF) file now also contains the RPA's manifesto (in very very tiny print) which you must scroll past first before you reach the description of their preferred model.

David Shannon's Minimalist Model
A Minimum of Constitution changes required to become a Republic
"Baby Steps to an Australian Republic". Text of changes proposed. Removes "Queen", "Royal", and "references to British currency" but the "Governor-General" is not altered to "president". The "Governor-General" would, however, be appointed by Parliament--apparently for life, or so it would seem from the proposal! No term of office is specified and no mechanism seems to be provided for removing the GG from office. (The old mechanism in s2--"during the Queen's pleasure"--is removed but no replacement given.) This may not have been an oversight. A much more radical "alternative Australian Constitution" specifically states (item 31) that a Governor-General "shall retain office until replaced, or until resigning office in writing addressed to the Speaker". Also removes (as opposed to amends) the last two paragraphs of s73 for reasons that are not made clear.

James F. Stack's Model
"Australian Republic?" Proposed Model for an Australian Republic (missing)
In the form of a long essay. Directly elected presidency (but number of candidates limited to five "[t]o prevent confusion in the Australian electorate and also to ensure a positive result"), two Vice Presidents, five-year term, limit of two terms, upper age limit (effectively 70 years), and a requirement for medical examinations before and periodically during office. Uses a variation of the "recall" for removing the president from office: "Any citizen or group of citizens may, at any time, apply to the High Court for impeachment proceedings to be taken against the President", with the High Court (rather than a popular vote) having the final say.

2-Member Electoral College Model
2-Member Electoral College
By David Catchpole. Features a non-executive presidency chosen by a two-member college elected by proportional representation.

Radical Revisions

I should explain the word "radical" here. I do not use it (as some do) to mean merely a directly elected presidency (or even the use of CIR). An executive presidency might make the grade, depending on what else was bundled with it, but the models gathered here go way beyond even that. Their most typical change is to a unitary state. But there are often other equally radical ones as well. For example, an inquisitorial (as opposed to adversarial) judicial system, or a body of citizens (chosen by lot for one year) for passing judgment on laws enacted by Parliament. In at least one case (that of the Alliance for Democratic Reform), the approach taken to implementing the chosen model might also be fairly described as "radical".

David Shannon's Minimalist Model

An Alternative Australian Constitution
By David Shannon

Queen not mentioned but there is a "Governor-General" rather than a "president" (though he adds that he "prefer[s] 'Governor'"). Federal state, unicameral parliament, executive presidency (the Governor-General"shall head the Civil and Military Services of Government), Governor-General appointed by Parliament (apparently for life; or at least for as long as the GG cares to stay in office), citizen initiated referenda, unified judicial system, bill of rights, most federal taxation to be abolished (or so at least I take to be the meaning of "The Government shall have no authority to exact revenue, save in accordance with Section 44 or by referendum"; s44 says "There shall be a tax of 1% of the value of land as ascertained by the owner, collected annually"), also treaty powers and government borrowing to be forbidden ("save by referendum").

The Australian Republic--A citizen-centred alternative
By Ratifiers for Democracy
Another somewhat "maximalist" solution to the republic issue. In essence: a President chosen by Parliament. The latter would be a single-house legislature which would make laws in conjunction with the Ratifiers, a body of citizens (100,000 are suggested) chosen by lot for one year, who would pass a YES/NO judgment on each parliamentary bill using a system of "inverse proportional voting" (ie a bill which enjoyed 95% parliamentary support would require only 5% Ratifier support to pass).
"The purpose of the Ratifiers is to ensure that legislation passed by Parliament is acceptable to Australians, without putting restrictions on our Parliamentarians to act as leaders and lead (but not drive) us."
Now also contains passages about CIR and "The President and the Ratifiers".

Constitution of Australia: Proposed (missing)
By Heath V.W. Craft

Currently only revised chapters I & VII (plus a modified preamble) online. Unitary state, bill of rights, president chosen by popular vote.

Constitution, Government, and the Electoral System: Policies for the Republic (missing)
A draft of a policy by Klaas Woldring for the New Labour Party.

Not quite certain where to place this one. Less a model than pieces of one. That is, a suite of ideas (in the form of an essay), with associated discussion and (brief) recommendations. Details are few and sketchy, and many of the ideas (Hare-Clarke system of PR, fixed 4-year terms, bill of rights) are not terribly radical. However, one of the recommendations does call for a unitary state, which is why the paper has ended up here (rather than in "Other Proposed Republican Models). Note: there are also no specific recommendations about a republic. However, interspersed throughout is a discussion of various aspects of the republic and the republican debate, and several of the recommendations are specifically named as forming "the core ingredients of a Maximalist Republic". Comes complete with references.

A New Australian Constitution: the Mollison Model (missing)
By Charles Mollison

A complete re-write. In essence: the abolition of the States, a bill of rights, a legislative power vested in a "central Government" consisting of a "President", "Parliament", and a Senate, all directly elected (but the President by a rather complicated 4-round system), an inquisitorial judicial system, and citizen-initiated referenda.

A proposed Constitution for the Commonwealth of Australia when we become a republic
By David Cusack

A "proposed Constitution for the Commonwealth of Australia when we become a republic". A complete rewrite. States abolished, 2-chamber Parliament, bill of rights, CIR, largely ceremonial president popularly elected for 7-year term. Goes into fine detail on some matters (eg "thirty days before the election to fill the office of President, all candidates shall address the people through the Parliamentary Broadcasting Office and issue a public statement respecting their candidature"). Appears to entrench great slabs of the bureaucracy (there's a (long!) list of commissions & boards it specifies the compositions for), and some goals appear impossibly lofty (eg "the National Elections Commission shall always ensure that information in a referendum shall be written in clear, concise English, without ambiguity and with the purpose of proposals for amendment fully explained in a manner which does not indicate either approval or disapproval of the question").

A Unitary Republic with an Elected President
By Dr Gavin Putland

A complete rewrite, though individual provisions are on occasions modelled after the old. (And at least one is partially modelled after an obscure provision in the US Constitution.) The States are abolished (but "Former States" can still have a sort of residual effect in some places; the States are replaced by "Municipalities"), Senate abolished, directly elected president (and deputy president) nominated by "Municipal Councils", modified version of the Westminster system, fixed 4-year terms (and a quorum of 2/3) for Parliament, 8-year terms for the president, those convicted of treason lose the right to vote. (Also: "A person who presents himself as an Elector at a polling booth shall be turned away if he...has failed to follow simple and reasonable enrolment procedures prescribed by law.") Lots of other changes. Note: due to the mechanism used for election the president and deputy president will most likely come from different political parties.

Now includes an overview.

Politics in the Making--Taking the Republican Debate Seriously: Adopting a Maximalist Approach (March 1995)
By Dr Klaas Woldring (Alliance for Democratic Reform)

A discussion paper, but with the accent more on the "Maximalist Approach" than on the republican issue. In essence: separation of government from parliament, Hare-Clark proportional representation, fixed four-year terms, a unitary state, and a bill of rights. To achieve this: it would abandon the existing Constitution and draft a new one using an extra-constitutional process involving a special Constitutional Commission and a non-section 128 referendum. Note: the republic issue actually gets only passing attention, although the implication would seem to be that the monarchy would expire with the old Constitution.

("...Australians should not allow themselves to be governed from the grave, at great cost, simply because an amendment procedure, agreed to in 1900, doesn't work and cannot be changed in practice...")

Proposed Constitution for the Democratic Republic of Australia
By Garry Bates.

Comparatively brief, but highly radical in some respects. No abolition of States, but abolition of Federal, State, and Territory Parliaments and their replacement by a Council of State and 127 Area Councils. The latter are popular elected, the former is not. Also features a bill of rights, recognition of "the prior occupation of Australia by indigenous peoples and the taking of the land by force of arms, a "Governor of the Republic" directly "elected by universal suffrage of all citizens as determined by the Council of State on the 1st Saturday in February every six years", a High Court which "may allow appeal to a United Nations or world Court authority as it sees fit", etc.

Simon Bastin's Radical Draft (59K)

The States are abolished, Senate elected one member per Region (a "Local Government Area consisting of two adjoining divisions for the House of Representatives"). Many other changes. (As might be guessed from the fact that this version is about one-half the size of his minimalist version above.)

The "United People Power Inc." Alternative Three

A highly radical re-write in more than one sense of the term! No president or monarchy, but there's a directly elected "Crown Council" with vast (eg ss39, 42, & 49) powers, a Governor-General, citizen-initiated referenda and recall, punitive export duties on foreign-owned assets (s11), a provision to fly the flag (s12), prohibitions against the federal authorities duplicating States functions and services (s13), and a unique view (s3) regarding what constitutes "common law".

("4.(c) Existing Australian laws found to be difficult for the average Australian citizen to comprehend shall be rewritten to enable ready understanding by the average Australian citizen."

50. [...] The Crown Council shall convey to the Parliament any request the Crown Council may have to implement legislation including penal clauses required to protect the public and the national interest from media bias. The Parliament shall without undue delay pass legislation required to deal with the situation in the people's best interest.")

Note: the draft itself appears to have vanished. (You now have to buy it!) All that remains (assorted other blurb aside) is a Summary of the Alternative Three Proposal

Non-Republican Proposals

Monarchy or Republic? Is there a Third Way? (missing): Author unknown. At the site (and the front page is stamped with the name) of White Crest Pty Ltd. "An Australian Head of State, resident in Australia and Head of State of only Australia? YES. An Australian Republic? NO." In the form of a "slide-show". ("'Monarchists, Royalists and Republicans' recommends that holders of the Order of Australia should select and recommend one, and only one, person to succeed to powers vested in the Australian Crown.")

Miscellaneous

Constitutional Centenary Foundation

Three parts of a four-part series of short essays on the issue of republican models. For the fourth part, see the Foundation's entry up in the Issues section.

Models for a Australian Republic: The Current Debate (missing)
Looks briefly at "what is republic" and "the present system", including an explanation of the "reserv powers".
Models for a Australian Republic (missing)
Looks briefly (complete with comparison chart) at three models and how they work overseas.
Minimal Republican Models (missing)
A more extended look at minimalist republican models.

Plebiscite for an Australian Republic Bill 1997 (First Reading, H. of R) (missing)

A Bill (sponsored by the ALP) for a national plebiscite on the Australian republic. The questions to be put would be decided by a parliamentary joint committee. Note: It's in Adobe Acrobat (not HTML) format. (An equivalent copy for its first reading in the Senate can be found here.)

Republic (Consultation on an Elected President) Bill 1999 (First Reading, Senate)

A proposed Bill (sponsored by the Australian Democrats) for a national plebiscite on a popularly elected president. At the Australian Democrat's website.

Senator Murray on his private Members Bill, Consultation on an Elected President, Bill 1999
In Parliament, 30 June 1999.

The Australian Republic Issue

A Guide

The 1998 Constitutional Convention

The 1999 Blueprint

Other (Unofficial or Defunct) Blueprints