A DANGEROUS PLAN

Article published in The Age, 11 October 1999, p. 15

The manner of appointment and dismissal largely determines how a governor-general or president will act in the office.

At present governors-general with the necessary experience and community respect are selected in a manner creating no mandate to tempt rivalry with the elected government. Chosen by the prime minister alone, a governor-general has no basis whatsoever for imagining any mandate or authority from the people or their elected representatives.

Everyone agrees the prime ministers on both sides of politics have chosen governors-general very well. Bearing the sole responsibility for the choice, a prime minister's reputation in the community and history depends on making a good choice.

All this would change if the Malcolm Turnbull model were voted in at the 6 November referendum. Its president would usually have the great mandate of nomination by an influential community organisation, selected by the Short-List Committee to its short-list, endorsement by the party rooms on both sides of politics and election by virtually all the Parliament. It would often exceed the parliamentary mandate of the prime minister. The title 'president' would create expectations of strong assertive Presidents like those of the republic of the United States of America.

Four of the nine Australians appointed governor-general were Cabinet ministers and three High Court judges. None of these would be available under the Turnbull model. No Commonwealth Government for 50 years has had a two-thirds majority of both houses, so the support of both government and opposition would be essential. Neither side would support a Cabinet minister of the other side becoming president.

The Commonwealth Government is a party to most cases that come before the High Court. A judge who has accepted nomination and needed the government's support to become President would have to reveal that before such a case started. The judge could have no confidence of getting the numbers in the Short-List Committee and the party rooms on both sides. This real embarrassment makes High Court candidature unlikely.

Others of the calibre of governors-general would be unlikely to become presidential candidates. The process would be high farce from the outset. Some of the most ridiculous people would be nominated. Allegations of disgraceful conduct against candidates of high reputation would emerge, as with nominees for the US Supreme Court. Candidates' names would leak. Media polls and votes would be likely to be topped by celebrities. Great pressure would be brought on the party rooms to choose the celebrity at the top. The media make celebrities and an heir to a media empire with celebrity status would be hard to beat.

Everyone would blame everyone else for an unsuitable President.

The McGarvie model leaves the manner of appointment as it is now. My recent book Democracy: choosing Australia's republic, fully explains these things.