Minutes/Policy Development Committee/Constitutional Reform WG/2014-03-19

Meeting Minutes This document is a record of a meeting. Do not edit this document without contacting the relevant group first.

Agenda

• Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians (Mozart)
• Republicanism (Mozart)
• Citizen-initiated referenda (Mozart)
• Bill of Rights policy amendments (Mozart)

Minutes

Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians

• This is the first priority.
• Recommendations in summary and the full report are available at http://www.recognise.org.au/expert-panel-report
• Given our commitment to democracy, human rights and social equality, all of these recommendations seem appropriate to adopt.
• Government has committed to holding a referendum.
• Between now and the next meeting the executive summary should be read and further discussion to take place.

Republicanism

• Current system seems fundamentally okay
• Room for modification of existing constitutional monarchy into a parliamentary republic
  • Prime Minister remains Head of Government, President as Head of State
  • President has ceremonial duties like the Governor-General, but no powers of veto over legislation. Essentially would perform the duties of the Governor-General as they are performed now.
• What does the current Governor-General do?
  • Administers the Constitution, including:
    • Swearing in Members of Parliament and Senators, and accepting their resignations
    • Appoints Prime Ministers from leader of majority party or coalition of parties.
    • Deals wth double dissolution situations.
    • Issues writs for elections.
    • Bestows honours.
    • Appoints ambassadors.
    • Non-executive functions.
• If we allow the President to be appointed by Parliament, we avoid turning it into a Labor/Liberal US-style Presidential race.
  • If you appoint from Parliament you can at least get a non-political presidency.
  • Appoint President by 2/3 majority of Parliament, or 80% even (to avoid a situation where one party gets more than 2/3s of seats).
• Divided opinion on whether we need a policy regarding republicanism.
  • Concern that demand for a referendum until it succeeds is pigheaded; forcing people to vote on a referendum that already failed in 1999 would not be progress.
  • The Monarchy is a relic of feudalism, fundamentally undemocratic, and not Australian. This is a legacy of colonialism.
• Mozart's opinion is that a position on the matter is all that's needed at this stage. Which side we would be on if a referendum did come up.
  • Broad proposal is that we support the replacement of the monarch with a president; a head of state with solely ceremonial roles.
  • How to elect them is the detail to be nutted out.
  • However, there is benefits of retaining a monarch:
    • Stable stucture, doesn't change often, fairly non-controversial, and people have an emotional attachment to the Queen.
• 1999 referendum was defeated:
  • This was barely defeated however, with a 10% margin.
  • It was also 15 years ago.
  • The question was arguably rigged.
• Weak position (if a referendum happened, we'd support a republic) or bullying position (keep voting until we get what we want).
  • The weaker position is not a bad position.
  • Weak line doesn't require specifying a voting model. We can just say we support any model that delivered a non-partisan presidency with purely ceremonial powers.
    • This seems generally acceptable.
• General agreement that a Parliamentary Republic, in which the President replaces the Monarchy, is non-partisan, and has ceremonial responsibilities, is acceptable.
• No majority opinion on whether to pursue this issue at this stage; though agreement that if it were to happen, a simple statement is appropriate.

Citizens-initiated referenda

• The Swiss model for this might be appropriate for us in Australia.
• In Switzerland, if you get 50,000 signatures on a petitition, you can hold a referenda on laws.
  • If the federal legislature passes a law, and the people don't want it, if you get 50K signatures, everyone gets to vote on it and can effectively strike down laws passed.
• This seems quite democratic.
• Australians tend against voting is the immediate downside.
• https://www.ch.ch/en/referendum/
• Might lend power to reactionary organised groups.
• We imported our mode of constitutional amendment from the Swiss, but with less participation.
• Issue with using fixed numbers, might be more appropriate to work on a percentage of currently eligible voters.
• We already have a position on allowing direct petitions to Government.
  • This is a watered-down form of the Swiss model.
• General agreement in favour of adopting a policy along these lines.
• Elections would stop being carte blanches and mandates
• Could help resolve issues like the Carbon Tax.

Bill of Rights

• Item skipped due to lack of preparedness.