• Keating-era Cabinet documents reveal concerns over an elected Australian president
    9 replies, posted
[quote=ABC News]Australians might elect a president of the wrong "calibre", the Keating Government was warned during the republic debate. Cabinet documents from 1994 and 1995 also reveal Kieren Perkins' role in securing Olympic funding, and that ministers considered a carbon tax to address climate change. The documents — kept secret for more than two decades — have been released today by the National Archives of Australia. Here's some of the standout issues Parliament was considering during the period: [b]Public should not elect president of Australian republic[/b] Paul Keating's push for a republic featured heavily during his final term in office. The Prime Minister's Department cautioned against letting voters choose the president, saying appointment by Parliament would provide "effective safeguards in respect to the calibre and non-partisanship of candidates". Mr Keating later told cabinet "it is imperative that his or her mandate does not flow from popular election". In June 1995, he announced a plan for the head of state to be elected by both houses at a joint sitting of Parliament. Former Keating government minister Kim Beazley last month revealed he was not confident: "I just felt we did not have a show of getting the republic through without a directly elected model". [b]Cabinet considers carbon tax and emissions trading scheme[/b] Even in 1994, the government was grappling with how to reduce carbon emissions, with Australia well off track for its year 2000 target.[/quote] Read more at [url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-01/documents-reveal-concerns-over-an-elected-australian-president/9295668[/url]
Really interesting stuff - I tend to agree with Keating that the president should not be voted on by popular election. Better to maintaining a system where the voter is voting for the party.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;53018813]Really interesting stuff - I tend to agree with Keating that the president should not be voted on by popular election. Better to maintaining a system where the voter is voting for the party.[/QUOTE] Yeah. The McGarvie model is the best way to go about a republic, but it's a shame that it would be the least popular model if taken to a referendum. We don't need a temperamental, populist celebrity acting as head of state, especially if a public election model also gave the head of state additional powers compared to the current Governor-General.
Have to disagree with you guys; the government needs checks in case they try to do something stupid. A president elected by parliament either won't be able to do anything because parliament could remove him, or won't want to because he's in bed with them. A president who only rubber stamps legislation and only has reserve powers should not suffer from partisanship because the position has no effective power. If you say added another requirement like the president being required to resign and dissolve parliament if they used reserve powers then he/she would only use their powers in the most dire of emergencies further reducing the likelihood of partisanship.
[QUOTE=download;53019403]Have to disagree with you guys; the government needs checks in case they try to do something stupid. A president elected by parliament either won't be able to do anything because parliament could remove him, or won't want to because he's in bed with them. A president who only rubber stamps legislation and only has reserve powers should not suffer from partisanship because the position has no effective power. If you say added another requirement like the president being required to resign and dissolve parliament if they used reserve powers then he/she would only use their powers in the most dire of emergencies further reducing the likelihood of partisanship.[/QUOTE] The government already has plenty of checks against it, including the constitution and High Court, the Senate, and federalism (eg the federal government can't make changes to GST without the consent of the Premiers). I disagree with the idea of any more checks being required. [quote]A president who only rubber stamps legislation and only has reserve powers should not suffer from partisanship because the position has no effective power[/quote] Partisanship is exactly what would happen if the Head of State were to be elected; eg Presidential elections in Ireland are a contest between candidates put forward by each political party, as opposed to enlightened independents, as most people would romanticise a Head of State ought to be. Australia has had a very good track record of appointed Governors-General doing their job in a nonpartisan manner.
In other news. [URL="http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/prime-minister-malcolm-turnbull-says-plebiscite-could-be-held-to-gauge-support-for-aussie-republic/news-story/2e7d03fd1167390ffda19fcfb4ce4a9f"] Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says plebiscite could be held to gauge support for Aussie republic.[/URL]
stOP with the postal surveys you copper loving fuck.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;53020081]In other news. [URL="http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/prime-minister-malcolm-turnbull-says-plebiscite-could-be-held-to-gauge-support-for-aussie-republic/news-story/2e7d03fd1167390ffda19fcfb4ce4a9f"] Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says plebiscite could be held to gauge support for Aussie republic.[/URL][/QUOTE] isn't there like, literally no reason to become a republic?
[QUOTE=CertainDOOM;53020101]stOP with the postal surveys you copper loving fuck.[/QUOTE] Considering how long gay marriage was dragged out before the postal survey, maybe postal surveys are the only way these guys will take the hint.
[QUOTE=Araknid;53020167]isn't there like, literally no reason to become a republic?[/QUOTE] All it achieves is we get to have a president as head of state instead of the queen(Who no one actually thinks of when they think leader of Australia). So IMO it achieves nothing. Others might disagree and say it gives us more prestige, or a more independent national identity.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.