It was been previously suggested the Governors be elected by the State Parliaments.
I’m personally in favour of a directly-elected President along the lines of the Presidency of Ireland, except the 7 year terms (5 years would be my absolute max)
Do people really want a choice between Eddie McGuire or some retired sportsperson as President? Even if we directly elect a President, we know what the options will be…
I’d prefer if the President was appointed by the same process as the Governor General is today.
I’m a minimalist republican.
2 Likes
Despite highlighting Turnbull’s backflipping on everything he apparently believed in (a valid political point), having a simple vote to ask do the majority of Australian voters want a republic is the right first step.
There’s no point wasting time & money in arguing about what type if there isn’t the basic support of the idea.
We should just have this simple vote at the next election (coordinating with an election is the cheapest & so most efficient way).
If there is enough support, then maybe we can have a (hopefully) sensible discussion about what type of republic (I’m a minimalist, and so I think an overwhelming majority of parliament is good because it requires cross-party support and so the president will have to be non-partisan).
5 Likes
Jumping to assumptions aren’t we? Who cares if a “retired sportsperson” becomes President? There’s no guarantee that someone like McGuire could even secure a possible nomination (either by a political party or an Independent run) depending on the candidate nomination process.
I don’t think a Prime Minister should appoint a President. It’s one of the reasons the 1999 Referendum failed. People saw a potential constitutional crisis if the President and Prime Minister reached a political impasse and tried to sack each other (which both had the power to do if the Referendum passed).
Forgive me but that’s a ridiculous contradiction. The current situation is the PM appoints the GG, so there’s currently nothing stopping a repeat of exactly what happened to Whitlam’s Labor gov’t in 1975.
The minimalist model is for a overwhelming majority of parliament (i.e. two thirds) to vote for a president, thereby basically ensuring a non-political person, so avoiding any such conflict between the two.
A popularly-elected president would result in a conflict between the president and the elected gov’t lead by the PM. I don’t want such a system; the Americans can keep their ridiculous system to themselves.
Let’s have a minimal change with a non-partisan president instead.
2 Likes
I think that level of Head of State should just be eliminated altogether and rolled into the Prime Minister’s role. It would just add another level for the government to argue with.
Recent governments have had enough trouble negotating with crossbenchers in the Senate - adding a directly elected President on top could potentially lead to the kind of legislative blockages we’ve seen in America, and an appointed President is just another level to add on top of the gravy train. A person, probably unworthy of the role, getting a huge salary to sign off legislation and attend the occasional function.
2 Likes
A popularly elected presidency in parliamentary republics are common place in Europe, with the Irish Republican model being the most popular (i.e Lithuania, Iceland, Ireland, Portugal, Poland, Austria, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Macedonia etc) . It doesn’t mean the President will get involved with day-to-day politics (more akin to a Semi-Presidential system), but is instead seen as a symbol of the nation
1 Like
Thank you… I was about to say. It can easily work like those models mentioned.
I am a staunch republican and have studied republicanism in Australia relentlessly. I have come to the conclusion that a republic in Australia will not happen unless the Australian public are choosing our Head of State. Otherwise we will just have ads and a campaign about the ‘politicians republic’ and given the publics hatred towards politicians, they will vote against the minimalist option. I can’t wait for the day we become a republic.
Yes…Australians are crying out to be more like these countries…
So when the politics are hijacked so the extremes are represented, like in Austria recently, such that a far-right wing individual may be elected, do you think that is an appropriate “symbol of the nation”.
Yes, let’s swap The Queen for Steve Waugh (or whichever retired sportsperson is flavour of the month).
Banana republic here we come.
You’re using a false dichotomy by comparing Australia’s Economy with European countries.
I also take it that you would regard individuals like Donald Trump as part of the american extreme?
Besides, the FPO, Front National, Dutch Party for Freedom weren’t elected
I support this.
2 Likes
What about if the year after it was Michael Clarke? 
Erm I didn’t compare our economies with those countries at all…
I instead was referring to the fact that the vast majority of those are countries that have seen extreme political upheaval over many generations.
Ummm, well saying ‘banana republic’ and as well as saying we shouldn’t be like european countries that suffered major economic issues leads me to think otherwise
1 Like
I’m pretty sure I quoted a different portion of your post and made that remark separately in another post…
But they’re also countries that suffered major political issues (hint, we’re talking politics).
I don’t even know what you’re arguing here.
For clarity’s sake:
If you want me to turn my mind to, and refer to the economies of, THOSE COUNTRIES in particular - yes, that random bunch of countries are ones that NO Australians want to be like POLITICALLY or ECONOMICALLY. End of story.
Would have the major advantage over the Queen of 1) being Australian
2) living in Australia
3) giving a shit about Australia as a priority over other countries.
4 Likes