Foundation for National Renewal     The "Model Constitution" Activity

Federal Election October 2004: Which Candidates Trust the People?

Your responses to earlier tasks have made it clear that the majority prefer a two-tiered system of government with unicameral houses of parliament in 50 -100 regions and a bi-cameral National parliament consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives. You have indicated there should be a clear separation of powers between the LEGISLATURE, the EXECUTIVE and the JUDICIARY.

You have decided, at least on an interim basis, the role and responsibilities of the National Parliament (Task 18).

Responses to Task 22, (which explored the role, function and powers of the Governor General) generally supported the proposal contained therein with some minor changes. However, some respondents still favour having a ‘Head of State’ as a sort of ‘Peoples’ Ombudsman’ and ‘protector of the Constitution’ as well as the ‘Chief Executive’ or Head of Government. This proposition will be explored again when we debate how our Model Constitution holds together.

For the purposes of this Task, we will assume the Governor General has the following role, functions and powers and that he is the ‘Head of Government’. It is apparent that, with this allocation of responsibilities, the Governor General could be named the ‘Prime Minister’, the ‘President’ or even the ‘Chief Executive’. However, to remain consistent with previous tasks, we will continue to use the term, ‘Governor General’.

A. The role of the Governor General is to be the Head of Government.

B. Subject to this Constitution the Governor General is required to fulfil the following functions:

1. Guardian of this Constitution
2. Ceremonial Head of the Nation.
3. Spokesperson for the whole of Government.
4. Chief Executive and Chair of the Cabinet (Heads of Government Departments).
5. Oversee the execution of Government policy as expressed by the Parliament.
6. Commander in Chief of the Armed Services.
7. Receive visiting Heads of State of other countries.
8. Appoint Australian Ambassadors and Consuls (on advice from Foreign Affairs).
9. Appoint Heads of Government Departments (on advice from the Public Service Board).
10. Appoint Justices of the High Court (on advice from the Australian Judicial Authority (Yet to be defined)).
11. Appoint Justices of the C’wealth Supreme Court (on advice from the Australian Judicial Authority).
12. Appoint Commissioners, Ombudsmen, etc (on advice from the Public Service Board and Community Organisations).
13. Appoint Chairpersons of the Senate (on advice from the Public Service Board).
14. Appoint Chairpersons of the House of Reps (on advice from the Public Service Board).
15. Sign Legislation into Law.
16. Address the Parliament at least once annually.
17. Prorogue Parliament and call it into session in emergency circumstances not covered by the Constitution.
18. Seek advice from outside the Public Service when considered necessary.

C. Subject to this Constitution the powers of the Governor General are as follows:

1. To speak on behalf of the Nation both domestically and in the international forum. (The Governor General would be guided by the Parliament in this.)
2. To negotiate with the Heads of Government and Heads of State of other nations. (On the advice of and subject to veto by the Parliament.)
3. To deploy the Armed Services within Australia in time of emergency.
4. To declare war and peace (subject to referenda).
5. To sign legislation into law.
6. To refer legislation to the High Court for a judgement on constitutionality.
7. To send legislation back to the Parliament for reconsideration with or without recommendations.
8. To initiate referenda.
9. To authorise the conduct of Referenda initiated by Citizens.
10. To initiate parliamentary agenda items.
11. To establish such Government Departments and Offices as considered necessary for the good governance of the Commonwealth of Australia. (On advice from the Parliament.)
12. To coordinate policy development across Government Departments at the behest of the Parliament.
13. To hold Heads of Departments, Ombudsmen, Commissioners, etc, accountable for their performance and to sack them if necessary. (On advice from the Parliament.)
14. To hold the Chairpersons of Parliament accountable and to sack them if necessary. (On advice from the Parliament)
15. To sack a Member of Parliament for misconduct or dereliction on advice from the Parliament.

 

In this Task we will explore ways and means of electing/appointing the Governor General.

Currently, the Governor General is appointed by the Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister. Because the primary role of the Governor General is currently to represent the Monarchy, this can be regarded as appropriate. However, with the role and responsibilities we have now assigned to the Governor General, some other method of appointment/election is obviously required.

In Switzerland, the PARLIAMENT appoints the EXECUTIVE (named the Federal Government) from the general citizenry and then, each year, selects one member of the Federal Government to be the President of the Swiss Confederation for one year. The President chairs the Federal Government.

An Electoral College consisting of two electors from each of 50 -100 regions could be appointed/elected by each region in such manner as each region might decide. Candidates for election to the position of Governor General could be nominated by any organisation or be self nominated. There could be a restriction that precluded persons who had been a politician or a member of a political party within the preceding eight years. The Electoral College could study written submissions and view video presentations from candidates before convening to hear presentations first hand from candidates. Several rounds of voting could then be conducted first of all to narrow the field and then to select the successful candidate.

The advantages of this system appear to be that it too is relatively simple, selection and appointment is opened up to the whole citizenry and persons other than politicians would be appointed. Furthermore, those chosen to do the selecting could be seen to be representative of the general community and not politicians. Another advantage could be that candidature could be confidential and only the final, successful candidate would be known by the general public. This could encourage candidates who might otherwise not come forward. A further advantage would be the absence of any need for an ‘election campaign’ and the associated costs. Nor would there be any need for the, not necessarily helpful, involvement of the media.

The disadvantages might be that the lack of public debate would detract from the feeling of public ownership, and therefore popular support of the appointment. Furthermore, the process could be seen to be elitist in that only a ‘select few’ would have a say in the selection.

The primary component of this proposal is the random selection of 12 persons in each region to form a series of juries that would be required to assess the attributes of candidates and elect the Governor General using preferential voting. Candidates could be identified by any of the means explored in other options.

The advantage of this system is that the election of the Governor General can be seen as being performed by the community in general (rather than by any ‘ruling elite’) without the complexity and expense of conducting a nation-wide election. The juries could be provided with videos of each candidate and could be given the opportunity to question candidates by telephone hookup or video conferencing. A system of eliminations could be incorporated (depending on the number of candidates) to allow a concentration of effort on the most likely contenders. Another aspect of this system that could be a distinct advantage is that candidature could be kept confidential; candidates need only be identified to the Citizen Juries. Furthermore, there would be no requirement for ‘election campaigns’ and the associated costs.

The big disadvantage appears to be that the ‘People’ could still feel disempowered and that the Governor General had been imposed on them because they were not involved in the final voting. The absence of ‘face to face’ contact between Juries and Candidates is a major disadvantage. This could be included in this option but it would be more expensive to convene 12 jurors from each region than two as in the Electoral College option. However, it would still be a cheaper option than holding elections.

In this proposal, one Presidential candidate could be nominated by each region having been selected/elected in a manner determined by each region. No region would be compelled to nominate a candidate and regional candidates need not be from the nominating region. A minimum of six candidates would be required and if there were insufficient regional candidates, the National Parliament could be required to nominate candidates. The Governor General would be elected by the whole of Australia voting as one electorate using optional preferential voting. At each stage of the counting, the least successful candidate would be eliminated and his preferences distributed.

An advantage of this system is the initial ‘filtering’ of candidates in the regions. It could also be argued that this system would see a more widespread identification of possible candidates by virtue of the interest generated at regional level. However, the major advantage would appear to be the involvement of the whole country in the final election.

The major disadvantages of this system might be cost and the appearance of 100 candidates on the ballot paper (if we have 100 regions) and this could be regarded as beyond the power of most people to differentiate. Nation-wide election campaigns would be necessary and therefore it would also be necessary to have some rules regarding campaign spending. It could well necessitate public funding of election campaigns. Without this, a rich candidate could well flood the electorate with promotional material and swamp other candidates. It is also possible that a good candidate might be eliminated at the regional level.

This proposal envisages a two-stage election process involving all the voters in Australia. Each region would have the opportunity of nominating one candidate selected or elected by such means as is determined by each region. This could mean a total of 100 candidates (assuming we end up with 100 regions). Round One would see elections conducted across groupings of 10 regions to elect one candidate from each group of ten to contest the next Round. Round Two would see a nation-wide vote to elect the Governor General from the ten candidates identified in Round One. Politicians and members of political parties could be barred from candidature.

The advantage of this system is that all voters would be involved in the process and could feel ‘ownership’ or at least ‘identify with’ the elected Governor General. Involvement of the regions means that there would be maximum opportunity for the identification of suitable, non-political candidates. The use of two stages allows elections to be conducted in which there is no overwhelming number of candidates on the ballot paper. It is considered most voters would be able to assess ten candidates without the undue confusion that could pertain in elections of more than ten candidates.

The major disadvantage is some complexity and the cost of conducting two election processes involving all electors. However, by stipulating a term of office of, say, eight years; the cost could well be justified. However, there would be a need to have rules to strictly control campaign expenditure to eliminate the advantage of candidates with access to vast resources and this could necessitate public funding of election campaigns. Another disadvantage is the possible deterrence of suitable candidates by the need for ‘election campaigns’.

 

·=============== ===============·

Last updated: 3 May 2006