Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. M.J. Elliott:
1. That Australia should become a republic with an Australian
citizen as Head of State; and
2. That the concurrence of the House of Assembly to this motion
be requested.
to which the Hon. Mr Stefani has moved the following amendmentó
1. Leave out all words after `That' and insert the following:
`this Council congratulates the Federal Liberal Government for
organising the Constitutional Convention;
2. That following a referendum to be held in 1999 and, if passed
by the required majority, this Council is of the opinion that Australia
should become a republic with an Australian citizen as Head of State; and'
(Continued from 27 May. Page 772.)
The Hon. NICK XENOPHON: I support the motion and commend the
Hon. Mike Elliott for putting this motion before this Chamber. It is a
matter that ought to be considered in the context of what occurred at the
Constitutional Convention earlier this year. It is a matter that cannot
be ignored in the sense that, if there is a referendum, and if the motion
for Australia to be a republic is passed, clearly there will have to be
changes at a State level on this issue.
In terms of the Constitutional Convention, or ConCon as it has
been affectionately called, I will express some degree of disappointment,
despite the bonhomie, tears and hugs at the end of the conference. I was
disappointed with the outcome in the sense that I felt there could have
been greater scope to look at our constitutional system, our system of
government, in the sense that the options before it appeared to be quite
narrow. The proposition that there be a directly elected President, which
was the subject of a lot of impassioned support early on, was never tenable.
If we continue with our Westminster system, the concept of having a popularly
elected President to compete with the powers of Prime Minister and Cabinet
seems something that is untenable.
I would have liked to see some degree of debate on our existing
parliamentary system, the effectiveness of our current Westminster system,
and the separation of the Executive and Legislature which seems to have
been blurred over the years. Notwithstanding that, I think the outcome
on balance was a satisfactory one although, when this matter is debated
at a State level, I would like to think we could have a broader debate
on our system of government.
In terms of the amendment moved by the Hon. Mr Stefani, with
all respect, despite my great regard for the honourable member, I will
not be supporting his amendments. I do not believe they add anything to
the motion of the Hon. Mr Elliott. For that reason, I will be supporting
simply the motion put by Mr Elliott and not the amendments put by Mr Stefani.
The Hon. SANDRA KANCK secured the adjournment of the debate.
|
|