Процессные модели перехода Австралии к республике: дебаты и перспективы

A process model is, in the context of the republic debate in Australia, a model for the process by which the questions surrounding whether and how Australia should become a republic may be answered. A number of process models have been processed. Proposed process models are a subject of debate within the Republicanism movement. Such debate usually surrounds whether the people (via one or more referendum or plebiscite) should be asked to choose between the current system and a general republican system of government, one specific republican system of government, or multiple alternative republican systems of government.

To amend the Constitution of Australia, a referendum must be held and historically citizens have usually voted to reject the proposed amendment. In recent years, the most prominent constitutional reform issue has been whether to establish an Australian republic. As this issue is controversial and technical, governments, political parties and republican organisations have developed process models to help align their decisions with public sentiment. These decisions include the type of republic to establish and/or whether to proceed and hold a referendum. Supporters of constitutional monarchy are not served by commencing such a process and argue that conventions and plebiscites are unnecessary and poor use of government money.

A process model involves a series of events, usually ending in a referendum or a decision to not proceed. The following events are commonly found in republican process models:

A constitutional convention may include elected or appointed delegates to discuss and vote upon issues and reform proposals. If the delegates are a close representative sample of the population, decisions will be indicative of subsequent referendum results. That delegates have the opportunity and interest to review the issues in depth is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Informed decisions may result from delegates increased understanding of the issues, however as this happens their views become less representative of the general population. For example, at the 1998 constitution convention, delegates supporting direct election fared poorly in the voting in contrast to the results of opinion polls.

The threshold question asks whether Australia should become a republic. The wording of the proposal varies considerably, however to take an interesting example, Dr Barry Gardner suggests "do you favour Australia becoming a republic through the use of a model approved by a majority of the Australian people?". However, for status quo supporters, it is an opportunity to close down the republican debate for the long term. Australians for Constitutional Monarchy's (ACM) Kerry Jones says "I believe we would win it Plebiscites would strengthen the current system because people would say, 'Look at the can of worms that that is opening up.'" Monarchists officially object to the threshold plebiscite on the basis it subverts the intent of the amendment procedure of the Australian constitution. Opponents raise the concern that it could undermine confidence in the constitution prior to a republic being established.

Some republicans suggest that other plebiscite questions should be asked, so to increase voter input to the eventual republican proposal. The question "what shall we call the Head of State?" is independent, to a large extent, of the models question and can be asked on the same ballot paper. Critics of such a question say it "will only distract the electorate". This type of proposal is argued to be possible because the relevant section of the constitution is not specific, saying "the vote shall be taken in such manner as the Parliament prescribes." Tim Fischer put forward a similar proposal which converts the threshold plebiscite into a special referendum, held in advance, to absolutely confirm the legality of this procedure. Nevertheless, the proposal has received little support and there are clear political and legal risks. Opponents of republicanism would probably ask the High Court to declare that the proposal was unconstitutional.

When John Howard became Prime Minister of Australia in 1996, he initiated the first process model which concluded with the 1999 republic referendum. The process commenced with the election of 76 delegates to a constitutional convention. In the election, delegates obtained support by declaring their general views on republicanism rather than through being members of a political party. A further 76 delegates where chosen by the Prime Minister and taken from the leadership of political parties from the federal parliament and the various states and territories of Australia. In his speech to open the convention, Prime Minister Howard declared that "if clear support for a particular republican model emerges from this Convention my government will put that model to a referendum of the Australian people [however if] this Convention does not express a clear view [then] the people will be asked to vote in a plebiscite which presents them with all the reasonable alternatives. A formal constitutional referendum, offering a choice between the present system and the republican alternative receiving most support in the plebiscite, would then follow." The convention voted in support of the bi partisan appointment republican model and then voted in support of it being put in a referendum. That referendum was held on 6 November 1999 and was not successful. For the remainder of his time in office, John Howard argued that there was no necessity to commence a new process as nothing significant has changed since the referendum.

The Australian Republican Movement now supports a non bind plebiscite to decide the model, followed by a binding referendum to amend the Constitution, reflecting the model chosen.