Governor General’s job to choose new leader

This places the GG in a very awkward position. The number of seats, not the number of votes either party receives
will influence the GG’S decision. There is a need for clear guide lines for the GG to follow. The Constitution may
need to be altered to provide for this contingency. The GG will incur the wrath of many Australian voters whichever
choice she makes.Perhaps there is a case for a First past the Post System to be introduced.
The constitutional Experts will no doubt examine this closely. Unwritten Rules as referred to in this article do not
suffice and place too much onus on the GG.
 
Neville Gillmore.
 
Governor-General’s job to choose next leader

 

For the first time since 1975 the Governor-General will be pivotal in a national political crisis but there is no road map for Quentin Bryce.

Voters appear to have elected the first hung parliament in 70 years – so Ms Bryce’s vice-regal role has switched suddenly from ceremonial to serious.

As Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott woo independent and Greens MPs for their support to control the 76 seats needed to govern, it will be the task of the Governor-General to decide which leader is most likely to form a stable minority government.

Constitutionally, the percentage of votes gained by each party is irrelevant: it all comes down to seats.

“The real question is a political one: which side has got the 76 seats?” University of NSW constitutional law professor George Williams said yesterday.

He said the unwritten rule would be for Ms Bryce to wait until the return of writs – October 27 at the latest – to invite Ms Gillard, as caretaker Prime Minister, to form government.

Ms Gillard would then need to survive a vote of no confidence on the floor of parliament.

Should she lose, Ms Bryce would turn to Mr Abbott and invite him to form government.

Should that government also collapse, Ms Bryce would be able to dissolve parliament and order a new election – a reserve power last invoked in 1975 when John Kerr dismissed Labor leader Gough Whitlam.

Professor Williams said the Constitution did not spell out the Governor-General’s protocols, “which go back centuries to the UK”.

“They are all unwritten conventions,” he said.

Ms Bryce, appointed by the Rudd Labor government in 2008 and the mother-in-law of Labor MP Bill Shorten, can take advice from constitutional experts – including the Solicitor-General, academics and even the chief justice of the High Court.

She might also wish to consult Tasmanian Governor Peter Underwood, who faced a similar dilemma in April when Labor and the Liberals each won 10 seats in the 25-member house, with five Greens holding the balance of power.

Caretaker Premier David Bartlett told Mr Underwood to ask the leader of the opposition to form a government as the Liberals had the greatest overall vote.

But the Governor refused and ordered Mr Bartlett to recall parliament and test his support, on the basis he was the caretaker leader.

Mr Bartlett subsequently won the Greens’ support to govern.

Mr Underwood, a former chief justice, later stated: “The total number of votes received by the elected members of a political party is constitutionally irrelevant to the issue of who should be commissioned to form a government.”

Australian National University law professor Don Rothwell said Ms Gillard was under no legal obligation to step down as prime minister, despite the close result.

“The Prime Minister is not under any real obligation to move on the matter until after declarations are issued for the ballots,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Government House said yesterday neither side had contacted the Governor-General to arrange a meeting.

 


 

 

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.