A History of Referendums in Australia

When leadership fails

Australia's politicians have always struggled to get their ideas accepted by the Australian people when they have been put to a vote in a referendum. Of the 44 referendums that have been held, only 8 have been carried.

The failure can be partly attributed to the adversarial nature of the Australian political system which produces great critics, but poor salesman. In the bull pit of question time, politicians are trained in the art of the acid tongue. Furthermore, the Australian head of state is not a directly elected leader that won his popularity with a charismatic gift of the gab. Instead, the leader has been appointed by the Monarch of England on the advice of the Australian prime minister. These appointments are usually made to fit a political agenda, rather than to appeal to the general public.

While such a political system is great for finding flaws in ideas, and for developing a cynical mind, it doesn't produce leaders capable of inspiring others. When politicians have had to cease their criticism and just sell an idea (as is the case in a referendum) they simply haven't known how to behave.

The Republic Referendum – 1999

In the 90s, an Australian republic seemed like an idea whose time had come. Polls showed that 90 per cent of Australians were in favour of a republic. Both sides of parliament supported a republic. A host of Australian celebrities proudly came out with their support for a republic. The only national newspaper, The Australian, unashamedly stated its support for a republic.

In addition to the broad public support, there were numerous issues that allowed republican sentiment to be framed into current issues of the day. The upcoming Sydney Olympics were a stage for Australia to show its maturity to the world, and to have the games opened by the Queen of England seemed a little childish. Likewise, the upcoming Century of Federation celebrations allowed the republic to be portrayed as a constitutional step forward, as Federation was a century earlier. Even the upcoming mellenium celebrations seemed to be giving a sense that some kind of change should be happening.

The one sticking point was the republic model. Polls showed that 80 per cent of voters wanted the president to be directly elected by the people. Unfortunately, most politicians wanted the president to be appointed by a two-thirds majority of parliament. Politicians argued that a direct-election model would lead to a "populist" president. Presumably, the politicians feared that a president would introduce 'populist' polices such as tax cuts and pay for them by cutting all the government funding for obscure causes.

The politicians had their way and it was the parliamentary-appointed model that was put to the people, and then republicans tried to persuade the voters to accept it. The republication's persuasion techniques fell into two categories. One was hollow nationalism. The Australian Republic Movement tried to inspire patriotism and belonging. In its communications, the ARM stated that "an Australian should be the Australian head of state." They also paid for advertisements in which celebrities smiled at the camera and said: "vote yes for our republic."

The other persuasion technique was moralistic. From the academic world came a 'multicultural' campaign that countered some of nationalistic arguments of the ARM. For example, in her campaign for Australia becoming a republic, intellectuals like Jessica Stewart argued that Australia needed to be de-angloed in order to become a non-racist society. According to Ms Stewart, :

"Australians who insist on maintaining a British heritage are creating and perpetuating divisions in society."

Ms Stewart was also consumed with a zeal to erase Australian culture:

"typical values such as mateship, are expunged of their racist, sexist elements."

Neither the moral arguments of the intellectuals, nor the hollow nationalistic arguments of the ARM, proved effective in realising a slight shift in attitudes. In fact, they probably countered each other. With the ARM being nationalistic, and the intellectuals being anti-anglo, the end impression was that there were too many unaswered questions and too much conflict to support it.

Roughly 55 per cent of the nation voted no and all states voted no. Rural areas were strongholds for the constitutional monarchy, as were Labor seats in working-class suburbs. Wealthy city electorates mostly voted yes

1967 - Referendum on federal powers relating to Aborigines

In 1967, the Harold Holt Liberal government staged a referendum on whether the federal government should have powers in respect to Aborigines. The questions asked whether Aborigines should be included in the federal census, and whether the federal government should be allowed to make policies in respect to them (previously all Aboriginal issues had been left to the states, as they were deemed to have more specialised knowledge). Almost 90 per cent of Australians voted yes.

For political reasons, a number of myths have been created regarding the legal and symbolic ramifications of the referendum. One myth was that it allowed Aborigines to vote for the first time. In reality, although Aborigines had been excluded from the federal vote in 1901, under section 41 of the constitution, any person who held a State vote, also held a federal vote. When Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania and South Australia framed their constitutions in the 1850s they gave voting rights to all male subjects over 21 – Aborigines included. Legally, Aborigines have been allowed to vote in all federal elections. Aborigines were formerly given the federal vote by the Menzies Liberal government in 1962.

1951 - Referendum to ban communism

Throughout the world, different cultures have employed different strategies to defend 'freedom'. In communist countries, 'freedom' has been defended by shooting the individualist thinkers. In America, ' freedom' has defended by blacklisting communists, going to war in Vietnam, and bombing countries in the middle east. A few patriots have even taken matters into their own hands by murdering suspected communist sympathizers, or bombing apartment buildings.

In Australia in 1951, the Menzies government tried to defend ' freedom' by passing a bill banning communism. When the high court ruled the bill unlawful, a referendum was held to ban communism. To the government's displeasure, no McCarthyism type fever swept the nation and many Australians were against the referendum not because they were communists, but rather because they believed in freedom of choice. After the referendum was defeated, the Menzies government conscripted Australians to suppress the rights of Vietnamese to be communist.

1944 - Referendum to extend the Government's wartime powers into peacetime

In 1944, the government held a referendum to extend its war time powers into times of peace. One vocal opponent declared:

"Now it wants even greater power so it can push people around even more than it has in the past and so the Canberra bureaucrat, who, Nazi like, have made themselves little dictators, may continue to dictate."

Australia voted no.

1916/17 - Referendums on conscription

In 1916, the Government held a referendum to give itself the power to conscript Australians and send them to war. Vocal opposition came from the labour movement and working class football clubs who, despite supporting the war, objected to the principle of compulsion.

Australia voted no.

In 1917, the Government again held a referendum on conscription, but censored any advertisements that promoted the no case.

Australia voted no again.

1906 Senate elections

The first referendum held in Australia, and one of the few to have been passed. By 1906, the proposed amendment provided for Senate terms to begin on the 1st July.

It was generally felt that the referendum passed because the average voter just didn’t care how frequently the Senate rotates.

Table 1: Constitutional Referenda 1906-1988

Note: Amendments to Constitution in bold.

[Top]