Republican resurrection?

He then stirred up controversy by stating it that was the "popular vote" republicans who had destroyed the previous referendum. The first referendum on replacing the Queen with an Australian president appointed by the federal parliament was defeated by more than 1 million votes in 1999, following a split among republicans, some of whom wanted a directly-elected head of state. To those who do not remember the proposed model it was that the President to be appointed, and dismissed, by a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting of both Houses of the Commonwealth Parliament. The former Governor of Victoria, Mr Richard McGarvie, pointed out that this virtually placed control over removal of a President in the hands of the Opposition, the model was amended to put removal in the hands of the Prime Minister alone, subject only to later ratification by the House of Representatives -- the Senate, though involved in the appointment process, was to be ignored in the removal process. At the time many direct election republicans campaigned for a No vote saying that there would soon be another referendum on the issue. Turnbull then asked where have they been for the past 14 years? It was a good question.

Turnbull then finished by proposing that the plebiscite be web rather than paper-based. He argued that with "online plebiscite" voters would be presented with as much information as they choose about the various models and arguments behind constitutional proposals. My conclusion after hearing this from Turnbull was that his confidence in the current ARM strategy was low.

I confess I also have limited confidence in the current ARM strategy. I do not like the idea of voting or implementing something where the fine details have not been defined. We have had enough examples in the current government to make us all Burkean conservatives.

I think it would be better for the ARM to run its own "prototype" referendum. Anyone joining the ARM is a committed republican. The ARM could then run say a three month process of having each member discuss and vote on various proposals with the ability to change their vote as the discussion evolved.

In my own case hearing Malcolm Turnbull argue against the direct election of a President confirmed my antipathy to the case. I believe the best system for electing a President is that used by the largest democracy in the world, India.

My final question which no-one on my table was able to answer is why on earth didn't Julia start a campaign to have an Australian republic to create a diversion?