Stuart Khan Profile picture
May 1, 2022 21 tweets 8 min read Read on X
Lying awake at night, I read this tweet by @TonyHWindsor, encouraging someone to “learn what our Constitution says and how Governments are formed”. As a citizen of Australia, I suffered sudden shame of never having done that myself. So I did and here's an #auspolVote2022 thread🧵
The context here is the upcoming Australian election and the participation of high-profile Independent candidates, not associated with a political party. That’s not new; there were Independents elected to the House of Reps in the first parliament of 1901. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1901_Aust…
But this year, some people are concerned with the prospect that no major political party (or established coalition of parties) may have enough members elected to form a majority in the House of Reps, leading to ‘minority government’ or a ‘hung parliament’. smh.com.au/politics/feder…
Minority government is unusual in Australia, but has occurred a couple of times. Once in 1940 when the Coalition led by Robert Menzies formed government with only 36 seats out of 74, and again in 2010 when the ALP formed government led by Julia Gillard with 72 of 150 seats.
So what does the Constitution of Australia prescribe in this circumstance? Here’s what I found: In the context of the House of Representatives, the Constitution makes no mention of ‘political parties’, nor does it specifically mention the office of “prime minister”.
The first thing to understand is that the ultimate ‘boss’ in the Australian parliament is not the prime minister, but the Queen of Australia, who reigns over the Monarchy of Australia as Head of State. That’s currently Elizabeth II, better known as Queen of the United Kingdom.
The Australian Constitution creates the role of the Governor-General, appointed by the Queen to be her representative in the Commonwealth and to exercise such powers and functions of the Queen as she may be pleased to assign to “him”.
The Constitution also creates “The Senate”, with senators for each State elected by the people of the State voting as one electorate. The Senate has the power to pass, amend or reject many types of proposed laws, which are passed up to it from the House of Representatives.
So the Constitution also creates the “House of Representatives”, with members elected from roughly equal-population ‘electoral divisions’. This is where most laws are first drafted and -once agreed by majority vote- are passed up to the Senate for its approval.
Once a proposed law is passed by both Houses, it is then passed to the Governor General, who can provide approval [“assent”] in the Queen’s name, reject it, or pass it on to the Queen “for the Queen’s pleasure”. The Queen may also disallow laws that had received the GG’s assent.
While there is no “prime minister” referred to in the Constitution, there are “Ministers of the State”, appointed by the Governor-General (and can be sacked by the GG) to manage the “departments” of State as the government may establish. Ministers can come from either house.
All Ministers of State, become members of the “Federal Executive Council" (FEC) to advise the GG in the government of the Commonwealth. While it’s not explicit, the GG is bound by convention to follow the advice of the FEC on almost all occasions. aph.gov.au/About_Parliame…
So, according to the Constitution, any senator or Member of the House of Reps can become a Minister (including the PM), as long as the GG (and ultimately the Queen) agrees. And Ministers, as members of the FEC get to advise the GG on most aspects of government from thereon. 😐
Ahh, but then there are things called “conventions”. They don’t appear in the Constitution, but are established and generally accepted rules of practice. An official version of the Australian Constitution includes overview notes by the Australian Government Solicitor which state:
Circumstances in which there is no explicit requirement in the Constitution and no generally agreed convention can lead to a constitutional crisis, such as that which occurred in 1975 with dismissal of Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister:
So what does all this mean for this 2022 election? If any political party or coalition of parties has a majority of seats in the House of Reps, they will ask the GG to appoint their leader as PM and other members as Ministers and members of the FEC. The GG will agree to do so.
If no party has a majority, they'll need to convince the GG to appoint a PM & ministers. To do that, they will need to demonstrate that they have support of the majority. This will give minor parties and Independents the opportunity to support a party that needs extra numbers.
That’s a very powerful position to be in (known as ‘having the balance of power’), since support can be bargained for. Potential supporters could request many things in return, such particular laws to be supported or even to be made a Minister.
The ongoing functioning of the parliament would continue to work in much the same way. Each new bill would require majority support to pass through each house of parliament, but the individuals comprising that majority may not be the same each time.
In my opinion, a parliament with a minority government and a large crossbench of minor parties and Independents can provide very robust government. Yes, there’ll be lots of deal-making, but all bills will be exposed to robust debate.
Should Independents be expected to indicate -prior to the election- which major party they would support? I think its perfectly fair for them to state that they should wait and see the elected composition of the parliament and then see who wants to talk.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stuart Khan

Stuart Khan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @stukhan

Dec 10, 2022
A little waterway, which became known as the Tank Stream is of great historical significance to Sydney. But Sydneysiders wander the city streets, mostly oblivious that it runs beneath their feet. So here’s a short thread to help you know.
The Gadigal People are Indigenous inhabitants of the southern side of Sydney Harbour and relied on this waterway as one of several freshwater sources, for thousands of years. It was a stream of barely 2km, flowing from a swampy area immediately east of Hyde Park to Circular Quay.
When the First Fleet brough European settlers to Australia in 1788, they had initially planned to establish a Colony at Botany Bay. But Captain Athur Phillip found several things lacking at Botany Bay, one of which was a shortage of high-quality fresh drinking water.
Read 38 tweets
Oct 29, 2022
In 19C Sydney, piped drinking water was unreliable and mostly restricted to the wealthy. Drinking fountains in public thoroughfares & parks were common. I've been observing some of these old drinking fountains still surving around inner-Sydney. So a thread on some of the best.🧵
St Jude’s Fountain on Alison Road, Randwick was built to be supplied by a natural spring beneath. Four hundred children from the nearby Destitute Children's Asylum watched Mayor John Dawson break a bottle of water over the fountain and dedicate its use to the public in 1866.
Walter Renny was a painter and operated paper-hanging warehouse in Pitt Street. He was a City of Sydney Alderman, 1863-1870 and Mayor 1869–70. His most visible legacy is a series of ornate drinking water fountains, such as this one from Argyle Place in the Rocks from 1869.
Read 20 tweets
Sep 21, 2022
When Sydney Desalination Plant was first constructed (2007-2010), it was sized to produce 250 ML/day water. But NSW Gov had the foresight to plan for a future expansion to 500 ML/day. I visited today, to learn how that expansion to might proceed, when the need arises. Thread 🧵
Most importantly, the seawater intake pipe and the concentrate disposal pipe are already appropriately sized for the full 500 ML/day capacity. The site on which the plant (“Stage 1”) is constructed, also has plenty of extra space available for the expansion (“Stage 2”).
Seawater enters the plant via a tunnel and does so without pumping, so there is a deep chamber down to the incoming seawater, which changes depth with the tide. The incoming seawater is filtered through this course screen, which rotates to facilitate cleaning.
Read 10 tweets
Jul 8, 2022
I have seen some people question whether we can really introduce flood mitigation capacity to Warragamba Dam without having to raise the wall. Let me explain how we can do that by introducing more “rainfall independent supplies” (RFIS) to Sydney’s overall water supply. (1/6) 🧵
The draft Greater Sydney Water Strategy highlights Sydney’s high rainfall dependence and the need to reduce it by adding new RFIS. This is because our existing supplies are not sufficiently resilient to drought, whereas a higher proportion of RFIS will provide greater resilience.
Sydney’s desal plant can produce 90 GL/year, but was designed to be expanded to produce a further 90 GL/year. That’s just one example of where additional RFIS can be found. Other possibilities are new desal plants and/or purified recycled water.
Read 6 tweets
Apr 7, 2022
Woah. Great call! Water is Australia’s most valuable resource and we have a long way to go to improve our management of it. A new National Water Commission is an essential step toward such improvement. Great news @terrimbutler.
Is it too early to start listing the things a National Water Commission should address?

I’ll start with:
Building climate change and extreme weather events into all water management strategies (including, but not limited to the Murray Darling Basin Plan). Our environment is changing and our management of water needs to respond that fact.
Read 10 tweets
Dec 9, 2020
Wastewater-based epidemiology (“sewage testing”) for SARS-CoV-2 is exciting and some of the best work in the world is coming from Australia. But it's important to communicate accurate conclusions from the science (1/8). abc.net.au/news/2020-12-1…
This story, like many others before it, claims breathlessly that this study “shows wastewater testing can detect coronavirus weeks before people show symptoms”. It really does not do that (2/8).
The key point is that this study reports the analysis of archived sewage samples, collected in Brisbane in Feb 2020, but analysed months later. Its true that there were no clinical cases reported in Feb, but there was practically no clinical testing occuring to do that (3/8).
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(