Mr McCLELLAND (11:03 PM) —One of the problems with the government's question is that, in telling only part of the story, it is misleading. There are a number of aspects of the Constitution Alteration (Establishment of Republic) Bill 1999 which are very important and the Australian people should know about them. I daresay that most of the speakers on the other side, and I suppose it would be most of the speakers on our side, have not read our Constitution. Very few Australians have read our Constitution. Indeed, very few law students have read our Constitution. If you read it, the black and white document does not reflect the reality. Why? Because of the tremendous powers given to both the Queen and the Governor-General under our current Constitution. For instance, most people are not aware that the Governor-General has an absolute discretion as to whether he assents to any legislation, under the black and white wording of the Constitution. Most people are not aware of the Queen's power to disallow any law within 12 months. Most people are not aware of the power of the Governor-General to appoint the ministers of the day.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop interjecting—

Mr McCLELLAND —The minister says that they will not be changed, but something will, which I will come to. Most Australians are not aware that the Governor-General presently has a power to appoint ministers. They do not even have to be elected to parliament. They have a three-month period of grace for that to occur. Most people are not aware that the Governor-General is the commander-in-chief of our armed forces and has absolute discretion. These powers would give that person—the Governor-General or the Queen—if exercised, greater powers than any dictator in the world. Why are they not exercised? They are not exercised—and this answers the minister's question—because of the existence of conventions that the head of state, whether it be the Queen or the Governor-General for the purpose of the argument, acts on the advice of the government of the day. It is part of our system of responsible government, but that is not reflected in the Constitution.

If there were a constitutional crisis, there is nothing in the black and white document confirming that they will act on advice. That will change under the proposed bill. Clause 59 of the bill will actually specify that in exercising powers—other than the reserve powers, which are limited to four issues—including exercising prerogative powers, the President will specifically be compelled to act on the advice of the government of the day.

A former speaker said, `What's in it for Joe Blow?' It will be for the first time that the actuality of our system of government will be reflected in the black and white text of our Constitution and you minimise prospects for national trauma which certainly could occur under our present system if our head of state chose to exercise those black and white powers. For the first time, our black and white legal document will reflect the actuality.

The Joint Select Committee on the Republic Referendum, of which I was a member, recommended a number of amendments to enhance those powers and I seek leave to table suggested amendments which the Labor Party proposes to the government.

Leave granted.

Mr McCLELLAND —I know the amendments will be the subject of debate in the Senate and I do not propose to debate each of them now. Indeed I note, in fairness to the government, that they are considering the report of the joint select committee and are in the process of considering amendments which appropriately arise from the committee's report. The Labor Party has tabled our document with a view to indicating how the proposals can be strengthened. For instance, we have recommended in the committee report that the Prime Minister have regard to considerations of diversity in appointing the Nominations Committee to propose a list of eminent Australians. We have proposed some strengthening of the accountability provisions by compelling the Prime Minister, should it be necessary to dismiss the President, to table as soon as practicable, but certainly within 30 days, his reasons for the dismissal before parliament considers the matter. So again that is another very significant area of accountability. We have recommended that the conventions relating to the source of power and the development of conventions be specifically recognised. These things coming out of the committee process are there to strengthen what we think is a very good bill. (Time expired)