Thirty one years ago, on this day, June 5th, 1994, the referendum idea that has been around since early 1989 is still being mooted…
Any national referendum to decide the republican issue should also include a proposal to give the Federal Government increased powers and responsibility to protect the environment, Democrat Leader Senator Cheryl Kernot said yesterday.
“The debate on constitutional reform must be broadened to include concerns about the environment,” Senator Kernot said, marking World Environment Day.
Senator Kernot said the Democrats supported a proposal by a former executive director of the Australian Conservation Foundation, Phillip Toyne, which would confer on the Commonwealth the power to make laws about:
• Land, air and water conservation affecting more than one state or territory.
• Nuclear energy and ionising radiation.
• Protection of areas of national and international significance.
• Protection of flora and fauna from extinction.
• Regulation of genetically or biologically manipulated life forms.
A spokesman for Senator Kernot said later there was no present consideration for such a referendum to be held in tandem with the next federal election, but it should happen and “the sooner and the better.”
Grose, S. 1994. Ecology should go to vote: Kernot. Canberra Times, 6 June p 2.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/118168960
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 359ppm. As of 2025 it is 4xxppm, but check here for daily measures.
The broader context was that the heady days of 1988-9 were long gone. It was in early 1989 that the ALP’s Federal Environment Minister, Graham Richardson, had mooted the referendum at a fundraising dinner in Adelaide (LINK). Since then the business pushback had been very determined and pretty successful.
The specific context was that Environment Minister John Faulkner was making noises about a carbon tax, because he knew Australia had to have SOMETHING to take to COP1 in Berlin if it wasn’t to get hammered in the negotiations. Meanwhile, the moves for a referendum on dumping the monarchy was on its way…
What I think we can learn from this is that ideas persist for a certain period, but there is only so many times they can be pulled out of Cohen’s “garbage can” and dusted off…
What happened next – there was no eco-referendum. The Republic referendum was held, and failed.
What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.
Also on this day: