The representative of the King in Australia, Sam Mostyn, has stated she would not rule out the possibility of a governor-general dismissing a prime minister in the future. This comment comes as Australia reflects on the 50th anniversary of the controversial dismissal of former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam on November 11, 1975. Whitlam was removed from office by then-governor-general Sir John Kerr, a moment that has left a lasting impact on Australian politics.
Whitlam’s dismissal occurred outside Old Parliament House when he publicly condemned Kerr for his actions. “Well may we say, ‘God save the Queen,’ because nothing will save the Governor-General,” he stated, moments after the official announcement dissolved parliament. This unprecedented act raised questions about the role of unelected officials in Australian governance, fuelling republican sentiments among voters who questioned why a governor-general could dismiss an elected prime minister.
In a forthcoming Sky News Australia documentary titled “The Dismissal: 50 Years On,” Mostyn addressed the issue of reserve powers held by the governor-general. “One of the beauties of our constitutional arrangements and the reserve powers is that they are there and available to be affected by the governor-general in the interest of stability of the nation,” she explained. Mostyn emphasized that while she would not dismiss the possibility, it is unlikely that a governor-general would find themselves in a situation where they would need to exercise such powers.
Mostyn defended Kerr’s actions, suggesting that the decision to dismiss Whitlam was not sudden. Rather, it was the culmination of a series of political tensions, including budget blockages by then-opposition leader Malcolm Fraser and various scandals within the Whitlam government. Mostyn remarked, “Sir John wasn’t just on that morning suddenly of the view that he was exercising that power of dismissal. It took a long time to get to this point.”
In her past comments, Mostyn has framed the powers of the governor-general as tools for providing guidance to the government rather than instruments for political intervention. In a recent interview with The Australian, she spoke about the governor-general’s responsibility to monitor government conduct, stating, “If a government starts to behave irresponsibly, the role of the governor-general will be to have those conversations with the prime minister, with the ministers of the Crown, early enough to say ‘there’s trouble ahead.’”
The question of whether Kerr should have provided a warning to Whitlam prior to the dismissal remains a topic of debate. Dale Budd, who served as Fraser’s chief of staff, raised this question in the Sky documentary, noting that while Whitlam was not forewarned, Fraser had been contacted by Kerr in the days leading up to the dismissal. Budd recounted, “Malcolm Fraser told me that … Kerr hadn’t made up his mind, but that he wanted Fraser’s agreement that should there be a caretaker government, these were the conditions which would apply.”
Reflecting on the events from 1975, Paul Kelly, editor-at-large at The Australian, shared insights from his time as a reporter covering the crisis. He recalled a conversation with Fraser, who expressed confidence that the situation would culminate in the governor-general’s intervention. “He said to me he was very confident the crisis would be resolved with the governor-general intervening to dismiss the prime minister over the next several days,” Kelly revealed.
This anniversary prompts a renewed examination of the complexities surrounding the role of the governor-general and the potential for political intervention in Australia’s parliamentary system. The documentary will air on Tuesday at 19:30 AEDT and aims to explore the implications of that historic day and the ongoing relevance of these discussions in contemporary governance.
