To what extent is royal assent an automatic process?

[vanroevan1994]

In the text book "Justice and Outcomes 11e Units 3&4" Learning activity 1.4 asks that question - and I have no idea how to answer it properly? :?


: )

[eeps]

It's a weird question in my opinion. I would say generally, royal assent is an automatic process. The governor-general will just give royal assent to a bill once it has passed both houses of Parliament (House of Representatives and the Senate), from the advice of the PM and ministers. Otherwise, if the governor-general doesn't agree with a bill - it can withhold royal assent (which means it's not an automatic process). In that case, the bill may have to go back to Parliament and amendments may be made.

[Mech]

Peculiar question. Well, it is not really automatic. Before a Bill can become an official piece of legislation effective in the Commonwealth canon, it must pass the Upper and Lower Houses. I also believe that the Governor-General can withhold giving Royal Assent in certain conditions (which evade my memory now). You then also have proclamation.

[Fyrefly]

These days royal assent is much more an automatic and ceremonial process than it was in the past. However, it really is improper to label royal assent as "automatic". The Governor-General of Australia can exercise their reserve powers whenever they so choose, and it is simply the case that in current times they rarely choose to do this.

http://australianpolitics.com/parliament/legislation/royal-assent.shtml
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/1997-98/98rn25.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor-General_of_Australia#Constitutional_role_and_functions

[Liuy]

In an answer, include that although royal assent is generally a formality as the GG is basically a rubber stamp in the law making process ( think about separation of powers, executive power in theory is exercised by the GG but in practice is carried out by the cabinet, who are part of parliament and the legislative power), they also in theory have the power to withhold royal assent, but this is rarely exercised. When using royal assent as a role of the Crown, always mention give OR withhold royal assent.

[schnappy]

This is an interesting question that really does require careful thought and an understanding of why we have royal assent.

Which is why the VCAA would never ask it.

[meganrobyn]

Section 58 of the Constitution says the GG can:
1. Give RA.
2. Reserve (delay) RA for up to 2 years.
3. Withhold (refuse) RA.
4. Request that amendments be made to the bill before they will give RA.
5. Revoke (take back) RA up to 1 year after giving it.

In practice they have never done 2-5 because they always give it. There are more political barriers to refusing it than legal ones, though.

The Victorian Governor can't delay, refuse, revoke etc - if the bill has legitimately passed both houses of parliament, they have to give RA. It's not 100% spelled out in the Victorian Constitution, but that's what most academics think is the meaning. In 1851 the Victorian Governor *did* refuse RA, but that was because  the bill hadn't passed both houses of parliament, for example.

Therefore, it's not automatic in *theory*, but it *is* in everyday practice.