What is the difference between governor general and president

It is reasonable to presume that no special reasons may be given to the Governor-General, or indeed are necessary, for a dissolution of the House if the House is near the end of its three year term. Table 1. To synchronise election of the House with election for half the Senate and to gain a mandate from the people prior to the forthcoming Imperial War Conference H.

The effect of the amendment was that the bill should not be brought into operation until submitted to a referendum or an election. The Government was defeated on a formal motion for the adjournment of the House. To synchronise elections of the House with elections for half the Senate; the need to avoid conflict with State election campaigns mid-way through the ensuing year; the impracticability of elections in January or February; authority mandate to deal with economic problems H.

Prime Minister Menzies referred to the fact that the Government had gone close to defeat on five occasions; the need to obtain a mandate on policies concerning North West Cape radio station, the defence of Malaysia and the proposed southern hemisphere nuclear free zone H.

To synchronise House election with election for half the Senate; to provide an opportunity to end election speculation and the resulting uncertainty and to enable the Government to seek from the people an expression of their will; to conform with the pattern of elections taking place in the latter months of a calendar year H.

To synchronise elections for the House with election for half the Senate; claimed business community concerns that if there were to be an election in the spring it should be held as early as possible ending electioneering atmosphere etc. The table does not include simultaneous dissolutions of both Houses granted by the Governor-General under s.

On four occasions reasons, if any, were not given to the House—for example, the House may not have been sitting at the time. As far as is known, the majority of dissolutions have taken place in circumstances which presented no special features. Where necessary, it is a normal feature for the Governor-General to grant a dissolution on the condition and assurance that adequate provision, that is, parliamentary appropriation, is made for the Administration in all its branches to be carried on until the new Parliament meets.

The precedents in Table 1. A feature of the precedents is that in , , and the grounds given included a perceived need to synchronise the election of the House of Representatives with a periodic election for half the Senate. The Governor-General is known to have refused to accept advice to grant a dissolution on three occasions: [49].

The advice of Prime Minister Fisher in the case consisted of a lengthy Cabinet minute which contained the following summary of reasons:. Your Advisers venture to submit, after careful perusal of the principles laid down by Todd and other writers on Constitutional Law, and by leading British statesmen, and the precedents established in the British Parliament and followed throughout the self-governing Dominions and States, that a dissolution may properly be had recourse to under any of the following circumstances:.

On 10 January , following the defeat of a national referendum relating to compulsory military service overseas, Prime Minister Hughes informed the House that the Government had considered it its duty to resign unconditionally and to offer no advice to the Governor-General. A memorandum from the Governor-General setting out his views was tabled in the House:. On the 8th of January the Prime Minister waited on the Governor-General and tendered to him his resignation.

In doing so Mr. Hughes offered no advice as to who should be asked to form an Administration. The Governor-General considered that it was his paramount duty a to make provision for carrying on the business of the country in accordance with the principles of parliamentary government, b to avoid a situation arising which must lead to a further appeal to the country within twelve months of an election resulting in the return of two Houses of similar political complexion, which are still working in unison.

The Governor-General was also of the opinion that in granting a commission for the formation of a new Administration his choice must be determined solely by the parliamentary situation.

Any other course would be a departure from constitutional practice, and an infringement of the rights of Parliament. In the absence of such parliamentary indications as are given by a defeat of the Government in Parliament, the Governor-General endeavoured to ascertain what the situation was by seeking information from representatives of all sections of the House with a view to determining where the majority lay, and what prospects there were of forming an alternative Government.

As a result of these interviews, in which the knowledge and views of all those he consulted were most freely and generously placed at his service, the Governor-General was of the opinion that the majority of the National Party was likely to retain its cohesion, and that therefore a Government having the promise of stability could only be formed from that section of the House.

Investigations failed to elicit proof of sufficient strength in any other quarter. It also became clear to him that the leader in the National Party, who had the best prospect of securing unity among his followers and of therefore being able to form a Government having those elements of permanence so essential to the conduct of affairs during war, was the Right Honourable W.

Hughes, whom the Governor-General therefore commissioned to form an Administration. A further case which requires brief mention is that of Prime Minister Fadden who resigned following a defeat in the House on 3 October In specific circumstances set out in section 57 of the Constitution, following continued disagreement between the Senate and the House of Representatives over legislation, the Governor-General may dissolve both Houses simultaneously.

The functions of the Governor-General in relation to the legislature are discussed in more detail elsewhere in the appropriate parts of the text. The Crown in its relations with the legislature is characterised by formality, ceremony and tradition. For example, tradition dictates that the Sovereign should not enter the House of Representatives. For example, the US president is powerful while the Indian president is "figure head" in nature.

It is the constitution of the State or a country that defines the actual power of the government and the head of the state. Today, opposition in Pakistan is voicing concern of having curtailing the power of the PM and giving more powers to the President; like Article Al-Asr And every small and great thing is recorded.

Al-Qamar And guard yourselves against a day in which ye will be brought back to Allah. Then every soul will be paid in full that which it hath earned, and they will not be wronged.

Muhammad T S Awan. Virtually the head of the state was British Monarch i. King George then Queen Elizabath The powers of governor general were elucidated under Indian Independance Act, When Pakistan became a republic and its own constitution was promulgated, the post of Governor General was replaced with President. Thread Tools. BB code is On. Smilies are On. Trackbacks are On.

Here, we discussed the difference between the Viceroy and Governor-General of India as well as specific events that happened during the tenure of some of the most important viceroy and governors-general of India. Indian Councils Act Current Affairs analysis. Policy of Non-Interference. First Burmese War Treaty of Yandaboo. First Afghan War Social reforms like the abolition of female infanticide.

The Third Burmese War Establishment of the Indian National Congress Factory Act