I said:-
I feel that,no matter the terms in which it is couched, a resignation must be seen to be an offer and it has to be accepted by the official to whom it is offered. Don. (By which post I mean that the official, in the end has to decide whether or not he will accept it.)
Sorry Forumites but, despite what has been written since, I still don't see that, since the board has refused to accept SR's resignation
, he has any choice but to continue to act in that position.
When a majority in the House of Reps nominates a PM, the GG has reserved powers to accept or decline that nomination. (We learned this following Kerr's actions in 1975.) The PM then fills the position for the term of the parliament or "at her Majesties pleasure"
.
This means that the reserve powers can be invoked to sack the PM. Should the PM wish to resign against the wishes of the GG then it aint going to happen. The PM would need to not show or act in a manner that was unacceptable to the GG and be sacked. It seems clear to me that the board has always (In fact MUST have) the power to appoint it's president. And the same goes for the position of area rep. Regards, Don