Political:

It was the ambush that was out in the open. It was the whack over the head that nobody saw. It was the surprise that everybody saw coming.

But the proof was there before our eyes. Malcolm Turnbull, staggering around in a daze, spouting rubbish and looking as if he needed a drip.

He was one of the casualties to emerge out of the Constitutional Constitution which wound up yesterday in Canberra. Undoubtedly a few more were helped or carried out of the Member's Bar at the rear of Old Parliament House, but I guess we'll not hear about them.

On paper, and in the eyes of his supporters, Malcolm Turnbull was a winner. He had lasted the distance, led his Australian Republican Movement to victory at the Convention, emerging with the "clear view" of his bipartisan republic model the preferred choice, to be put to the people at a referendum next year.

But I couldn't help but notice a few inconsistencies at his final press conference. He should have been over the moon with euphoria, smiling and beaming at everybody, handing out emotional handshakes, hugs and kisses to his many supporters and well-wishers. But he was flat, drained of energy, smiles were forced and the words mechanical.

They didn't make a real lot of sense, either. He called his republican model "an attractive, saleable proposition", as if it were an exercise bike or a lawn sprinkling system on a television sales show, rather than the future of our nation. "We got eighty percent of the republican vote." he said "Let's face it, we were never going to get the monarchists on-side."

But a referendum vote will be the province of all the people, not just the republicans. Monarchists will be out there in the general community every bit as much as they were in the Convention, opposing him at every step, pointing out the flaws and dangers in his model, highlighting the benefits of our current system.

In the end, out of 152 delegates, he managed 73 votes in favour of his preferred republican model. Not the two-thirds majority favoured by his model. Not even a majority. For a referendum to be carried, he needs a majority of people in a majority of states, and a majority overall. On these figures, he has a huge selling task ahead of him to convince the people.

He will be actively opposed by every conservative group, and by the more extreme elements. The conservatives will campaign against his model because they prefer the status quo, and they will play on the long-established public fear of change and concentration of power in Canberra. Those on the left will also fight against him because his model does not provide for the direct participation of the people in electing a president, an outcome that every poll for the last decade has shown clearly. If we have a republic, the people want to vote for the president.

In contrast, Lloyd Waddy and Kerry Jones, the leaders of Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy, were upbeat. "We are delighted because the phoney war is over and the real battle has begun." said Kerry "This is the day that the anti-republican forces in Australia united."

Lloyd Waddy outlined how their strategy had worked, "We wanted the republicans to reduce themselves to a single target -- we wanted the republicans to own their model."

And own it they do. The clear voice of the convention, said John Howard, was for the bipartisan ARM model, and it would be a travesty if it were not put before the people.

John Howard had the broadest smile of all, and he was the statesman striding to the microphone, confident, determined, a gleam in his eye, the very model of the strong leader that Australia wanted and needed at this moment.

You'd think the republicans would have been suspicious. Here was the long-declared arch-monarchist enthusiastically praising the work of the convention, the delegates, the young people, the indigenous and ethnic representatives, the chairmen, the staff, even the media.

He was rubbing the nose of the doubters in it. They had said that he had stacked the convention with monarchists, that he wouldn't accept a republic as "the clear view" of the convention, that he wanted the whole process to fail. He was proving them all wrong. He was giving them the very thing they thought they would never get.

If there was a man of the moment, this moment in history, it was John Howard.

And if there was a man with a huge task of him, an impossible task in the eyes of the experts, it was Malcolm Turnbull. He had been placed squarely behind the eight-ball, with his colours nailed to the flank of a republican model described by one delegate as "a camel with two legs".

"It'll never fly", I whispered to a fellow scribbler.

And it will not, cannot possibly get up when put before the people. It has failed in this convention to attract majority support, let alone the two-thirds support that is the bare minimum needed for constitutional change, going by the history of referenda. Referenda are not won by the people voting for elements of change that they find attractive -- they are defeated by people voting against the parts of the package they detest.

And there is much to dislike in this model. Its preamble is full of motherhood statements, but in attempting to gain the support of delegates it has included something for everyone to hate, whether it be indigenous recognition, the inclusion of "Almighty God", multiculturalism, gender equality and the environment. A politically correct preamble that will undoubtedly leave the average voter unmoved.

The killer for the preamble is the rider that it should not have implication for interpreting the other provisions of the Constitution. In other words, having made strong statements about indigenous recognition, equality, age, sex and culture, it is to mean nothing when considered by the courts!

The model's nomination procedure is another politically correct way to alienate the people. Smaller parties such as One Nation, the Greens and the Democrats are to have an input. As are State and Territory Parliaments, local governments, community organisations and members of the public. Geography, gender and cultural diversity are to be taken into account in making up the committee to choose a shortlist, and the shortlist itself is to reflect community diversity.

This cannot fail to result in a committee that is huge, unwieldy and riven by factions; and a "shortlist" that is long and non-committal. In a breathtaking display of ignorance of the way such things work, the committee must conduct its deliberations in secret, without disclosing the names of nominees. As Peter Costello chortled "Let me tell you the way this town works. You go down to Aussies (the Parliament House coffee shop) to find out the name of the next High Court Judge. You go up to the Press Gallery to find out next week's Cabinet agenda. And you turn to the Comcar driver if you want to know which people are sleeping together."

The killer for the nomination process is that the Prime Minister is not required to do more than "take into account" the shortlist. He is free to nominate anybody he wants for the head of state position.

The dismissal procedure is bizarre. The president may be dismissed with a "notice in writing" signed by the Prime Minister, effective immediately. What Prime Minister, mindful of the way Sir John Kerr treated Gough Whitlam, will not travel out to Government house with a notice of dismissal in his pocket, ready to be whipped out in an emergency?

This republican model, this "Trojan Camel" is truly the product of a committee, and if it receives the vote of more than one Australian in six after a year and a half of being picked to pieces by constitutional lawyers, monarchists, direct election proponents and every second radio talk-show host, I will be surprised.

Malcolm Turnbull might have won the battle, but he has lost the war. The republic is dead.

Dorothy Pratt looking good for One Nation in the state seat of Barambah.

When Dorothy Pratt, who sees herself in the mould of Pauline Hanson (a lady who has had her fair share of life's knocks), stood up to be counted by standing in Barambah she did so without knowing what to expect.