The ABC is advocating for an alternative funding model to protect itself from the “threat of capricious or arbitrary political decisions” made by the government of the day.

The broadcaster’s acting chair, David Anderson, used a submission to the Senate committee investigating allegations of political interference within the ABC, established by the Greens, Labor and the crossbench over the Michelle Guthrie and Justin Milne saga, to lobby for change.

Anderson, who was named as Guthrie’s replacement after she was sacked by the board just halfway through her contract, said under the current funding agreement, which sees money set out over a three-year term, the broadcaster was vulnerable to the whims of whatever government was in power.

“Since such funding decisions are an exercise of ministerial power, or government policy decisions, they are discretionary,” he wrote.

“In effect this has two overlapping and potentially detrimental outcomes for the corporation; the funding amount and timing of such appropriation is unilaterally made by the government of the day [and] the exercise of this financial control may create an environment where perceived or real political influence on the ABC’s editorial independence is possible.”

In his submission, Anderson did not address the inquiry’s key mission – establishing whether or not attempts were made to interfere in the organisation’s editorial independence – but instead laid out the case for how political interference and the perception of it, could be avoided.

“In order to ensure the ABC’s statutory role is carried out and independence not only safeguarded, but seen to be safeguarded, it is essential that the commonwealth guarantee stable and sufficient funding for the national broadcaster. This will ensure that the ABC is not under threat of capricious or arbitrary political decisions that may influence, or be perceived to influence ABC editorial or management decisions,” he wrote.

“The corporation would welcome consideration of alternative funding arrangements that would deliver a greater level of financial certainty,” he said.

The inquiry, which begins public hearings next week, was established after Guthrie alleged Milne had told her to sack ABC journalists the government didn’t like.

Milne denied he had received complaints or orders from anyone in the government about journalists, or that he had attempted to interfere with editorial processes, but later said he believed his role as chair was to be a “conduit” between the broadcaster and the government. Milne resigned from his role after Guthrie’s allegations of interference were made public.

The former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and the communications minister, Mitch Fifield, also rebuffed suggestions they had asked for journalists to be sacked. Both said any complaints were only ever about accuracy and fairness of stories, and were made through established processes.

Guthrie has launched legal action over her termination.

The government has engaged US-based consultancy firm Korn Ferry to find its new ABC chair, contracting it for another two years for any further board appointments.

Just nine submissions to the inquiry have been loaded on the committee’s website. No findings will be made until March next year.