PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

500N 20th Dec 2013 01:14

I think people put far too much emphasis on the link from GG to the Queen.
Far too much. Even the Queen is hapy for us to move on but I don't think
we will see it soon as we are too disorganised.


Nothing wrong with the flag, it's good enough for Hawaii !
The problem with the flag debate is it will get hijacked by lefty do gooders
wanting to use it to make a statement. nothing wrong with the flag showing
our heritage, it doens't mean we are beholden to the UK, in fact the fact that
the Southern Cross is on it and it's history at Ballarat says more.

Andu 20th Dec 2013 01:44

I wasn't in the country in 1999, so saw the referendum only from afar. However, I understand that one of the major reasons behind its failing was the rejection by the majority of the population of the method any such non-royal HoS would be elected. "The people" apparently did not want the political elite (the members of Parliament) electing the Head of State; they wanted to elect him/her themselves. (I understand that the people [or should that be sheeple?] were lead to feel this way by a concentrated campaign in favour of the popular vote by the Murdoch press.)

If I read that right, I'm in despair that people allowed themselves to be so easily lead. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that any non-royal HoS that Australia adopts would have a titular/ceremonial role with strictly structured and clearly laid out powers to intervene in crisis situations like the events of November 1975. I think Israel's President occupies a very similar status to what we'd be looking to adopt. (How often do you hear about him? The last time he made the news, he was sexually harassing members of his staff. :) )

So really, what I'd like to see is virtually a carbon copy of what we have in our Governor General (if not necessarily our current Governor General!), but without the link back to the UK and the Queen/King of England. Since we would remain a collection of States, I'd go so far as to say we should seriously consider maintaining the GG title rather than adopting the President title.

However, I differ with the majority of Australians (in 1999 at least) in that I feel we should avoid the popular election option at all costs, for it would involve the real risk of what some have said here before me, the richest man (or the man backed by the richest man) winning.

A HoS elected by a minimum of 2/3rds of parliamentarians would ensure that no ex-politician would ever get elected. (As much as I'd like to see it, and as much as the Labor Pardee deserve it, we're never going to see a Federal Parliament with numbers anywhere near what we currently have in Queensland.)

2/3rds of parliamentarians would only ever elect a non-controversial, non-political - and one could only hope, worthy - candidate. If the electorate became involved, (I hate to say it, but), I shudder to think who might get up. I also feel that the position should be one that does not attract a campaign, even a campaign tat is 'once removed' (where the candidate remains aloof while someone [like Rupert Murdoch?] champions him/her.)

Back in 1999, the Brit media totally (and I mean totally) misread the decision to reject becoming a republic. The overriding opinion from the talking heads on Brit TV and the written media was that we loved 'em and still felt we needed them so much we couldn't bear to separate. Some of the comments were downright embarrassing.

500N 20th Dec 2013 01:54

"Back in 1999, the Brit media totally (and I mean totally) misread the decision to reject becoming a republic. The overriding opinion from the talking heads on Brit TV and the written media was that we loved 'em and still felt we needed them so much we couldn't bear to separate. Some of the comments were downright embarrassing."

I missed that. Would have been funny to watch.

rh200 20th Dec 2013 03:39

So as I mentioned before, if the new head of state is going to be a nobody, and hence not worth aspiring to, why bother?

bosnich71 20th Dec 2013 03:54

Congratulations, Kenneth. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...cons/icon7.gif

500N 20th Dec 2013 03:55

rh

Good point.

We have had a few good one's in a row lately.

bosnich71 20th Dec 2013 04:01

Andu .... 'talking heads on brit T.V. etc.'
Don't take it to heart old chap,they were probably taking the piss.

Andu 20th Dec 2013 04:49

No bos, anything but. They really were carrying on as though we had just shown how well we knew our place, tuggin' the forelock and grovelling to our betters. I kid you not. There were some serious (!) panel discussions about it on the Beeb, with every commentator totally misunderstanding and totally misreading the fact that John Howard and cleverly sabotaged the referendum by couching the questions to get the answers he wanted.

Every commentator I can recall really thought the result showed "clear evidence" that the majority of Awstrayans felt a deep and meaningful link with the home country.

John Hill 20th Dec 2013 04:58

Australia does not want to cut traditional ties with England especially if that would lead to loosing out on the benefits of being in the Commonwealth.

500N 20th Dec 2013 05:01

They obviously hadn't looked up the ehtnic make up of Australia then !!! LOL

Only the Maltese from Europe from the 50's to 70's had an affinity with
the UK, the rest (Italians, Greeks etc) got an affinity with Aus very quickly.
Some liked the monarchy, some were non plussed.

And as for anyone from the 80's onwards who came here, I doubt it.

So you have the WASP's, Maltese and ???? that's about it.

Airey Belvoir 20th Dec 2013 05:04

I blame good Queen Vic. With all those kids she had them married off to undeserving European inbred despots instead of farming them out to the Colonies to kick off the nascent Royal line in those countries.

The system inherited from the UK has stood the test of time. Neither the administration nor the state has ascendency over the other. And while the state draws its head in for the most part and cuts ribbons and opens fetes woe betide the administration that gets above itself. The system works supremely well.

And what of the alternatives for a republic of Australia?

Choice #1 - The pollies choose. Hmm. We've seen what that can do with State and Federal Governors - fortunately the present system shackles them in much the same way as it does in the UK.

Choice #2 - Popularly elected. Oh FFS! Can you really imagine the likes of Shane Warne, Jason Akermanis, Kylie Minogue or Hugh Jackman being our Head of State? Or even worse - the latest rave winner of "Australia's Got Talent", or whoever Women's Day or New Idea can convince the thickos to vote for. You only have to look at the winners of the Golden Logie to instantly scotch that idea.

If it ain't broke - don't fix it.

- - - - - - - -

Yes 10,000+ Quite remarkable when you consider all the threads that were canned previously because of trouble-makers and some questionable modding.

John Hill 20th Dec 2013 05:05

Of course the Greeks had an affinity with the British Monarchy.

Howard Hughes 20th Dec 2013 05:11


And what of the alternatives for a republic of Australia?

Choice #1 - The pollies choose. Hmm. We've seen what that can do with State and Federal Governors - fortunately the present system shackles them in much the same way as it does in the UK.
The Pollies already put forward the Governor General, the Queen just gives the nod! So why not continue with that system, apart from having to get the Queens OK? That would have the least impact on the system and least changes to the constitution. In fact the Head of State could even still be called Governor General, Governor, or maybe Executive Governor.

500N 20th Dec 2013 05:19

"The Pollies already put forward the Governor General, the Queen just gives the nod! So why not continue with that system, apart from having to get the Queens OK? That would have the least impact on the system and least changes to the constitution."

Well the Queen is very unlikely to say no to someone put up so
it kind of is irrelevant.

The other thing is, which GG was removed in the last 10 years ?
Was it a GG or Vic's GG ? I think he was an ex priest or something.

Ken Borough 20th Dec 2013 06:21

Were Australia to become a republic, the only tie with the Brits that would be broken is the farce that the Queen of England is the Queen of Australia. All other institutions can be continued basically unchanged. We'd not have to forego of membership of the Commonwealth: I can't see what such membership achieves except the ability to send some young people to an athletics carnival every four years.

I do wish that someone like Malcolm Turnbull or Fr Frank Brennan could write a treatise on the benefits of a republic that would be not only readily available but also easily understood. For those of us who understand the implications, becoming a republic with minimal change is not a big deal. However, the message that it sends to the rest of the world would be immeasurable. End of rant. :ok:

500n. A former G-G, recommended for office by one John Winston Howard, was at the time of his appointment an Archbishop of Anglican Church. For memory, he resigned kicking and screaming with a large cloud over his head on account of the way in which he 'managed' (used charitably), a case of alleged abuse. You can read about it here: Governor-General quits - smh.com.au

parabellum 20th Dec 2013 06:27

To keep the Shanes and Kylies out of the frame a basic requirement should be a minimum of fifteen years public service, time spent as a senator or MP not to count.

CoodaShooda 20th Dec 2013 06:37


the message that it sends to the rest of the world would be immeasurable.
Ken
I'd hazard a guess that, whatever the message from Australia, it would pass pretty well unnoticed by the rest of the world.

Apart from the occasional sportsmen and women, and some rather funky wildlife, we don't really grab the headlines 'off shore'.

I'd be more interested in seeing us focus on developing a strong social culture that is supported by the governments we elect. This would require significant change to our current system of government - but, given that the existing arrangements are rapidly falling short of requirements, that may not be a bad thing.

Ken Borough 20th Dec 2013 06:49

Cooda,

The first things we need to do is to abolish the states and update the Federal Constitution so as to reflect life in the 21st century. Sadly, I think we'll see airborne pigs before we see either deed.:mad:

rh200 20th Dec 2013 07:17


I do wish that someone like Malcolm Turnbull or Fr Frank Brennan could write a treatise on the benefits of a republic that would be not only readily available but also easily understood.
Won't happen, why because there isn't any with any of the proposals. Thats the farcical point, in the whole time not one person has put forward a single actual benefit. All the ones put forward are some humilating joke.

least the daylight savings crew over here could actually make a case for it, when they got smited in their referendum.

rh200 20th Dec 2013 07:19


The first things we need to do is to abolish the states
I'd rather WA spilt than let that happen

bugged on the right 20th Dec 2013 07:32

I agree with Worrals post 9997 and add that we should look at the present situation as a kind of outsourcing. The Royal family have been doing what they do for a very long time and have polished the art to perfection. They are popular in Australia and really don't cost a lot. The portraits of the Queen and all the stationery are not replaced that often and we have essentially been a republic for a long time. For anybody to suggest that the country would be measurably better off is laughable. I also dread the thought that some entertainment functionary could be appointed. The British have their republicans as well and I would suggest that without the Royal family, there is little apart from castles to attract tourists.

500N 20th Dec 2013 08:26

"However, the message that it sends to the rest of the world would be immeasurable."

We might think it immeasurable, the rest of the world probably
wouldn't hear it or read it and if any did, shrug the shoulders
and say who cares. It wouldn't make one bit of difference to how
others deal with us.

Like others, put up a valid case with some good benefits and even I might have a close look at it but change for change sake on some perceived wim doesn't cut it with me.

Whether we like it or not, it is part of our history and our country was forged under it. We have thrown enough bath water of our countries history out already without continuing to do it.

Ken Borough 20th Dec 2013 08:28

One immeasurable benefit would be that an Australian born citizen would be our Head of a State, instead of a foreigner who doesn't even live in the country. What could top that? Anyway, I don't think we here will make a difference so let's move on.

Does Australia need a Bill of Rights, especially as TA's mob is moving inexorably further to the right?

Worrals in the wilds 20th Dec 2013 08:30

Maybe, but that was also voted down by referendum back in 1988.

500N 20th Dec 2013 08:35

For all intents and purposes, we do have an Aussie head of state.

Sorry, having the Queen there makes bugger all difference.

John Eacott 20th Dec 2013 08:44


Originally Posted by Ken Borough (Post 8217072)
especially as TA's mob is moving inexorably further to the right?

Especially as they are starting from the extreme left. I suppose that you were thinking that an LNP Government would remain there?

How strange.

Ken Borough 20th Dec 2013 08:53

John,

They are moving further to the right than they were positioned prior to the election. I wasn't suggesting movement from the left. :ugh::ugh:

John Eacott 20th Dec 2013 09:02

How easy it is to misunderstand!

Nonetheless, I'd disagree that there is a 'move' from the pre-election position (which is what I now guess that you mean/meant?) other than recognising the reality of what they've inherited.

Forecasts based on estimates soon crumble when access to the real figures are made available; hardly the fault of the incoming administration. Yet some of the current popular press is giving a charmed run to the bizarre claims of the opposition which infer that they are blameless and it's all Tony's fault :rolleyes:

Andu 20th Dec 2013 09:43

Donning my pedant hat here.

Each State has a Governor - just that - 'Governor'. The 'nayshun' has a Governor General.

It was the Governor of NSW, the Rev Peter Hollingsworth (sp?) who was prevailed upon to step down because of his history of not falling over backwards to put a stop to all sorts of questionable goings-on in the Anglican Church. (Anything he may have done or failed to do paled into insignificance compared with what we're learning about the behaviour of 9/10ths of the leadership of the last Labor governments, both Federal and NSW.)

I share the misgivings of those who worry about the risks of change. However, I think it's time we took that/those risk(s) and shed the last formal ties with England/Britain. It was a very good suggestion re making it a requirement that the person HoS be above a certain age and with a required amount of public service behind him/her. Anything to avoid the latest sporting 'hero' or the latest winner of 'Australia's Got Talent' or 'Dancing With the Stars' getting the nod from adoring Bruces and Sheilas.

Ken Borough 20th Dec 2013 10:46

Andu,

I'll don my hat as well and raise you one! Hollingsworth was a Governor-General appointed on Howard's recommendation. He was never the Guvner of NSW.

Andu 20th Dec 2013 11:09

I stand corrected, Ken.

Ken Borough 21st Dec 2013 00:32

Be afraid. No, be very afraid!

George Brandis' inside job on human rights draws fire

Captain Sand Dune 21st Dec 2013 00:37


A SIEGE outside Parliament House has ended after a tense two hours, after former Wollongong taxi driver Abdula Ganiji drove on to the footpath and threatened to blow himself up.
Mr Ganiji has been a regular visitor to Parliament, where he held a hunger strike about a $200 fine he copped 15 years ago, and called on the Premier Barry O'Farrell to solve a dispute with his employer, Wollongong Radio cabs.
Staff inside the building were alerted to the threat with an announcement from security at about midday, that said the front of parliament would be closed due to a "security operation".
Staff were told to only exit and enter the building through the back entrance, and stay away from the front of the building.
Mr Ganiji was demanding to speak with the Premier, or he would blow himself up.
Mr Ganiji was dragged from a Chrysler 3000 around 2pm by tactical police, and is now receiving medical attention.
Macquarie Street was blocked off at both ends and workers in surrounding buildings were escorted out .
Security sources told The Telegraph the man's threats included a claim that he had packed the car with an explosive - one report suggested this included 25 litres of petrol.
Mr O'Farrell remained in the building throughout the siege.
Assistant police commissioner Mark Murdoch told media that at no time were members of the public at risk, and staff within Parliament were not in danger.
Assistant commissioner Murdoch said tactical police stormed the car, after the man stopped responding to negotiators and ignited a cigarette lighter.
"At that instant specialist police, our public order and riot squad and our tactical operations unit moved forward quickly, a hand-held device was used by police to inject a canister of gas into the car, entry was gained to the vehicle and the man was removed," he said.
"We were satisfied that at no time, and I stress, at no time, was anyone at risk, no member of the community were at risk, no one in any building was at risk and importantly no members of our parliament were at risk because of this incident."
"No one was at risk at any time, apart from the man in the vehicle, and the officers who were trying to resolve the situation."
Security at Parliament House announced that the Macquarie street entrance of the building had reopened just after 3.30pm.
Firstly, well done to the NSW police who dealt with this nutter. If it were me in charge, I would evacuated everyone within a suitable radius and told the nutter to go ahead and put everyone out of their misery. But that’s just the type of caring, sensitive bloke I am.

Secondly, I note the offender is of an ethnicity that has a predilection for blowing themselves and others up when they aren’t getting what they want. I trust those who have championed the cause of Australia’s ‘open door’ immigration policy are proud of themselves.

Thirdly, I predict the following will now happen:

1. There will be an army of lawyers (the usual lefty types such as Slater and Gordon et al) knifing each other in order to defend this nut case.

2. He will ‘diagnosed’ with some type of ailment (bipolar, schizophrenia, Asperger’s, take your pick) that will be used to mitigate what he has done.
3. He will be given a suspended sentence and a fine, and not the goal time he so richly deserves.

And while I’m at it – ah yes, the great Australian republic debate. I have no problem with a republic per se. However no one has yet informed me how being a republic will benefit the average tax paying Australian. And no, having an Australian as head of State and a flag without the union jack does not qualify.

500N 21st Dec 2013 00:38

The vocal minority are having the temples they built under Labor
torn down bit by bit.

At least they won't have all these semi Gov't organisations available
to speak on their behalf now, they'll have to get off their backsides
and do some work themselves.

By the time Abbott has finished, it will take them 3 years to rebuild
under Labor before they are effective again which is good. I hope he
crushes them so it takes them longer.

Captain Sand Dune 21st Dec 2013 00:42


The vocal minority are having the temples they built under Labor
torn down bit by bit.
And my, aren't they squealing!! A sure sign the government is on the right track.

500N 21st Dec 2013 00:46

Oh yes, they are squealing big time.

Asylum Seekers Health group, now one doctor.
The Appointment of the guy to the Human Rights group.

and a few others.

TA still hasn't gone far enough, he needs to clean out the Public Service,
especially the Greens within the enironment departments that hinder so much
with red tape.

Hopefully a balance will be restored !
(A balance far right of centre ;) :O).

Hempy 21st Dec 2013 00:52

Goebbels would be proud

500N 21st Dec 2013 00:58

We haven't gone far enough yet for him to take notice.

Give it a year or two.


Just Remember, it was Labor that made more and more people right wing !

chuboy 21st Dec 2013 08:02


Originally Posted by 500N (Post 8226528)

TA still hasn't gone far enough, he needs to clean out the Public Service,
especially the Greens within the enironment departments that hinder so much
with red tape.

Just curious, do you believe there is a better way of ensuring our environment is not harmed by development or do you just not care about it at all? I would be interested to know what you think would work better.

Takan Inchovit 21st Dec 2013 08:25

A better way for who, the green ideals or the general public?


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:37.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.