Monarchy V's Republic debate re aviation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: about there
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monarchy V's Republic debate re aviation
For the erudite amongst us, would a republic offer a clean slate and freedom in terms of aviation regulations for our GA industry to prosper or is it a side ways step from the current system?
In plain english....Do you really think the bureacrats would do themselves out of a job?...exactly the opposite! The constitution as printed can reside in a small booklet....if the bureaucrats got hold of that the rewrite would be bigger than Ben Hur and take an epic length of time....The bureacrats killed China for millennia,,,I can see no difference here...best to leave what our fathers created alone...it has stood the test of time.
I wonder at the irony of nearly all our Australians of the year are republicans and cannot wait to express it on receiving their gong.....yet... a majority of people in a majority of states voted against it for pretty well the reasons stated above.
To bring this post relevent to aviation...Bureaucracy has continuously re-written the regs from something the size of the booklet that contains the constitution to something the size of the tax act...and needing a legal bent just to decifer it....would the regs be simplified by a constitution change to a republic? YA THINK? just refer to Creampuff's post on the rewrite of our regs that will bungle on forever...answer enough!
I wonder at the irony of nearly all our Australians of the year are republicans and cannot wait to express it on receiving their gong.....yet... a majority of people in a majority of states voted against it for pretty well the reasons stated above.
To bring this post relevent to aviation...Bureaucracy has continuously re-written the regs from something the size of the booklet that contains the constitution to something the size of the tax act...and needing a legal bent just to decifer it....would the regs be simplified by a constitution change to a republic? YA THINK? just refer to Creampuff's post on the rewrite of our regs that will bungle on forever...answer enough!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a majority of people in a majority of states voted against it for pretty well the reasons stated above.
The vote should be yes/no. Lil Johnny the rat was a master at wedge politics and had repulicans against republicans.
Super Cecil,
I'm not sure I would like to vote for an open ended question of Yes or No.
The fanatics would say we need change but lets decide later what that change is going to be.
I am more than comfortable where we sit at the moment.
I'm not sure I would like to vote for an open ended question of Yes or No.
The fanatics would say we need change but lets decide later what that change is going to be.
I am more than comfortable where we sit at the moment.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure I would like to vote for an open ended question of Yes or No.
The fanatics would say we need change but lets decide later what that change is going to be.
I am more than comfortable where we sit at the moment.
I am more than comfortable where we sit at the moment.
Looking forward to the royal wedding are we? I've reserved the royal mints mugs with chuck and Liz or whoever it's goanna be.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My one chance to agree with OZBUSDRIVER seems only to go into cyberspace not if, but when, this thread develops into a mudslinging political nonsense and is locked.
I give it about 12 hours.
I give it about 12 hours.
Super Cecil,
'Open ended' as in what are we actually voting for.
Yes to a "change" but in what form, what conditions, what rights, what time frame, who decides, what format of power, and the list goes on.
Any intelligent person will expect to be given the finer details for what he/she is voting for.
Very fortunately there was a significant percentage of the population who thought the same! Royal and Republican 'fanatics' alike.
I'm pleased you have the next few months to look forward to.
The mugs are a most appropriate collector's item.
(Sorry Frank I couldn't help myself)
'Open ended' as in what are we actually voting for.
Yes to a "change" but in what form, what conditions, what rights, what time frame, who decides, what format of power, and the list goes on.
Any intelligent person will expect to be given the finer details for what he/she is voting for.
Very fortunately there was a significant percentage of the population who thought the same! Royal and Republican 'fanatics' alike.
I'm pleased you have the next few months to look forward to.
The mugs are a most appropriate collector's item.
(Sorry Frank I couldn't help myself)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank and Ad, I'm sure yool change your minds. Especially as Mr Skynews (Affiliated with Murdoch?) suggests if we get Dick for President. That alone will change your minds I'm sure. Shortly you will take the painting of a young Liz with crown and adornments off your walls replacing it with an enlarged photograph of Dick. You can still worship Queenie of an afternoon when you go to the RSL.
As Mr Sky said, Dick for Presidend.
As Mr Sky said, Dick for Presidend.
Grandpa Aerotart
As it stands our armed forces pledge allegiance to the Queen/King NOT the President of Australia. Personally I would rather have our Fighter/Bomber (aviation content) crews showing allegiance to a Monarch that has the best interests of Australians at heart rather than someone like a Rudd/Gilliard/Chavez who has only their own best interests at heart.
The Republican elite are usually of the political left and often display a barely concealed hatred, or at least disdain, of all that Australia IS. Its history, culture and everything else that made Australia what it is.
A President would inevitably end up being a Political appointee - you only have to look at the political bias our current Gov General is displaying to recognise that danger inherent in that. If they suggested a directly elected President - well they didn't last time for obvious reasons - do YOU trust the average Australian voter to be across all the issues enough to vote for a President - we'd end up having a footballer or Reality TV star as Pres
Australia needs MUCH smaller/less Govt NOT a Republic.
The Republican elite are usually of the political left and often display a barely concealed hatred, or at least disdain, of all that Australia IS. Its history, culture and everything else that made Australia what it is.
A President would inevitably end up being a Political appointee - you only have to look at the political bias our current Gov General is displaying to recognise that danger inherent in that. If they suggested a directly elected President - well they didn't last time for obvious reasons - do YOU trust the average Australian voter to be across all the issues enough to vote for a President - we'd end up having a footballer or Reality TV star as Pres
Australia needs MUCH smaller/less Govt NOT a Republic.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australia is the most over governed country in the world.
You have an exact system of government duplicated at federal level.
A republic would be a perfect time to re-write a constitution but imagine how it would end up if the same philosophy that OLC at CASA has taken.
Never have we had such a distinct lack of talent in politics than we do at this time. Albanesse, Garret, Rudd and God help us Gillard and Abbott.
Abolish state governments. Absorb every state government into the senate at federal level. Pay the ar$eholes twice as much to then halve the numbers in the senate (yep, turn them against each other like a good ole pilot on pilot fight)
Done deal
You have an exact system of government duplicated at federal level.
A republic would be a perfect time to re-write a constitution but imagine how it would end up if the same philosophy that OLC at CASA has taken.
Never have we had such a distinct lack of talent in politics than we do at this time. Albanesse, Garret, Rudd and God help us Gillard and Abbott.
Abolish state governments. Absorb every state government into the senate at federal level. Pay the ar$eholes twice as much to then halve the numbers in the senate (yep, turn them against each other like a good ole pilot on pilot fight)
Done deal
Noooo Jack! Not a complete solely federal government! We should scale back Federalism and make the States compete with each other for the revenues of business and wealth creation.
If the federation became a common-market treaty between States, you could form or relocate your air charter business in the most welcoming state, yet still do business throughout Australia.
It's the increasing grip of Federal Government on Australia that causes the ballooning of bureaucracy and it's getting worse, with healthcare, water resource management, mining taxes etc. It's completely the wrong way to go! Case in point is the EU - all the states strangling themselves equally with a monster bureacracy. Norway and Switzerland have the best of all worlds.
If the federation became a common-market treaty between States, you could form or relocate your air charter business in the most welcoming state, yet still do business throughout Australia.
It's the increasing grip of Federal Government on Australia that causes the ballooning of bureaucracy and it's getting worse, with healthcare, water resource management, mining taxes etc. It's completely the wrong way to go! Case in point is the EU - all the states strangling themselves equally with a monster bureacracy. Norway and Switzerland have the best of all worlds.
Super cecil...no republic has ever been born without a revolution!
As simple as that! Nobody wanted the discord that the ARM created within the convention. If they couldn't decide what model then how could the public ever decide...and Howard knew it in spades that if the public is presented a referendum that does not clearly state the benefit it will be rejected...and it was!
Don't feel bad about it...you will be the first against the wall come the revolution
As simple as that! Nobody wanted the discord that the ARM created within the convention. If they couldn't decide what model then how could the public ever decide...and Howard knew it in spades that if the public is presented a referendum that does not clearly state the benefit it will be rejected...and it was!
Don't feel bad about it...you will be the first against the wall come the revolution
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australians are too easy going.
It's about time we got a few more middle eastern types. When Gillard tries to launch a dirty new big tax, there will be riots in the streets!
Aussies are too happy to take it up the backsides while we are pooned......
It's about time we got a few more middle eastern types. When Gillard tries to launch a dirty new big tax, there will be riots in the streets!
Aussies are too happy to take it up the backsides while we are pooned......
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm a Republican, but don't think it will happen in my lifetime. The Majority want a vote for President and the pollies want to keep that privilege to themselves!
I personally am not averse to a system where the President is decided by both Houses of Parliament. While it would be open to politicisation, it is not too far removed from the present system. Would much prefer this to some ex footy player/soapie star/lead singer that would be elected by the masses...
I personally am not averse to a system where the President is decided by both Houses of Parliament. While it would be open to politicisation, it is not too far removed from the present system. Would much prefer this to some ex footy player/soapie star/lead singer that would be elected by the masses...
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Long history tells us that:
Parliament protects us against the Crown
The Crown protects us against Parliament
Parliament's should have NO say in a president. Awkward for vermin but them's the breaks
Parliament protects us against the Crown
The Crown protects us against Parliament
Parliament's should have NO say in a president. Awkward for vermin but them's the breaks
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy, could you imagine 7 states with 7 separate parliaments, 7 separate CASA's, building regs, police forces ( extradition treaties ) great in theory mate to have them competing against each other but that in itself breeds new beauracracies! No thanks!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Crown protects us against Parliament
Jack Ranga is quite right pointing out the horror of 7 competing governments. Just go and ask any corporation having to trade in separate states just how much it is complying with the varying legislation. That is why the Corporations Act was introduced where all states agreed to a common legislative model.
The Australian Constitution is a very legalese type document which reflects the Constitutional Conventions which led to its formation as it was primarily lawyers who attended. It primary purpose is to set out the Commonwealth powers and leaves the rest to the states. This is why company legislation was in the states area. There are numerous other areas where progress has been hindered by the state bias in the Constitution.
As an aside, the Australian Constitution is an Act passed by the UK Parliament. It took Australia a very long time to cut the links with the UK Parliament and an even longer time to cut the link to the UK courts.
Chuckles, I don't think the fact that the armed forces swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown makes the slightest bit of difference to how they act. The Crown's authority in Australia is through the government (the PM is known as the Queen's loyal Head of Government, the Leader of the Opposition has a similar title) so what the government orders the forces will do. To suggest otherwise is to raise the spectre of mutiny.
Yes I can Jack! With the exception of CASA, what you've described is exactly what we have and pay for now, although we also have the overhead costs of an overreaching Federation as well.