Should Australia become a Republic?

[noco]

We need to have a republic, the same as we need same sex marriage, the same as we need open borders, the same as we need more money for welfare, the same as we need more money for infrastructure, the same as we need more money to give a tax cut for business, the same as we need more money for a tax cut on PAYG employees.

Jeez we just seem to need.

I can tell you who needs a Republic, the media, it would give them new food for the next fifty years.

The only people that keep the U.K media in check is the Royal Family.

This Republican crap is just another diversion from the real issues facing Australia.....THE ECONOMY...Perhaps we should be concentrating our efforts in a bi-partisan way to sort out the mess we find ourselves in....Both major parties seem to have very little concern or know what to do...One says we want to do so and so and the left says, no way......Nobody seems to care about the National interest.....It is all about who can throw the most mud.

 

[sptrawler]

This Republican crap is just another diversion from the real issues facing Australia.....THE ECONOMY...Perhaps we should be concentrating our efforts in a bi-partisan way to sort out the mess we find ourselves in....Both major parties seem to have very little concern or know what to do...One says we want to do so and so and the left says, no way......Nobody seems to care about the National interest.....It is all about who can throw the most mud.

The media love chaos, noco, if they don't have chaos they have nothing to write about.

This wasn't a problem 20 years ago, there was only the daily papers, now there is social media.

So the mainstream media have to drive the issues, then they are in front of the wave, the problem is the silent majority don't listen.

That is the problem, the major Parties are having trouble coming to terms with, they think the media represents majority opinion.

When in fact they only represent the opinion they support, that is why Channel 10 wallows around in the doldrums, they think someone gives a $hit what the project has to say.
The only thing that has saved channel 10's ar$e was family feud, easy to digest.

What sane person, with a brain, wants to listen to a group of "project wannabies" tell us what we should be thinking and telling us why we should be thinking it.
I for one hate some reporter telling me what I should be thinking and then telling me what action I should be adopting.
Jeez is there any wonder, Trump and Hanson are doing well. FFS

My rant for the day.

 

[SirRumpole]

I don't really see your point or are just trying to be the clown in a three circus.....You also praised the fact by thanking God that we have the Westminster system....Then in another post you state "I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A REPUBLIC".

I am not really sure where you stand ATM.

Just putting some alternatives out there noco. Pity you don't know what tongue in cheek means, but I couldn't find an emojie for it.

If we want a Royal Family, why not have our own instead of another country's ?

 

[Tisme]

The media love chaos, noco, if they don't have chaos they have nothing to write about.

This wasn't a problem 20 years ago, there was only the daily papers, now there is social media.

So the mainstream media have to drive the issues, then they are in front of the wave, the problem is the silent majority don't listen.

That is the problem, the major Parties are having trouble coming to terms with, they think the media represents majority opinion.

When in fact they only represent the opinion they support, that is why Channel 10 wallows around in the doldrums, they think someone gives a $hit what the project has to say.
The only thing that has saved channel 10's ar$e was family feud, easy to digest.

What sane person, with a brain, wants to listen to a group of "project wannabies" tell us what we should be thinking and telling us why we should be thinking it.
I for one hate some reporter telling me what I should be thinking and then telling me what action I should be adopting.
Jeez is there any wonder, Trump and Hanson are doing well. FFS

My rant for the day.

Excellent rant

 

[sptrawler]

It's back on the agenda, Captain FW, cheer leader for the I want to be a Legend Club, wants now to put the Republic back on the agenda.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...australian-republic-vote-20180101-h0bzlu.html

How the hell could we operate as a country with President Rudd, President Gillard, President Abbott, President Turnbull? FFS
Even Kim Beasley a Labor man through and through, is saying Rudd was a goose.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...s-24hour-media-obsession-20171218-h06qbh.html

I hope Turnbull at least gives us a vote that matters, and is reviewable, not some half arsed post it out and see how it pans out postal vote.
At least it could end his career, which IMO, would be doing Australia a favour.

 

[SirRumpole]

I voted for it last time, but seeing how much trouble a bad President has got the US into, I doubt if I would vote for it again, unless the President had purely ceremonial powers.

In a country that names a ferry "Ferry McFerryface", I have little faith in my compatriots to make a sensible decision in this important matter.

 

[sptrawler]

I voted for it last time, but seeing how much trouble a bad President has got the US into, I doubt if I would vote for it again, unless the President had purely ceremonial powers.

In a country that names a ferry "Ferry McFerryface", I have little faith in my compatriots to make a sensible decision in this important matter.

Just having the underlying fact, they can be sacked, is a godsend. IMO
Kerr may have been an idiot, I don't know, but the fact he could dissolve the Parliament, and make them face the people is something that should be cherished and not given away lightly.
I haven't seen a many Statesmen, in the position of Prime Minister, I've seen fewer that I would give absolute power to.
I know it will mean a big pay rise for the "big Chair", but to me it doesn't mean the outcomes will be any better.
Stuff them, why make their position any more secure and less answerable, than ours?
Just my opinion, that of a disillusioned voter.

 

[Tisme]

I voted for it last time, but seeing how much trouble a bad President has got the US into, I doubt if I would vote for it again, unless the President had purely ceremonial powers.

In a country that names a ferry "Ferry McFerryface", I have little faith in my compatriots to make a sensible decision in this important matter.

I have no doubt the appointment would be an equity nomination, rather than merit based or popular vote. Something like Australian of the year selections. How that plays out when we are in need of a warrior leader would be concerning, especially if Delta Goodrem is the el presidente because she is quota female, sings songs and overcame cancer

 

[wayneL]

Wrong question.

What sort of Republic is the primary question. A plebiscite with the question "do you want a republic?", may as well be "would you like to give us a blank cheque?".

Let's see the proposed Republican model first, then we can all talk.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

The Queen person addressed her country. Britons.

Chips down, and it's sauve qui peut. (themselves)

I understand the language, and some of the culture, but have little affinity with much else..

 

[SirRumpole]

The Queen person addressed her country. Britons.

Chips down, and it's sauve qui peut. (themselves)

I understand the language, and some of the culture, but have little affinity with much else..

She actually specifically mentioned Australia as well.

The context of her remarks was "you'll be right mates".

 

[Dona Ferentes]

Tokenism

 

[Logique]

The UK is finally out of the EU, and will be looking for new trade deals in the Antipodes.

I don't think it's the right time to thinking Republic. And in any case not within the reign of the Queen.

 

[wayneL]

Republic or not I'm pretty ambivalent. Like I said before what sort of Republic?Lets see a model first, if it's a good model which benefits all, I'm in, otherwise let's just keep our constitutional monarchy thanks.

As far as trade with us it wasn't the monarchy which screwed us over, it was the parliament when they joined the EEC.

And I agree with @Logique, let's wait till Liz is gone before seriously talking about it. The window of opportunity for Republicans is when the egregious Charles is king, but before William takes the throne.

But I stress, for me, it had better be a bloody good model.

 

[sptrawler]

I'm yet to be convinced a Republic is any better than what we have, I don't see any Republics around the World, that I would be rushing to emulate.
Maybe someone could point to someone in recent history, that would make a good President?

 

[Knobby22]

The Australian Republican Movement ARM has finally worked out a model sort of based on Ireland.

Basically we would get to choose from 11 candidates, one picked by each state and 3 from the Feds.
The President would have reduced powers as they couldn't sack a Government if it had a majority of the house.

I can see a lot of problems with this.
Thumbs down from me, need more convincing.

I understand why you wouldn't want say Kylie Minogue or Clive Palmer becoming President then sacking the Government over some point of contention but if the Government tries to circumvent Democracy then the power to sack could be really useful.

 

[Humid]

I'm up for a new flag.....

 

[sptrawler]

The Westminster system has stood centuries of testing and is yet to be shown to be flawed, a group of outspoken, overpowering, self opinionated people want to have the dream of ultimate control.
El Presidente, if people think branch stacking is rampant now, wait and see the shenanigans that will go on to get preselection for the 'Big Hat", Turnbull would be first out of retirement IMO, followed closely by 'look at me Kev'. ?
There's an old saying, 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.

 

[sptrawler]

Here is an article on the issue:

‘Charles will be King ... and no Australians can apply’: Republicans launch presidential plans

The Australian Republican Movement has finalised its proposed changes to the Australian constitution.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
The proposed model and constitutional changes have been designed after extensive consultations with legal experts and are similar to the Irish Republic, which vests limited powers in a future President, who would replace the Governor-General - the Queen’s representative in Australia.
Each state and territory would be able to propose one candidate for president, with how that person was chosen up to the jurisdiction, while the federal government would propose up to three candidates - with a popular vote to follow.

A future president would appoint a prime minister who had a majority in the House of Representatives, as the Governor-General currently does, but could not terminate a prime minister who had a majority in the House, as Sir John Kerr did to Gough Whitlam in 1975.
Other functions such as the issuing of writs for an election and summoning the House to determine confidence in the government would be retained but assent from the head of state for new laws endorsed by voters would be automatic after seven days.
In practice, a President would have fewer powers than the Governor-General currently does.

The hybrid model proposed by the ARM seeks to unify supporters of a republic who were divided in 1999 between people who wanted a directly elected president and those who wanted a head of state chosen by Parliament.

 

[sptrawler]

One thing I have noticed is, the republican push, is by self opinionated bigots, that complain and bitch endlessly that mainstream don't agree with them.