Australian Republic

[RFC4eva]

Mark Latham has renewed the republic debate, proposing to again hold a referendum on the issue should the ALP win the next election.

He is proposing a more straight forward question to try and determine the populations' view.

A majority of referendums fail in Australia. I was wondering what fellow PR Enders thought 8)

 

[EyeOfTheTiger]

Bit of a dilemma here. Voted republic, but am not keen on a new flag. Obviously the Union Jack would be redundant but I wouldn't like a drastic change.
People fought for our flag and were buried with it draped on their coffin. R.I.P.

 

[feisty tige]

I understand that the flag stirs emotions but it important to remember that the flag is only symbolic of something bigger. Australians fought for the country and democracy, not just for the flag.

 

[shawry]

I voted against a republic last time, dont see the point in changing it for the sake of change. Australia has bigger issues it should worry about.

 

[hutstar]

Can't really think of anything more important than self determination myself. Love to see a republic, but the constitution is a bugger to change. It will probably take another shocker Whitlam style before anything happens.

 

[Khan]

Even though I want to see a republic , the last thing I want to see is the next ellection be fought on that.

We currently have self determination. In the last 50 years I think you will find that only time that the GG has interferred in the day to day running of Australia is in 1975. The most likely effect of having a president would be to directly replace the GG with the president without changing the powers so the events of 1975 could still happen. In fact you could argue with a popularly elected president it could happen easier as his chance of holding office agaikn would be reflected in media polls.

We wasted money on the last referendum, there are day to day issues that should have a greater weight than the republic. Medicare, refugess/illegal immigrants, taxes thing that would make a direct difference.

By bringing up the republic Mister Latham will effectivally split the country again as John Howard did when we had the last referendum. Real issues got forgotten, we paid for a consitution convention that produced that stupid model of how a republic would work (not Johnny) he is not to balme for that idea. Ask Eddie and Turnbull who came up with that idea. It was never going to get over the line.

I was a child living in the country when Mister Whitlam was sacked and there is a few details that aren't known about the dismissal other than what has been portrayed. Gouch and his Ministry were wasting money at a time that the country could not afford it. The way it all happened may have been underhanded but the country could not afford to keep spending like he was doing.

Have you ever read George Orwell's 1984, there is a line that goes (excuse the paraphrasing) "He who controls the past contyrols the future". Currently only the negative side of things that happened in 1975 are quoted/ presented to the majority of Australians through both the media or schoold systems.

We (Australia) purchased a piece of Art called Blue Pols ($10 mill) when famers were selling cattle at $1.75 per head. It was relisticaly better to shoot the animal Theses prices of course were not reflected in the butchers so most people thought that it was just cow cockie complaining. Why the price drop, cancelation of export deals, to england, russia and I think china occured at that time with the Whitlam goverment doing the negotiation.

The are two sides of each argument however one side of this argument is hardly ever portrayed in the media.

If this sounds like a left verses right argument it isn't. Both sides of politics play just as dirty. The right wing is anti union , right ?. Are you aware that the only time that a state of emergency act has been called against a Union. Take a guess, MUA (nope), BLF (nope) , CFMEU( nope). The only union that has had the SOE act used on is the VDIA (Victorian Diary Industry Assocition) when they blockaded the factories in the eighties. The goverment in question , John Cain's Labor. The reason no milk for coffee/breakfast. Hospitals were still being supplied, nursing mum etc etc.

Back to my original point, starting a debate about the republic at the moment is not efficent. We need to solve the refugees, medicare, public liability insuarance, taxes a lot of things that will directly effect the way we all live. Lets ask both parties what they can do for us, rather than get tied down into a discussion on a theoretical argument on a republic.


Go Tiges


Lets Roar in 2004

Khan

 

[bg25]

We (Australia) purchased a piece of Art called Blue Poles ($10 mill)...

Ah, But have you seen what it is worth today?????

 

[CanbTiger]

Hear Hear shawry/ Khan

I don’t support the monarchy, however I’m not frothing at the mouth to spend time, incur expenses obtaining a president either.

Surely more pressing social issues face Australia than shifting to a republic.

I can think of:
- Drug Law reform
- Euthanasia
- Soil Erosion
- Immigration Policy
- Race Relations
- Rights of Indigenous Australians
- Criminal Justice law reform
….to name just a few.

I for one would love to see a Convention on these issues similar to that held on the Republic. It disgusts me that politicians can place a symbolically significant, but every day insignificant, issue top of their priority list while these issues go wasting.

If this is the best Latham can do then I really hope Howard whips his arse at the next election.

:angrysanta :angrysanta :angrysanta

 

[tigerman]

How right you are Canbtiger.

Throw in housing for the elderly, heath, education etc.
That is what the next election should be all about.
Unfortunately we all know that the election will be about homeland security. I wonder what scare tactics, and lies will be dished up to us this time, by honest John.

 

[RFC4eva]

I for one would love to see a Convention on these issues similar to that held on the Republic. It disgusts me that politicians can place a symbolically significant, but every day insignificant, issue top of their priority list while these issues go wasting.

If this is the best Latham can do then I really hope Howard whips his @rse at the next election.

Latham has raised the issue, not made it a major priority!

I have no doubt that he will be prioritising health care and education; not the republic. I just wanted to see what PREnders thought about the republic after Latham mentioned it.

I doubt that Latham would head into an election campaign with a republic convention on the top of his priority list.

I agree with tigerman, that little Johnny will again try to run the campaign on border protection, and terrorism scare tactics. ??? I hope, and I think that Latham will focus more on the welfare of Australian people and Australian society; concentrating on health and education.

 

[sabretooth]

Whoah! too heavy for me, dudes.

My old dad always saidnever argue about two things - religion and politics.

I'm going back to talk footy. Life is much funnier poking fun at Collingwood and Carlton . . . and much safer.

 

[Khan]

I'll give mister Latham a chance here, and wait until I see what he makes the major issue.

Personally I think it will be the republic. It is something that he is the direct oppisite of John Howard, and there is no cloudy waters from past leaders involved.

He Mentioned it in the first week as leader, he suggested excatly what most people would have perferred to do last time as the method he wouid support.


I'll let him hang / shine himself for a while.


Khan


p.s At the point blue poles was purchased we couldn't afford it. Have you evere heard of the Bottom of the Harbour scheme. The Australian goverment was effectivally borrowing money just to pay public servant wages. Social Welfare is great but before you implement it you need the money to spend. When the painting was purchased it would have been about 25% of our surplus so in current terms (if the reported surplus is correct) 1 billion dollars that could have been spent on the social welfare plans of his own goverment. It was purchased to plaqate the chardonay set.

 

[CanbTiger]

I think the republic was a major priority for Latham RFC. Certainly, it was one of his 4 “key objectives” together with:

(i) Placing more rungs in the ladder of opportunity (how this is to be achieved remains to be seen)
(ii) Apologizing to the Stolen generation; AND
(iii) Freeing children from detention centres

Media from the time of his announcement read as follows:

ABC- World Today 11/12/2003
ROSS SOLLY: New Labor leader Mark Latham yesterday identified the republic as a major priority if he should become prime minister; and unlike many politicians, he'd be happy to have a president elected directly by the people.

SMH- 10/12/2003
New federal Opposition Leader Mark Latham today vowed to put the republic debate back on the national agenda if Labor wins the next election.
…..

The Australian

Republic a priority for Latham
December 10, 2003
A FEDERAL Labor government under Mark Latham would make the republic a priority in its first term, the party's new political leader said today.

 

[RFC4eva]

Point taken Canb

Not that I disagree with these issues being raised, but I hope they don't dominate Labor policy-making before the next election.

I want the opposition to be pro-active, rather than simply countering the government's stance. ???
Latham has only been leader for a week or two, so hopefully it will turn around.

Will have to wait until Johnny calls the election. (Waiting to see if we have Tampa crisis II)

 

[shawry]

I dont agree with children beign freed from detention if they are going to be seperated from their parents. If their parents are already free then the children should be with them. That is my stance.

Having said that seeing the ridiculous acts by the detainees in Nauru sewing their mouths together you do have to wonder about their snaity and ability ot be good parents.

 

[Khan]

CanbTiger


As I said I see this as being Marky's platform.

What I would prefer is during the current parliment, someone putting an open vote to the parliment on this issue. Making it obvious to evryone what was going to happen in the next parlimentry term. And get on with running this country.


A few points
i) Huh


ii) Even though it is PC to apolgise for past goverments no opposition leader has promised they will do it. I think the wording has always been "look into" or "examine" this issue. Legally if the prime minister comes out and on the behalf of the country says sorry the current Australian goverment is accepting resposibility for something they directly had no part in. If it happens this country is broke...the litigation would be huge.

John Howard has said that he personally regrets what has happened in the past, and every time he has mentioned it he has always made sure that it is rationalised as his opinion not the Australian Goiverment's. Reason for this would be the Australian Goverments Lawyers telling him what not to say. Paul Keating was prime minister during Mabo and the start of the stolen generation why didn't he say sorry. Why same advise. Once a new prime minister is in place he will be given the same advise and wont say sorry . This is the same reasoning as a tobacco company amitting that ciggies cause cancer, even though current opinion says that it is true the directors in the past did not have that info tyhere for you dont apologise for past failings.

The american giverment has always stopped short of apologising for the masacre of Native americans during the 1800's , why the litigation from this alone would break even the american budget in months.

iii) We have to work out better way of dealing with immigration/refugees. Unfortunatly both the open borders policy and the detetntion center policies I can see as full of holes. We need to think about a better method


iv) Republic . This needs a lot more thought and a bi-partisan approach but can wait. It has little or no effect on our average lives


Khan


p.s Now I'll call Mark Latham by his full name. I actually dislike calling John Howard by Johnny or little Johnny as a mark of repect for the position not the man. Can you imagine calling Bob hawke, bobby, or gough Whitlan Gouchy or Malcom Fraser Mally not likely.

 

[CanbTiger]

p.s Now I'll call Mark Latham by his full name. I actually dislike calling John Howard by Johnny or little Johnny as a mark of repect for the position not the man. Can you imagine calling Bob hawke, bobby, or gough Whitlan Gouchy or Malcom Fraser Mally not likely.

LOL...fuckface, wanker, shitforbrains, *smile*, prick works for me with politicians Khan

:winksanta (nah, just kidding)

 

[tigerman]

In a recent survey, only 2% of the people surveyed, knew that Michael Jeffery was the Queen's (Head Honcho) Governor General of Australia.

 

[Khan]

Exactly, no one cares who the GG is. Other than maybe voting for him, how often should we see a president if he only has the same power as the GG. Never


Anothoer wastage issue I would love to see and is a vote winner is if some of these past politictions/govenor perks where dumped , free airfare 20 times a year what the..., A free services office , your super paid out in a lump sum.


Now there is talk of a redunancy payout if you are voted out


Get rid of these perks then talk Rebublic

Khan

 

[Walster]

Khan you obviously must have been young when this happened because your timeline and references are not correct. First of all Blue Poles was bought for $1.3M in 1973 and is now regarded as one this nations more astute art purchases and is worth $40M today. Labour then went on to win the 1974 election so this can hardly be a reason for the sacking. You have also mention the bottom of the harbour scheme. I fail to see what a tax avoidence scheme has to do with anything in this thread. Are you thinking of the loans affair wich was beat up out of all proportions by the media and made to look like a under the table corrupt backroom deal to give money to the government to keep on governing when supply was blocked. In fact it was going to be used to buy back all our mining rights and assetts from over-seas owned cartels such as Rio Tinto. In other words buy back the farm and keep the wealth here. So with supply blocked and the excuse of corruption Kerr sacked the government. Now as we all know the GG is the Queens representative in Australia so an Australian government elected by the Australian people is sacked by the head of another country who by the way is the largest private shareholder in Rio Tinto. I hope this clears up any misconceptions you have.