Progress toward a republic stalls

[the next big thing]

Progress toward a republic stalls
A Newspoll shows 45 per cent of voters favour Australian becoming a republic, while 36 per cent are against it.

It's the lowest level of support for a republic since the 39 per cent in 1994, when the issue was put on the national agenda, The Australian reports, quoting the survey.

The figure peaked at 52 per cent seven years ago, after the defeat of the 1999 referendum.

The report says some of those once in favour of a republic are now counted among the 19 per cent who say they are uncommitted about the issue.

But if Prince Charles became King and his wife Camilla was "princess consort" then 51 per cent of voters said they would favour a republic, versus 29 per cent against.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/061211/2/11qkt.html

 

[mld]

I think it is highly unlikely that Australia will cut its ties with the monarchy before the United Kingdom does.

 

[baktiger]

There are many and much more important things that need to be changed before a purely
symbolic "gesture" of a republic.

 

[mld]

That excuse is generally used as a cop-out by closet monarchists in my experience.

 

[baktiger]

That excuse is generally used as a cop-out by closet monarchists in my experience.

So? What benefits would occur if we immediatly became a republic?

Quite a typical respose from people who can't actually define why it is that we
really REALLY need to be a republic.

Your argument is that we SHOULD - we have to! So there! As I said, there's no
particulary reason why we should that would have any effect on us, so it's just
not the priority that the "anti-monarchists" would like us to believe it is.

 

[mld]

That excuse is generally used as a cop-out by closet monarchists in my experience.

So? What benefits would occur if we immediatly became a republic?

Quite a typical respose from people who can't actually define why it is that we
really REALLY need to be a republic.

Your argument is that we SHOULD - we have to! So there! As I said, there's no
particulary reason why we should that would have any effect on us, so it's just
not the priority that the "anti-monarchists" would like us to believe it is.

Please quote my argument for a republic since you are referring to it.

 

[baktiger]

That excuse is generally used as a cop-out by closet monarchists in my experience.

So? What benefits would occur if we immediatly became a republic?

Quite a typical respose from people who can't actually define why it is that we
really REALLY need to be a republic.

Your argument is that we SHOULD - we have to! So there! As I said, there's no
particulary reason why we should that would have any effect on us, so it's just
not the priority that the "anti-monarchists" would like us to believe it is.

Please quote my argument for a republic since you are referring to it.

Fair enough! I assumed you were one of those rabid republicans. My mistake.
Accept my apology.
I'm a "non-event". Couldn't give a stuff as it wont make any difference. Let it
die out naturally so all the old ladys and people into it can have their fun while
it lasts. No harm in that. Another 20 or 30 years and it'll naturally progress.

 

[Liverpool]

Becoming a republic is like Bracksy's decision to change Spencer Street Station to Southern Cross Station......just an excuse to waste a lot of money and resources, for what?

People just have to ask themselves this:

How is MY life going to be better by Australia becoming a republic?

At the moment, I'd assume that 99% of people on here think we have the best nation in the world.....why fix something that isn't broken?

Agree with you Baktiger...there are far more pressing issues such as....ooooooh! Here's an article I'll post on the 'racial tolerance' thread....

 

[tigersnake]

There are many and much more important things that need to be changed before a purely
symbolic "gesture" of a republic.

Why the quote marks around the word gesture? anyway...

First, symbols are important. Anyone who thinks they are aren't are delusional. National identities are built on symbols. You stance suggests all symbols are somehow crap, but I'm sure you'd be among the first in line to defend the established conservative symbols. You can't have it both ways.

Second, to me its essential for us long term, its also inevitable. Its symbolic of cutting the apron strings to mummy.

 

[Rosy]

Second, to me its essential for us long term, its also inevitable. Its symbolic of cutting the apron strings to mummy.

I'd be interested to know the reasons you think it's essential ts. I'm not passionate either way really, to me the monarchy is like an appendix, a useless appendage that's there for no apparent reason but not really doing any harm.

There are a lot more pressing matters that need attention and $$$ at this stage but I agree the split is inevitable in years to come.

 

[tigersnake]

There's always important matters that need attending to Rosy, by that logic it would never happen. It'll happen. Might take 3 years, might take 10, sonner the better for me, but it doesn't really bother me. A decade isn't that long in the life of a nation. If we want to be taken seriously as a nation we have to have our own head of state and our own flag. Its a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Rosy]

If we want to be taken seriously as a nation we have to have our own head of state and our own flag. Its a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not so sure anyone would take us less seriously because we have a token head of state. I don't think we need the monarchy but don't think they have too much influence over the running of our country or the way we're perceived just the same.

 

[Anduril]

I think every Australian child should be able to aspire to be our Head of State.

I do not want to be the subject of a foreign queen, which we all are.

Monarchy contravenes Australian laws of discrimination etc too.

However the reason so many are unconcerned at the moment Next Big Thing is most likely because the issue is not in the public arena ATM.

As to $$$. When governments can spend billions on self promotion and name changes to govt depts, then a President and Republic is a drop in the ocean I think.

PS Where was that well known Aussie Queen Elizabeth II on Australia Day? ( Or shouldn't that be Elizabeth I, after all we hardly existed as a colony when Good Queen Bess reigned.)

 

[RemoteTiger]

Why does Australia need to become a Republic sooner than later?

Simple - it will provide the reason to change our constitution. By moving away from a Westminster Government System to our republic will allow us as a nation to evaluate where in our current Government System we are being blocked from progressing from growing. Plus foresee what challanges a new system of government could open up for our great country - to make it even better that what it currently is.

It will be a chance to reduce the size of Government in Australia - really do we need 3 tiers of Government for just over 20 million people? I am all for smaller Government and more of the workforce employed in GDP increasing jobs.

Do you realise the Manufacturing sector is decreasing in Australia - because of 3 tiers of Government levied taxes - Liverpool can tell you more about the Manufacturing sector as he works closely with it - but as I understand it Australian Companies are moving to Malaysia etc. because the Malaysian Government is offering them 10 years free of company associated taxes - add the cheaper labour and hey that puts dollars on the bottom line. BUT DECREASES AUSTRALIAS GDP because the company no longer operates from Australia!

Bring on the republic - give Australia the wake up the shake we need to continue to be the best place on this planet to live.

 

[Rosy]

As to $$$. When governments can spend billions on self promotion and name changes to govt depts, then a President and Republic is a drop in the ocean I think.

Monarchy contravenes Australian laws of discrimination etc too.

I wouldn't have a clue how much turfing the monarchy would cost but I'd prefer drops in the ocean to turn into drops in our water system. :hihi

I've gotta admit I'm apathetic about the topic really. Happy to go with the flow.

Out of general interest I'd be interested to know how the Monarchy contravenes discrimination laws Andy.

Remote excuse my ignorance, this isn't a topic I have much interest in usually, but how does the 3 tiers of Govt tie in with the Monarchy and the way our manufacturing sector is managed? :-[

 

[Liverpool]

There's always important matters that need attending to Rosy, by that logic it would never happen. It'll happen. Might take 3 years, might take 10, sonner the better for me, but it doesn't really bother me. A decade isn't that long in the life of a nation. If we want to be taken seriously as a nation we have to have our own head of state and our own flag. Its a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

The sooner the better for you?
How so?

It just goes back to my question:

How is YOUR life going to change if we became a Republic tomorrow?

Are we going to take more money home in our pay?
Will interest-rates suddenly drop??
Will we get a deluge of rain in our dams???

Let's be honest...it isn't going to change anything.
And at the moment, like I stated earlier...we have one of, if not, THE best nation on the planet.

Why change something when it seems to be going along quite nicely, as is?

I think every Australian child should be able to aspire to be our Head of State.
I do not want to be the subject of a foreign queen, which we all are.
Monarchy contravenes Australian laws of discrimination etc too.
However the reason so many are unconcerned at the moment Next Big Thing is most likely because the issue is not in the public arena ATM.
As to $$$. When governments can spend billions on self promotion and name changes to govt depts, then a President and Republic is a drop in the ocean I think.
PS Where was that well known Aussie Queen Elizabeth II on Australia Day? ( Or shouldn't that be Elizabeth I, after all we hardly existed as a colony when Good Queen Bess reigned.)

What are you talking about Anduril?
Every child can become PM.
Our PM doesn't have to have royal blood or anything like that, so any Joe Blow can go through the steps it takes to get into a position to challenge for the top job.
Do you think every decision John Howard and his government make, are vetoed by the Queen, before being passed?

As for discrimination? ???

As for a foreign subject.....c'mon, you're kidding me now...is your life so terrible and unbearable, and Australia such a poor place to live, because there is a Queen on the other side of the planet, who lets be honest, doesn't interfere in the everyday runnings of the country, and the everyday decisions made by our elected government?

And finally, you complain that we should have our own head of state and become a republic, yet when the Queen stayed away on Australia Day, for us to do our own thing and celebrate in our own way, you question why she wasn't here!
Can't win it seems.... :

Why does Australia need to become a Republic sooner than later?

Simple - it will provide the reason to change our constitution. By moving away from a Westminster Government System to our republic will allow us as a nation to evaluate where in our current Government System we are being blocked from progressing from growing. Plus foresee what challanges a new system of government could open up for our great country - to make it even better that what it currently is.

It will be a chance to reduce the size of Government in Australia - really do we need 3 tiers of Government for just over 20 million people? I am all for smaller Government and more of the workforce employed in GDP increasing jobs.

Do you realise the Manufacturing sector is decreasing in Australia - because of 3 tiers of Government levied taxes - Liverpool can tell you more about the Manufacturing sector as he works closely with it - but as I understand it Australian Companies are moving to Malaysia etc. because the Malaysian Government is offering them 10 years free of company associated taxes - add the cheaper labour and hey that puts dollars on the bottom line. BUT DECREASES AUSTRALIAS GDP because the company no longer operates from Australia!

Bring on the republic - give Australia the wake up the shake we need to continue to be the best place on this planet to live.

Interesting you used Malaysia mate...thought they were a monarchy there too?
Plus their GDP isn't too flash either...

I do agree with you regarding the overuse of Government.
Don't mind having a local council for local affairs and issues....but I reckon we could do away with the State side of things.

 

[the next big thing]

If we want to be taken seriously as a nation we have to have our own head of state and our own flag. Its a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not so sure anyone would take us less seriously because we have a token head of state. I don't think we need the monarchy but don't think they have too much influence over the running of our country or the way we're perceived just the same.

Yes your right rosy but they can have a big influence on the way the country running like in 1975 with Whitlam government being sacked by GG

The GG has so much power under constitution which is not use because long-established convention

Chapter 2 of the Constitution (Sections 61-70) sets out how the Government of Australia shall operate. It makes no mention of the Cabinet, political parties or the Prime Minister:

Section 61: "The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen's representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth."

In practice, it is the Cabinet, led by the Prime Minister, which performs this task.

Section 62: "There shall be a Federal Executive Council to advise the Governor-General in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure."

In practice, the Governor-General, acting on the advice of the leader of the majority party in the House of Representatives, summons members of the majority party and swears them in as ministers.

Section 64: "The Governor-General may appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish.
Such officers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. They shall be members of the Federal Executive Council, and shall be the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth."

In practice, the ministers are chosen by the Prime Minister who advised the Governor-General of the names and jobs allocated to the ministers.
It was this section of the Constitution that the Governor-General used to dismiss the Whitlam Government in 1975.

Section 68: "The command-in-chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor-General as the Queen's representative."

In practice, the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister are in charge of the armed services. It is unlikely that the armed services would accept orders from the Governor-General if they were not also Government orders.

Section 28: "Every House of Representatives shall continue for three years from the first meeting of the House, and no longer, but may be soon dissolved by the Governor-General."

In practice, Prime Ministers decide when the House will be dissolved and elections called. The one power that both major parties give exclusively to their leaders is the power to decide election dates.

Section 72: "The Justices of the High Court and of the other courts created by the Parliament.. shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council."

In practice, judges are appointed by the Cabinet. The Governor-General simply rubberstamps the decision.

http://whitlamdismissal.com/issues/

PS This not a Whitlam or Labor site

The Australian constitution is so out of date with the way the government is run today. Which means that the government is run is by convention and not law which is a joke for a country like Australia

 

[RemoteTiger]

As to $$$. When governments can spend billions on self promotion and name changes to govt depts, then a President and Republic is a drop in the ocean I think.

Monarchy contravenes Australian laws of discrimination etc too.

I wouldn't have a clue how much turfing the monarchy would cost but I'd prefer drops in the ocean to turn into drops in our water system. :hihi

I've gotta admit I'm apathetic about the topic really. Happy to go with the flow.

Out of general interest I'd be interested to know how the Monarchy contravenes discrimination laws Andy.

Remote excuse my ignorance, this isn't a topic I have much interest in usually, but how does the 3 tiers of Govt tie in with the Monarchy and the way our manufacturing sector is managed? :-[

The Monachy is the head of our Westminster Government System - The Queen's representative, The GG, has to sign and seal all acts of parliament as the final approval before it becomes law. If we are going to move away from the Monachy we need another system to create the final approval of an act of parliament - A Head of State. Hence we have to change the constitution.

If we are going to change our Constitution to enable us to become a Republic and move away from the Westminster Government System - why not take the opportunity to rewrite the whole consititution? Thus streamlining Government from a 3 tier (Federal, State and Local) system to possibly a two tier system. Federal and Local or Federal and State (where state looks after all the local council responsibilities).

Federalism would be responsible for National Security, Defence, Immigration, Health (Hospitals etc), Education (all levels - one curriculum), Social Security, Water, Conservation, One Australian Drivers Licence, Australian Birth Certificate etc. etc. This would stop the never ending bulldust about the Federal Government blaming the State Government for poor Education or Hospitals or bad water conservation. Or the State Governments blaming the Federal Government - and currently while they are pointing the stick at each other we the people continue to circle the gurgler!

To stop the claim that all control would be centered in Canberra - the Federal Departments could be relocated to other cities with just the parlaiment and major departments of the inner cabinet in Canberra.

How does the current 3 tier system impose itself on Manufacturing? My understanding is that a manufacurer has to pay Federal Taxes (Company Taxes, PAYE, Stevedoring etc.) State Taxes (Payroll Tax, Land Tax etc.) and Local Council Taxes (Water Rates and general Rates etc.) Add all these together and I have been advised by the Managing Director of a very large food manufacturer in NSW that 49% of his manufacturing company's costs relate to a government act. By changing our constitution and removing a tier of Government we could remove the taxes that Government has been imposing. E.G. if we got rid of State Governments we could remove Payroll Taxes and Land Taxes - who would then perfrom the public service a state government provides? - Those public services could be distributed to the Federal Government Departments (now distributed to the major capital cities) a number of regional governments which could be amalgamations of Local councils to create a local government for that area.

Currently around 28% of the Australian Workforce is on a Government Payroll - a vast majority of which do not produce GDP (some do) - which means that 72% of the workforce that do produce products and services that are calculated into our GDP are looking after the Government guys through taxes.

Reduce the Government size by removing a tier of government will decrease taxes increase GDP and remove a hell of a lot of red tape in this country.

Futher if you remove the state governments one could argue there is no need for a Federal Senate because that was set up to protect the individual smaller colonies from being over run by Victoria and NSW - no federal Senate - less taxes again.

Lets be honest some of the Politicians in this country at Fedeal, State and Local Government Levels are oxygen thieves and you and I as producing Australians are supporting their oppulent lives. Lets get those out and into the producing workforce so they can support themselves!

Please note I consider that Teachers, Professors, Doctors, Nurses are all part of a producing workforce.

What I do not consider part of a producing workforce is those public servants who work in a Federal Department or a State Department that does exactly the same thing. eg. Federal Department of Education, State Departments of Education - Federal Tourism, State Tourism, - Federal Austrade, State Departments of Trade - Federal Department of Health, State Department's of Health, etc. etc. etc.

Duplication everywhere and the taxpayer is paying for it.

Strewth - sorry Rosy - I will get off my soap box now - but it is something that really irks me - is the miss appropriation of Taxpayers money into duplicate services for a pissy little population of 20+ million people. All because some Politician and some beauracrats want to hang onto their fifedoms their areas of power and importance - they need to be redirected into jobs that produce returns for Australia and for us all!

My opinion only......RT

 

[lefty]

People say 'if it aint broke, why fix it,' and ''nothing would change anyways' and it doesn't impact on me' so really, if it isn't such a big deal and it won't change things, why not just do it?

 

[tigersnake]

I'm much more conservative on the issue than you remote. I reckon keep it simple, stick to one issue. Get rid of the British Queen and flag, replace with a true-blue Aussie pres and flag (which to me would just mean removing the union jack on our existing flag). Keep everything else the same. I'm sus on tacking on more constitutional change onto republic matters, and I reckon most Aussies are. There is merit in simplifying aspects of government, but keep it as a separate issue.

(as a side issue, I don't buy the production in Manila v production in Aus argument, the issue should be about the ethics of a company that relocates to avoid environmental laws, due process, fair labour laws etc. Australian companies and workers are some of the best in the world, and work efficiently together. A lot of those so-called burdensome taxes you speak of actually just keep the country running).

I was rerading an article recently, wish I could remember where, talking about production going offshore. It was emphasising that Aus companies are far more efficient and productive than the vast majority of SE asian companies. That while on the face of it, it looks like a huge difference in cost, $20 and hour v. $2 an hour, when you factor in the increased efficiency of Aus workers and companies, the actual difference is a few cents. But often that few cents might still lead to going offshore, other Aussie companies believe its far better to stay, but you don't hear about them because good news doesn't sell papers.