|
|
|
Dear guest,
Welcome to the internet's top destination for the civil discussion of politics. This is a forum for discussion and debate of the issues, and not for personal remarks aimed at other discussants.
This forum has no political affiliation and welcomes your perspective on the issues. Membership is free. If you would like to join the discussions and debates please REGISTER HERE.
All new members should review the forum rules. The "Today's Posts" button automatically adjusts itself to fit your screen on its first use for Firefox and on its second use, for Internet Explorer. Have a pleasant day. (This is a spam free board.)
|
 |
|

05-06-2008, 07:09 AM
|
|
Knight
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 507
Country:
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayingAttention
She actually does, Javert, and she excercised it in Australia in the 1970s when she forced Gough Whitlam to call a general election when he refused to resign after a double dissolution.
She does not have the power to suspend parliament but she most certainly has the power to force a general election. If such power was questioned by the government of the day it would be enforced by the citizenry on her behalf.
Fortunately such a constititional disaster has not so far occurred.
|
That's an interesting point which hadn't really sunk in with me, despite all the rituals.
Australia just needs to find out whether it feels it benefits or not from having the queen.
I imagine you would be out of the Commonwealth if you got rid of her.
|

05-06-2008, 09:23 AM
|
|
Viceroy
Sophist
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,083
Location: Wales
Country:
|
|
|
They don't have to be, many countries in the Commonwealth don't have her as their head of state.
__________________
... I am surprised at your insolence in writing to me at all. You know, as I know, that I bought this constituency... may God's curse light upon you and may it make your women as open and as free to the excise officers as your wives and daughters have always been to me while I have represented your scoundrel corporation.
I have the honour to be... your obliged humble servant, Anthony Henley
- MPs reply to constituent, mid 1700s
|

05-06-2008, 10:11 PM
|
 |
Conscript
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 20
Location: Canada
Country:
|
|
|
The power to call an election is EXTREMELY minor compared to a real monarch's power. I mean, a coalition of opposition parties can easily do such things. . .
|

05-10-2008, 02:57 AM
|
|
Conscript
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6
Country:
|
|
|
Whether Australia has a Queen as head of state is not a major concern to me. I have lived here 50 years and the only political affect of the Constitutional Monarchy has been that the Queen backed the Governor General’s interpretation of the Constitution when she sacked Gough Whitlam. This had the affect of forcing an early election in which Gough was overwhelmingly defeated.
Greater concern to me is that people wanting a Republic ask “Do we keep the Constitutional Monarchy or do we get a Republic?”.
This is a clever ruse by the Republicans because they lump all republic types against the Constitutional Monarchy system.
A sample of Republics include – Soviet Union ; Iraq ; United States of America ; Italian Social Republic ; India ; People’s Republic of China ; North Korea ; and Ethiopia (there are many others).
If asked to chose between the current Australian system and the examples of political systems above I am fairly sure that there would be far fewer people jumping on the Republican band wagon and more asking for further details as to exactly what type of Republic will replace our system.
Last edited by jmazz : 05-10-2008 at 03:05 AM.
|

05-11-2008, 07:42 PM
|
 |
Reeve
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 85
Location: Australia
Country:
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahermit
For God's sake no! They are descendants of criminals who would run amuck if it were not for strong control of a more civilized Great Briton. Why, they cannot even be trusted with guns. What would they do if they were suddenly forced to govern themselves. They are as willful children who need a strong parental symbol, which the Queen provides. 
|
WFT??? r u stupid? what the hell is wrong with u?
I'm not supposed to make personal attacks hear but that is just about the most offencive thing i have ever heard about anyone. may i point out you my friend being from the US are decended form racists, bigots, religous zelots, and slave drivers. not to mention u assholes decimated the indians.
Most of the people first sent to australia as prisoners were extreamly poor and convicted unfairly. the most common crime was stealing food or money to buy food. even more of australias population is decended from people the came during the gold rush.
__________________
Ignorance is mans greatest flaw
|

05-12-2008, 08:40 AM
|
 |
Squire
Patriotic skeptic
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 180
Country:
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhc
WFT??? r u stupid? what the hell is wrong with u?
I'm not supposed to make personal attacks hear but that is just about the most offencive thing i have ever heard about anyone. may i point out you my friend being from the US are decended form racists, bigots, religous zelots, and slave drivers. not to mention u assholes decimated the indians.
Most of the people first sent to australia as prisoners were extreamly poor and convicted unfairly. the most common crime was stealing food or money to buy food. even more of australias population is decended from people the came during the gold rush.
|
*laughs* they are being sarky mate, its a joke.
As for queen/Australia, I'm sure it doesn't make much difference one way or the other.
__________________
You can't help people being right for the wrong reasons. This fear of finding oneslef in bad company is not an expression of political purity; it is an expression of a lack of self-confidence.
|

05-12-2008, 11:05 AM
|
 |
Conscript
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 23
Country:
|
|
|
prudence
It would seem that Britons are worried about their own sovereignty, though the powers-that-be seem to be less so. Their involvement with the EU does not only threaten the existence of their own currency, but their ability to decide most -if not eventually all -matters for themselves. I'm not certain how EU architects view British royalty, but their influence would probably be allowed only if beneficial to the EU. This is the first time I have considered the effects of these things on Australia, but will the EU assume the influence of Britain on Australia (and others), will Australia find themselves independent regardless of their own will -or will they reject EU influence? The very existence of Britain as we know it is in question, as their armed forces (and so also, it might be logical to assume, intelligence agencies and direction thereof) -are combined with EU forces in the same manner as politcal and economic control.
some info on the subject..
UK to Hand Sovereignty to EU without Referendum
National Sovereignty in the European Union
EU Army
|

05-17-2008, 07:05 PM
|
|
Conscript
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12
|
|
|
Personally, I think Australia having the Queen is past its used by date. I really think its time for Australia to be a republic. We are still following other countries, I don't think Australia has really had a chance to grow up. Australia needs to become a stronger country, at the moment Australia gets pulled this way and that and it has for many many years. Just my opinion.
|

05-20-2008, 11:36 PM
|
 |
Reeve
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 85
Location: Australia
Country:
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocchip
Personally, I think Australia having the Queen is past its used by date. I really think its time for Australia to be a republic. We are still following other countries, I don't think Australia has really had a chance to grow up. Australia needs to become a stronger country, at the moment Australia gets pulled this way and that and it has for many many years. Just my opinion.
|
australia wouldn't change if it was a republic, we are better off with the queen. changeing would only serve national pride, and not by much. severing ties to tyhe queen could leave the country politicaly vunerable
__________________
Ignorance is mans greatest flaw
|

06-09-2008, 03:49 AM
|
|
Conscript
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14
Location: Noosa
Country:
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayingAttention
She actually does, Javert, and she excercised it in Australia in the 1970s when she forced Gough Whitlam to call a general election when he refused to resign after a double dissolution.
She does not have the power to suspend parliament but she most certainly has the power to force a general election. If such power was questioned by the government of the day it would be enforced by the citizenry on her behalf.
Fortunately such a constititional disaster has not so far occurred.
|
Yes, that was a terrible blow to democracy, when the Government was forced to go to the polls and face the people!
Imagine if RM in the country of Z was forced to face an election at which his opponents were allowed to hold meetings and rallies!
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
A vBSkinworks Design
 |
|