The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Why We Need Prince William as GG.

Why We Need Prince William as GG.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
Oliver,

Truthfully, it appears to me you are beyond help.

A Governor-General represent the British Crown. Hence if Charles was to be G-G then the moment the Queen was to vacate the throne then he could no longer remain to be a G-G as a G-G is to represent the Monarch and constitutionally requires to be a person born in the UK.
Neither can anyone naturalise to become an “Australian citizen” as constitutionally being an “Australian citizen” is having the “political” status that includes “franchise’ but exclude “nationality”.
Chinese nationals who were residing in the colonies, but had “franchise” as if they had paid the Poll tax they were allowed to vote, by Section 41 of the Constitution were entitled to use their “Australian citizenship” to vote in Federal elections but by section 44 of the Constitution were excluded from sitting in the federal parliament.
Constitutionally “Australian nationality” does not exist as Subsection 51(xix) of the Constitution allowed with consent of the British Parliament the Commonwealth of Australia to naturalise “aliens” to become “Subjects of the British Crown”.
No referendum was ever held, let alone succeeded to alter this, however children are taught since kindergarten differently as to what the political ambitions of the government is. Those who retain their kindergarten mentality will never grow up and never learn.
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Sunday, 22 July 2007 10:08:25 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka,

Thank you for some interesting comment. I was unaware of the distinctions involving "franchise". Intersting.

Else, my comment was a little tongue-in-cheek to the point out William, Charles and Elizabeth are first and foremost Britians and not Australian and that The Constitution(s), which served us well into the 1950s, is now its sunset regarding its contemporary relevancy.

By the same token, I would not like to see the American system with what is essentially an elected Monarch the a mandate. [Nixon said felt he had the same powers as Loius XIV. Guess Watergate showed overwise; But the lean of US affairs does give his comment "some" credice.]. That said, any revised Oz Constitution should have purely Australian locus, for the governors-general [or replacement title]and leglisation and all. Here, I posit someone outside of politics, who is not an alien [Australians are no longer British subjects].

Britain has a High Commissioner to represent it.

If it is will of the British to keep a Constitution Monarchy in place in the UK: So, be it. But, we, Australians, are not British. Our links to Braitain and her Queen are dotted line sociologically and economically. The legal relationship is fifty years behind the play.
Posted by Oliver, Monday, 23 July 2007 1:46:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oliver,

Why not read the material on my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH and my website at http://www.schorel-hlavka.com and you may just discover that we are still British nationals, regardless what the British and Australian governments seek to make otherwise.

Keep in mind that after a 5-year legal battle against the Federal Government lawyers I succeeded on all constitutional issues I raised.

The issue is not relevant if you do not feel being British, the issue is we have a Constitution of 1900 and it is embedded in it that we are British nationals. It cannot be amended, not even by a Section 128 of the Constitution. All laws can only be enacted by the British Crown! If not it isn’t any law!

Unless there is a successful referendum to amend the constitution to give the Commonwealth of Australia legislative powers to define/declare citizenship, any legislation as to Australian citizenship is null and void and without legal force.

The moment you accept for the Commonwealth of Australia to act contrary to constitutional limitations merely perhaps because it may suit you, then keep in mind that you then have no footing to complain if they act contrary to your constitutional rights as once to support tyranny/dictatorship you are a goner.

We either have a constitution or not. If we have one then it must be appropriately applied and not subject to what politicians desire!
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Wednesday, 25 July 2007 1:56:07 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy