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 > are we a democracy?

are we a democracy?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
We get to vote for a leader of a party that, as history has shown, can be replaced overnight. This has been replicated multiple times within the last decade. Question? after we have voted, do we have a say in how our country is run? We vote for a party but the promises have been divided in their importance (obviously to the pollie). Is Australia truly democratic? Does the average Aussie get a chance to voice an opinion? Why does Greg Hunt give a stamp of approval to the health insurance magnates to increase their rates to struggling families, regardless of their multi million dollar profits? Why did Bob Hawke introduce a "sin tax" many decades ago where the price of a nice cold beer increases incrementally every six months? Why do the pollies think that privatisation relates to cheaper rates for punters? history has proven that the end result is not in favour of the punters. Australia had enough gas reserves to last a thousand years, what happened to that? australia also had enough oil to supply neighbouring nations for a century or two, please explain? We now buy our oil at the US rate when it goes up and the Singapore rate when it goes down. Thanks Canberra. Greenslips, privatise and become cheaper? Do i have a Harbour Bridge to sell you, i'll throw in the Opera House for nothing. It would be interesting to hear from you folks, i'm not made of tissue paper, be as brutal as you like. i encourage robust debate, respect, and learn from perspectives that i have not considered. I look forward to your opinions, cheers
Posted by BOXY, Thursday, 6 September 2018 9:48:07 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
Welcome BOXY, well we all have differing views but as to policy we will never be pleased with everything any government does the removal of leaders should be in the hands of voters, BUT what then of Trump? I carry for life contempt for some over the knifing of Rudd, and the last spill was about internal war about policy, in fact all past Liberal spills in the recent past have been about that.
Senate? you will find my views about that chook pen include one that minorities having power only via blackmailing majority government clearly support the view the chook pen is anti Democracy,
Posted by Belly, Friday, 7 September 2018 7:51:05 AM
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
Welcome Boxy.

//We (in Australia) get to vote for a leader of a party// Well, that's not true, we get to vote for a representative in parliament. Many don't even get that, their choice is often unsuccessful. The leader/Prime Minister's position, as is the government, is determined by the majority of representatives elected. Generally from the one party, or a coalition of parties.

// Question? after we have voted, do we have a say in how our country is run?// No not exactly, our say is at the ballot box. It's a personal choice, if you're not satisfied with the existing government then you vote for an alternative candidate. Sometimes successful, sometimes not. This question also ties in with the next question.

// Does the average Aussie get a chance to voice an opinion?// Yes, you can make personal representation to local members, ministers, even the Prime Minister. That's not to say you will get a favourable response, as there are many competing opinions on the same issue.

//Is Australia truly democratic?// Not withstanding the practical limitations I would have to answer, Yes.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 7 September 2018 8:07:32 AM
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
Boxy: We vote for the Leader of a Party.

No we don't. We vote for a Party. The Party chooses the Leader.

"As it is now, as it has ever been."

P1405: if you're not satisfied with the existing government then you vote for an alternative candidate.

& of late, we get, "Same, Same, but different."

P1405: Yes, you can make personal representation to local members, ministers, even the Prime Minister.

& they'll do exactly what the "Unelected Party Executive" tells them they have to do.
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 7 September 2018 9:18:47 AM
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
How many times do people need to be reminded that Australians DO NOT vote for the Prime Minister! Like every other politician, he is elevated to that role by his peers in the party room. He can be removed/replaced only by his peers. The rest of us get no say in the leadership. This gabble about democracy falling apart when a PM is ousted is based on pure ignorance. All your questions should be directed to your elected representative, Boxy.

The only question that can be answered here is 'are we a democracy’. Some will say yes, some will say no. I say that we are a partial democracy, the only country closer to true democracy being Switzerland, where voters have access Citizen Initiated Referenda, which, if passed are binding on government.

Australians should forget all this hoo ha and hyperventilation about PMs being changed when they don't perform, and demand real democracy a la Switzerland.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 7 September 2018 10:19:08 AM
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
It's The Spectator Australian's tenth birthday, and the cover depicts all the scoundrels, no hopers and downright crooks who have stuffed up our Parliament and country over that period.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 7 September 2018 10:37:37 AM
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
Good Morning BOXY,

Welcome to the forum.

Lincoln defined democracy as "government of the people,
by the people, and for the people." In practice - pure
democracy would mean that every citizen would have the
right to participate in every decision, a situation that
would lead to complete chaos.

In practice, the societies we consider democratic are
those that have institutionalised procedures for
periodically choosing among contenders for public office.
We have a "Representative Democracy". That is we (the voters)
elect representatives who are responsible for making
political decisions.

In order for a democracy to thrive there are several basic
conditions that need to have been met -

Tolerance of dissent - a tolerance of criticism and of
dissenting opinions is fundamental to democracy.

Access to information. A democracy requires its citizens to
make informed choices. If its citizens or their
representatives are denied access to the information they
need to make these choices, or if they are given false or
misleading information, the democratic process becomes a
sham.

Diffusion of power - if power is diffused and no one
group can obtain a monopoly over it, the prospects for
democracy are enhanced. We do distribute power among various
branches of government - and among state and local
governments.

There are more prerequisites for democracy - but these will
suffice for now. What is ultimately more
important than formal restrictions on the abuse of
government power are informal restraints. These restraints,
expressed in widely shared norms and values, set limits
that public officials dare not violate. These underlying
assumptions about the "rules of the game," are an
invisible and vital part of any democratic system.

However, as we've seen over the past recent weeks - not everone
played by the "rules of the game." And, they may pay the
price at the next elections.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 7 September 2018 11:26:19 AM
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
BOXY - Can I suggest a different format that is easier to read instead of a block of words, which some people just could not be bothered reading, here are your words given a little spacing, which one would you prefer to read, the original or this one.

We get to vote for a leader of a party that, as history has shown, can be replaced overnight. This has been replicated multiple times within the last decade. Question? after we have voted, do we have a say in how our country is run? We vote for a party but the promises have been divided in their importance (obviously to the pollie).
Is Australia truly democratic?

Does the average Aussie get a chance to voice an opinion?

Why does Greg Hunt give a stamp of approval to the health insurance magnates to increase their rates to struggling families, regardless of their multi million dollar profits?

Why did Bob Hawke introduce a "sin tax" many decades ago where the price of a nice cold beer increases incrementally every six months?

Why do the pollies think that privatisation relates to cheaper rates for punters? history has proven that the end result is not in favour of the punters.

Australia had enough gas reserves to last a thousand years, what happened to that?

australia also had enough oil to supply neighbouring nations for a century or two, please explain?

We now buy our oil at the US rate when it goes up and the Singapore rate when it goes down.

Thanks Canberra. Greenslips, privatise and become cheaper?

Do i have a Harbour Bridge to sell you, i'll throw in the Opera House for nothing. It would be interesting to hear from you folks, i'm not made of tissue paper, be as brutal as you like.

i encourage robust debate, respect, and learn from perspectives that i have not considered. I look forward to your opinions, cheers
Posted by Philip S, Friday, 7 September 2018 12:18:44 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
PS: Can I suggest a different format that is easier to read instead of a block of words,

Yep. That's why the Irish invented Paragraphs.
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 7 September 2018 12:29:58 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
Jayb correct, makes it easier to read, hope others on here take note and use them.
Posted by Philip S, Friday, 7 September 2018 12:47:21 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
No, we're not a Democracy. Democracy does not hand the reigns to minorities.
Posted by individual, Friday, 7 September 2018 12:55:45 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
It's a good thing that Philip S couldn't use a red pen. Boxy might have got a complex. At least what Boxy says makes sense, unlike the person who has conniptions whenever I mention him. That's the one who needs educating. Boxy writes like Rudyard Kipling compared with that person.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 7 September 2018 1:40:21 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
I dunno, what is a democracy?
Posted by Armchair Critic, Friday, 7 September 2018 2:58:55 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
Indy,

You stated a democracy does not hand the reigns to
minorities.

That's not quite true. A tolerance of criticism
and of dissenting opinions is fundamental to democracy.
Governing parties must resist the temptation to equate
their own policies with the national good, or they will tend
to regard opposition as disloyal or even treasonable.
Similarly, democracies must avoid the danger of the
"tyranny of the majority."

In some cases the democratic process may work in such a
way that a small minority (Sikhs in India, for example)
is rendered permanently powerless. For groups in this
position, democracy might as well not exist, and it is
important that government should recognise the
grievances of minorities that have little political clout.
If the losers in the political process do not accept
the legitimacy of the process under which they have lost,
they may resort to more radical tactics outside the
institutional framework.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 7 September 2018 3:14:58 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
"tyranny of the majority."
Foxy,
That is no different to the Tyranny of minority. Get several minorities banding together & they'll use the argument of majority rule.
Tyranny of majority is a catchy term in a philosophical way, in an everyday reality it is not encountered in free-ish, non-fanatic religious societies .
Posted by individual, Friday, 7 September 2018 4:31:24 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
Indy,

Australia is a secular society.

The point being made was that the rights of minorities
cannot be ignored in a democracy - because as you agreed
they are capable of uniting in pursuit of
their goals. And after all our government is supposed
to serve all of the people not just a select few.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 7 September 2018 4:50:11 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
Foxy: Similarly, democracies must avoid the danger of the
"tyranny of the majority."

Also, Similarly, democracies must avoid the danger of the
"tyranny of the minority." which seems to be the case in the Western World at this present time.

Democracies are supposed to work for the Common Good, not to appease a Lunatical Fringe Minority, which seems to be the case in the Western World at this present time.

Foxy: In some cases the democratic process may work in such a
way that a small minority (Sikhs in India, for example)
is rendered permanently powerless.

Not the same thing as a Lunatical Fringe Group as is growing in the West, fed by a Socialist/Marxist University System. Is it Foxy. & India has a Cast System in place even though they have supposedly got rid of it. That.., is not the same thing Foxy, & you know it.

Foxy: it is important that government should recognize the grievances of minorities that have little political clout.

Yes they should, but Governments should not penalize the Majority to satisfy the grievances of that Minority. The very thing which is happening at the moment.

I see that as being very undemocratic, when a Government implements Laws to appease a minority to the detriment of the Majority. Don't you
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 7 September 2018 5:11:16 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
Jayb,

I don't see much of a problem quite frankly.

Minorities still do not have that large a
representation in Parliament as the rest of us.
We still have more control than they do.
However, in a democracy they do have the right for their
voices to be heard.

As for universities?

Well I guess the trouble with having an open-mind is of course
that people at university will insist on coming along and
trying to put things in it. (smile).
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 7 September 2018 5:27:41 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
Foxy: Minorities still do not have that large a representation in Parliament as the rest of us.

Of course, that's why they are called a Minority.

Foxy: However, in a democracy they do have the right for their voices to be heard.

Yes they do. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem when the Minority is given more balance than the Majority. Especially in some of the more outrageous issues expressed by Lunatic Fringe Groups.

No-one fines Minority Fringe Groups for their views when they offend the Majority, but the Sane Majority can get fined or Demonstrated against if they are seen to offend the Lunatic Fringe Groups.

How is that Democratic?

Foxy: Well I guess the trouble with having an open-mind is of course that people at university will insist on coming along and try to put things in it. (smile).

Yes, unfortunately Socialist/Marxist/Greenie Garbage is being forced into the minds of impressionable young students instead of what they are supposed to be studying. If they don't follow the Socialist/Marxist/Greenie Doctrine they are failed in their Courses. Some Courses students can't even get into unless they pass a Socialist/Marxist/Greenie entrance exam. (frown)
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 7 September 2018 5:43:45 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
our government is supposed to serve all of the people not just a select few.
Foxy,
Agreed, no-one will query that. That's why the few should refrain from asking for special deals that'd give them more than others.
Posted by individual, Friday, 7 September 2018 5:59:23 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
Jayb,

I seem to have misunderstood you in your previous post.
I didn't realise that you were referring to the lunatic
fringe groups - and of course I agree with you on them.

Indy,

I don't have a problem with what you're saying either.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 7 September 2018 6:06:46 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
Democracies can work well only in a civilized society. Societies ridden with factionalism,religious fundamentalism and many such divisive forces cannot practice democracy in a meaningful way.In most countries where democracy is supposed to be in place only MOBOCRACY is seen.
Posted by Ezhil, Saturday, 8 September 2018 1:32:41 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
Interesting comments Ezhil
Posted by Canem Malum, Saturday, 8 September 2018 2:46:09 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
Democracy has so many holes is like a piece of Swiss cheese.

Democracy can only work for those who believe in it if it's safeguarded against the actions of those who don't believe in it.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Sunday, 9 September 2018 1:54:26 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
Hi AC I said " Not withstanding the practical limitations I would have to answer, Yes (we are a democracy)." The practical limitations should be a concern. A camel is a horse once one considers the practical limitations of horses.

You said //Democracy has so many holes is like a piece of Swiss cheese.// I'll add, and sometimes with the odor of Limburger!

The Americans think a true democracy is where everyone votes for who should be dog catcher. Then they put a bloke into the White House who becomes a virtual dictator for four years.

The old Communist regimes thought they were democracies as well. They gave the voters a choice of two candidates. The fact they both came from the same party didn't matter, after all, only the party knows whats best for everyone. Their biggest mistake was, they didn't allow the people to vote for who should be dog catcher, which is their inalienable right in a true democracy!

We are a bit like the commo's, given a practical ( there's that word again) choice between Tweedle-Dum from Party A, and Tweedle-Even-Dummer from Party B. Why should the Tweedle people want to change things, they know which side their breads buttered when it comes to democracy, it must be perfect, after all it gets them elected.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 10 September 2018 5:28:38 AM
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
Boxy,

As above. There will never be a once-and-for-all perfect political system - democracy needs constant vigilance and as much participation as is practicable.

All once-and-for-all Utopias degenerate into fascism. That's surely been the first sorry lesson of history. After all, a 'blueprint' has to be touted as set in stone from the beginning, and it needs an anti-democratic regime to tout it, and to crush any opposition. Almost immediately after seizing power, realities force the 'rulers' to make modifications, but if anybody points them out, the new dictators have to, most regrettably, bring in the executioners. And predictably, some of the most fervent early supporters are amongst its early victims.

That's the second lesson of history.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 10 September 2018 2:05:12 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
Welcome Boxy,

First your title-question is a bit strange: "are we a democracy?"

- I am not a democracy and I hope that you are not one either: "democracy" is only an abstract concept and abstract concepts do not type on keyboards or initiate discussions...

Now suppose you include yourself in a larger group whom you call "we", then you must specify who those "we" are. Still, I fail to see how any group of non-democracies can constitute a democracy.

What you more likely meant to ask was: "Do we (=some group which you believe yourself and all readers to belong to) HAVE a democracy?", and by the context of your questions, you most likely meant that group to be the citizens of the state of Australia.

Assuming that to be the case, the answer is in the negative: the citizens of Australia do not have a democracy. This is because the Australian electoral system neither allows citizens to be represented, nor to indicate in any other way what their wishes are, so one could at least know what the majority wants over the various issues that affect their lives. Instead, Paul1405 already described how one big party split itself in two (Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Even-Dummer) and all one can practically do at election-time is to select between those "two".

Is a democracy even desirable?

Should a group of people all agree to such an arrangement, then a democracy could be quite a good thing. However, when a group (such as the group whom you seem to call "we") has no such consensus in place, a democracy would result in some people ruling over others without their consent - which is a form of violence, thus unacceptable.

Since at least some of the people (in fact most) who live in this continent have never even been asked for their consent, how less so agreed to such (presumed-democratic) arrangements, enforcing a democracy (or a seemingly-democracy) is a violent atrocity: the fact that the same is practised almost all over the world, does not reduce its severity!
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 10 September 2018 3:51:24 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
Whatever votes claimed by the winning side, cut that number in half.

Many people did not actually support the winning party, but they still voted for them.

They voted for them because they hated the policies of their opponent.

If we vote for the lesser evil, or if we vote our support for one lot simply out of disgust of the other, well it's a really screwed up system people, and I don't think incumbents can in any way claim the support they think they have.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 11 September 2018 8:24:02 AM
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
Oppositions should put forward solutions instead of sabotaging every policy by the encumbent.
It's our lives they're playing silly games with, no matter which party.
Australians need to shake off their insipid opportunism & consider fellow citizens & the Nation.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 11 September 2018 6:18:01 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
Clayton's Democracy.
- The democracy you have when you're not having a democracy.
http://youtu.be/ylH43Tcaj60
Posted by Armchair Critic, Thursday, 13 September 2018 4:58:44 AM
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
NO - NO dEMOCRACY.

We are an IMMIGROCRACY funded by by aristocrats on an overpopulated desert island run by a bunch of failed bankers in an isolated out-of touch backwater called Canberra. The current lack of discipline in Canberra is NOT democratic it is a testament to blind immigration policies to create wealth.

At the end of the day we are manipulated and coralled by foreign goverments like Islam, China and India and Sudan into doing what is best for their resident citizens and not our own people. As far as Canberra is concerned this is the holy grail and its economic growth and its good.

But for most of Australia it is a slippery slope of eroding our human rights that threatens the very foundation of our Democracy. Many electoral seats both state and federal are now represented by foreign leaders with foreign interests who preach that buying & breeding australians out of their electoral areas is a prerequisite for taking over Austrlaia and imposing their laws as they see fit.

The old melting pot immigration theory is in tatters and so too is Australia's democratic future. Foreign governments are promoting disquiet in Australian communities in order to get more political control in important electoral seats. The are using our politics against us.

The fear of States seceding that prompted Canberra's creation is no longer a reality. The proper course is to have Parliament meet in each Capital city on a rotational basis.

That way politicians can get stuck in traffic and have rude immigrants berate them on their way to work - like we have to endure every day -so thet can create wealth for who knows who.
Posted by FredM, Monday, 17 September 2018 6:32:19 AM
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
To FredM- Thanks for your comments- they sound rational.
Posted by Canem Malum, Monday, 17 September 2018 7:14:24 AM
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
CM: To FredM- Thanks for your comments- they sound rational.

Yes... that's what I thought.
Posted by Jayb, Monday, 17 September 2018 8:20:42 AM
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
Calem and Jayb,

Thanks for the 'H Hmm' support.

The last sentence in my post should read:

That way politicians can get stuck in traffic and have rude immigrants berate them on their way to work - like we have to endure every day.

Also since the powerful people who run this country live in capital cities and not Canberra this will allow us to see more clearly who our politicians are hanging out with and are REALLY representing.
Posted by FredM, Monday, 17 September 2018 1:24:27 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
Dear Fred,

So you really believe that a change of location can bring about change of fortunes? And that politicians are unaware of the plights of ordinary people? How naive!

The electoral system was never designed or intended for representation: this "representation" and "democracy" talk is just a propaganda piece, part of the ploy, part of the jungle where men struggle for wealth and power. Suppose you were to be elected yourself - how long do you think you would survive and maintain your innocence there? Why would you be representing strangers when you have your own ideology, agenda and interests, not to mention your indebtedness to the power-brokers who brought you to that position? Perhaps you could represent your family and close friends, but that's about as far as it goes! Want an example? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/13/aung-san-suu-kyi-myanmar-icon-rohingya

You are concerned about foreign "leaders"... imposing their laws as they see fit, but how about the locally-born leaders who already do exactly the same? What comfort is there in knowing where your oppressor happened to be born?

You suggest that «That way politicians can get stuck in traffic and have rude immigrants berate them», but is there a shortage of rude Australian-born people? In any case, the politicians will avoid traffic congestions by using hovercrafts of sorts: the technology is advancing and unlike you and me, budgeting for such fancy means of travel would never be an issue for politicians (and before this technology, they were simply accompanied by police-vans with sirens that cleared the roads for them).

Since you mentioned it, secession of states from the commonwealth could be a good step forward in the direction of democracy: when smaller states legislate independently, a competition is created, whereby state-politicians have an interest to make laws that favour their people, for otherwise their people might leave and move to other states that have less draconic laws.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 17 September 2018 2:14:49 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
Of course, we are a democracy; anyone can have lunch with the NSW Premier.

"Education Lunch With The Premier & Rob Stokes
This is a great opportunity for you to discuss with the Premier her vision for the state’s teachers and students to reach their full potential, the teaching reforms being implemented by the Berejiklian Government, and the new education initiatives funded in the 2018-19 Budget.

Guests at this lunch will be limited to 40 attendees with the proceeds going towards next year’s Liberal state election campaign.


DateFriday, 26 October 2018 Start Time12:30 PM Location Sydney
CBD
Price Single Seat $990.00
Premium Single Seat $2,500.00

The Premiers 2018 Roundtable Series $5,000.00

Dress Code, Business Attire, RSVP Friday, 19 October 2018"

Now don't mess things up and wear thongs and a singlet.
http://online.nsw.liberal.org.au/lpansw-events/events-online/20181026.aspx?utm_source=G2&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIyqeCwJfB3QIVAzOWCh2a6Qk6EAEYASAAEgJVtfD_BwE
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 17 September 2018 2:26:05 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
Chinese President Hu Jintao’s address to a joint meeting of the Australian Parliament in October 2003 was a landmark event in the history of Australia–China relations. A moment of great ceremonial and symbolic significance, it represented a highpoint in the Howard Government’s engagement with China.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and his wife Cheng Hong were honoured at a formal luncheon with the Prime Minister in the Great Hall at Parliament House on Thursday to kick off their five-day tour of Australia. As part of the visit, Turnbull has been campaigning to strike up a new export deal with China to expand access for chilled beef exports from Australian suppliers. The former Governor-General's house was handed over to China's political officer for Australia-New Zealand-PNG . As a mark of respect , Darwin ship fuelling depot has been named Great Harbour of People's Friendship Victory.
Posted by nicknamenick, Tuesday, 18 September 2018 9:43:50 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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