forcing us into perpetual war,
UOG,
Yes, with home-grown stupidity !

play with the world.
Otokonoko,
From where I'm standing it looks more like the undesirable sector of the world playing with Australia. Going by the state of the game they're winning.

Would it not be useful to address the issues that lie behind the design of a "republic"? As I understand it, a well designed system of government has two main elements - separation of powers and checks and balances. A republic of the US design separates the parliament (congress and senate) from the public service (administration) with the elected President being the CEO in charge of the administration.

The Judiciary is the third recognised and separate entity in the system of government. Power to nominate the Justices is vested in the President of the United States, and appointments are made with the advice and consent of the Senate.

The press also has a recognised role in the US (the Fourth Estate) where it is expected to hold the government to account. This sometimes has a major impact, as in Watergate.

If we evaluate Australia against this template, we find that we do not separate the parliament from the administration - both report to the PM. Also, the PM has much greater power to appoint Justices to the High Court, unlike the US. It is arguable that much of the press in Australia is muzzled, as is evident by the current "enquiries".

Discussion of issues relating to the Head of State in Australia would surely be enhanced by the consideration of the doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances that are delivered in a well designed republic.

Herbert/quote..Would it not be useful
to address the issues..that lie behind the design..of a "republic"?''

yes facts are needed

"" a well designed system..has two main elements
- separation of powers and checks and balances.""

we sepperated legislative powers..from the state..to fed
chapter 1..part 1...item 1..!

but the state
still creates legislation

worse..DIVERGENT legslation
note chap v 109..[inconsistancy of laws]
and 117

it made paper money
lawfull tender despite
claus...115

the list gets endless

""A republic of the US design""

begins with something govt wont do
write a charter of rights
[even in the us..they are only UN-RATIFIED ammendments

""separates the parliament..(congress and senate)
from the public service..(administration)""

lol
here the beurorockrats run the three party system

""with the elected President"'

no mate..the winner..gets to elect 'the presedent'
it just happens..they nominated themselves

""being the CEO..in charge of the administration.""

no mate..just like with the governer general here
he is boss-man..over the troops..[armed forces]

if anything the armed forces must be
subject ONLY to..a vast majoprity..of the both houses

""The Judiciary..is the third recognised
and separate entity in the system of government.""

lol
not really...it claims its licence..
from the legitimacy..of the state Power..to adjudicate..dispute
guided..not lorded over by preceedant...[its a mess]

there are two lawfull actionable causes to appear
civil contractual violation..or criminal damages
not revenue raising fines/drug laws..
[non victim creating
statuted crime]

by contractual trick...of unilateral contract[lol..confession].
extracted under juress..with threats/menaces..and capitalist run jails[the american prison industry]

indeed
as the christ said..
;set the prisoners free..!"

Under One God! Que? Excuse me for not following. But am I right in thinking that you consider that these fundamental underlying issues/principles should be addressed?

Herbert Stencil,

The problem with the US system is too much power in the hands of one person - and that person being one who is these days elected on the basis of the best media campaign, and hence the biggest wallet. (No great assurance of a great leader - viz GW Bush.)

Our 'Party' system may not provide us with many truly independent representatives, but at least the power is in many elected hands - and we fortunately don't have the likes of eleventh hour Presidential bills, exonerations and pardons, and the like (as GW Bush employed with some profusion just before leaving office). Our PM doesn't have those sorts of 'special' powers - nor our Governors.

In our system the Governors have very limited powers, but, in their absence, who would carry the power to dissolve both houses of parliament - the judiciary perhaps? (In the case of a deadlock.) Or form parliament, and install new reps and senators? There has to be a formal ceremonial process for such appointments - a signatory.

Though our Governors are elected by parliament, instead of by the people, their powers are limited and strictly defined - so to serve the specified narrow role. It works for me. (And it saves the cost of yet another broad electoral campaign and ballot.) And we rely on our respective parliaments to select and appoint only the most impeccable of persons (Australian) to the offices of Governor - and the track record to date is fairly impressive.

When the time is right for Aus to become a republic, I don't see why there would need to be any other change than simply to dispense with the requirement for the Queen to ratify or endorse the appointment of the Governor(s). However, in my view it would be best to resolve issues with the Constitution and Bill or Rights, or whatever, before we take that step into the future.

Advantages of being a republic? Mostly cosmetic, IMHO. (Maybe to massage a few egos?)