And Compton talks about other people's nonsense!

A Morgan poll says that 60% of Australians still want the Monarchy. How many of the 40% are for a republic, or just don't care is not revealed.

I would not call myself a monarchist, and I don’t like Charles; but why change a system that works? And, given the obsession with race and culture that prevails these days, why toss out the majority culture - the one that settled the country and did all the hard work to make it so attractive to immigrants who chose to come here, knowing full well that Australia is a constitutional monarchy.

Just reading the stuff of the pro Republic crowd makes me sad for the future of this Nation !
A Republic would be just as good as a Monarchy or indeed a benevolent Dictatorship.
However, just look at the average home-grown bogans & the far too many less-than-bogan imports & it becomes clear to non-bogans that no political system can ever work well as long as the bogan factor sabotages every good intention !
The most disrupting are of course the pseudo-intellectual 'educated' bogans ! The ones who got helped over the exams line but are now glued to the public funding trough ! Under a Republic this system would descend us into Anarchy !

We are being asked to believe that people like Everard Compton and Adam Bandt are going to be better, more trustworthy, more dignified, sensible, reliable and circumspect, less politically interfering, more minded with a sense of duty above partisan interests, than the late Queen.

And who are they going to propose for this? Why, a politician of course! What could go wrong? They have the minds and manners of Everard and Adam to model themselves on, pffffft!

Cumberland,

Compton is 91 years old; I wonder why he bothers. He is a bit like Klaus Schwarb of the WEF, at 80 years plus, who also wants to bugger things up for future generations before he kicks the bucket.

Here's the thing. A referendum can ask more than one question, i.e., do we want a voice in parliament and 2 do we want to become a republic. If the answer is yes to either or both those questions?

Then a second referendum should ask the important how, question? And given the expected timing, due respect and period of grieving for a dead monarch

For mine the statement from the heart should be the model or template and we the people should decide who should occupy the GG's role.

Becoming a republic doesn't mean we leave the commonwealth of nations!

Our new flag could be the national symbol alongside the Aboriginal flag in a corner where the union jack once stood?

It should be open to all citizens to nominate for the GG's role, not just a so-called eminent person chosen by our parliament!

And with that we need to bring back optional preferencing if only to prevent dirty deals done in backrooms in the dead of night by so-called power brokers!

Not only do I want us to become a republic but a truly democratic one as well. And that isn't the current status quo, Everald!
Alan B.

I believe those of us who want to be a republic number around 70% The 40% for and 60% against was for the model proposed by that very cunning monarchist, Howard!

If we are not asked to decide the model but just ask if? Then the 70% figure is the one we can expect. A second and necessary referendum should present what model we the people would prefer as how we the people chose our GG!

Monarchists will try it on all over the shop to try and prevent that outcome as Howard did all those years ago in the clayton's referendum we had when we "didn't" have a referendum!
Alan B.

It's going to take time before people will be
willing to consider the question of a republic
for Australia. It shouldn't be rushed.

First the funeral, then the coronation. Both of
which may re-inforce support for a monarchy.
People's emotions will be running high. Also
the combined disdain that many people currently feel for
politicians won't help the argument for a republic.
At least not at present.

Questions like - "Do we need a head of state at all?"
And, "If a head of state can do no more than accede
to the wishes of the Prime Minister what purpose does
she or he serve?"

These questions need to be asked - but not now.

Time to spend the time and money on a Republic when more pressing things are fixed such as homelessness, housing shortage, transport, roads, the nursing.shortage, the teacher shortage, the looming electricity problem etc., etc.

In other words, things that really matter.

Brothers, Sisters

We the People of the Popular Post Monarchical Front of Australia (PPMFA for short) hereby resolve:

- towards minimalist change, ie:

- Following a Referendum (With 2 main options Stay With The Monarchy or Leave It).

- Retain the title of Governor General (GG) but with no ties to the UK Monarchy.

- GG is appointed by our PM for a 4 year term. Possibly running alongside 4 year terms between Federal Elections (noting 4 year Federal terms would follow the sound logic of fixed State Government terms between Elections)

- GG cannot remove the PM. Removal is by Parliament in a no confidence motion.

- GG signs off legislation as he/she does already.

- The abovementioned Referendum will also determine whether Australia should remain in the Commonwealth of Nations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Nations

Signed

Mavers
Second Nation Top Bwana PPMFA

The reality is that people like being 'looked after'.
To service this need, a dominant personality will always rise to fill the role of overall benefactor and guide.
Even in a democracy, it works very well to have this kind of control above the parliament.
So it is a fact that large groups of people can be happier and more secure with a 'head person' in place.
In particular, one they don't choose. Like a parent.
So the present system works very well at bringing stability.
But as children grow up and strike out on their own, so should we forge a new path away from 'home'.
We still require friends and trading partners to prosper, and especially need to align ourselves with strong nations.
That is where real stability lies.
Being part of a large and well organised group, whilst continuing with our individual day to day regimes.
So whilst I think that we should sever ties with our monarchy, I don't see it as an urgent need.
But now would be a good time to consider the ramifications of 'going it alone'.

here here Is Mise, the ATO has already factored in the cost to change to a republic, over 2 billion dollars. What a total waste of money
Is becoming a republic help inflation? or cost of living, or our trade deficit? is it going to make houses cheaper? or get us better deals with other countries? is it going to make us safer, stop the chinese? Will it stop Covid? or any other IMPORTANT issues facings aussies today.

Can anyone give one good reason to be a republic? (and dont say it makes us a mature nation) we already punch way above our weight in the world order.

So much of the Republic issue rest on the style and Stability (or lack thereof Charles) brings to the Monarchy.

Beware an unvoted for King Charles sticking his nose into politics.

His record is mixed.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_III#Official_duties

"In June 2022, The Times reported that Charles had privately described the UK Government's Rwanda asylum plan as "appalling" and feared that it would overshadow the June Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Rwanda, where Charles represented the Queen.

[emphasis added] IT WAS LATER REPORTED THAT [UK] CABINET MINISTERS HAD WARNED

CHARLES TO AVOID MAKING POLITICAL COMMENTS, AS THEY FEARED A CONSTITUTIONAL

CRISIS COULD ARISE IF HE CONTINUED TO MAKE SUCH STATEMENTS ONCE HE BECAME KING."

That was then - when he was just a prince.

I believe that King Charles will stick to tradition.
He knows what's expected of him and what his role is
as King.
He's been preparing for this role for most of his life
and I'm sure that he fully understands what he should
or should not do. He may of course try to rise above
politics in his environmental concerns. But he shall be
diplomatic - I'm sure.

In other words, things that really matter.
is Mise,
In Australia it's Time to spend money on a non-military National Service scheme to bring some sort of sanity & common sense back into our indoctrination facilities !
Make teachers do what they should be doing & the same with bureaucrats !
I know many here on OLO are dead against slowing the Gravy Train but what about those who actually work to produce the goods & services that keep us all going in relative safety & comfort ? Shouldn't they get a say in policy making via referendum ? The Voice doesn't appear to address any such issues other than ideological & more wagons for that train !
Let's address uselessness & incompetence in society first !

I want us to become a republic but a truly democratic one as well.
Alan B,
You think the minority groups would go along with being democratic ?

Hi Foxy

Time will tell.

Cheers Mavers

Dear Mavers,

I'm trying to stay positive and hoping for
the best. I guess that's all anyone of us can
do.

Say what you like about King Charles, he is the most powerful man in Britain , bar none.

Good to learn from the author that King Charles is a decent bloke.

An Australian ruler might not be a decent bloke.
Australian rulers are likely to have one kind of ambition or another regarding Australia, thus they will be tempted to implement these ambitions over our backs.
The Queen never had, nor will King Charles or any of his successors ever have any ambitions regarding Australia: their interests lie in England, thus the Queen never harmed us by initiating any legislation or restrictions against the Australian people, nor will King Charles and his successors ever do so.
We can be confident that King Charles and his successors will let us live peacefully - if they will ever harass anyone then that would be the British people, not us.
We cannot say the same about an Australian ruler!

Long Live the King!

A number of people have commented 'if it aint broke don't fix it'. i could agree with that were it not for the fact now that the correspondence between Kerr and the Palace has finally been released it is clear that the crown clearly interfered - Kerr was guided every step of the way. Would it have happened if we were a republic? Maybe, maybe not but the key difference would have been that we could have held our own head of state accountable. We would not have to fight through the courts to get the correspondence between the palace and Kerr released. But those who think like me do not need to take the view that it is a choice between a monarchy and a republic. We could follow Norway's example and invite someone in to be our Monarch - there is alot to be said for some form of constitutional monarchy. However, the present system where we have a set of governors and a governor who are essentially accountable to the British monarchy is no longer fit for purpose.

Everard, you haven't given any reason for becoming a republic

This is one article I won’t be reading: I’m sure the ABC monarchy will ensure a republic fit for their rainbow flag view of the world overlooking Bondi Beach.

I really believe the view from the Western Suburbs of Sydney, where guns and gangs speaking over two hundred languages and dialects, give a more reliable view to gauge the sentiments of the new Australia of the twenty first century.

The authorities have moved on the eight tent dwelling families from the Lurnea public school grounds mentioned in my more relevant and realistic than Everalds posts.

The sad fact of Australian life is that the Everslds of this world, the over comfortably socially accommodated, with no experience or the slightest care at all, of the consequences their meddling in the lives of others will create, will be the drivers of the downward spiral of modern Australia.

Dan

The sad fact of Australian life is that the Everslds of this world, the over comfortably socially accommodated, with no experience or the slightest care at all, of the consequences their meddling in the lives of others will create, will be the drivers of the downward spiral of modern Australia.
diver dan,
On the nail !

As a follow up to Is Mise's comment (he is the most powerful man in Britain , bar none.)

I feel compelled to point out that if that is so, it is only because the public allow it to be so.
Ulitmately, it is the public which determines the status quo.
Even if they sometimes take a few hundred years to get around to making a necessary change.
Most of the time they accept what they are told, and will even legitimise ideas which are patently absurd.
Their thinking can be slow, but they get there in the end.

BAYGON, Wednesday, 14,
The people spoke in a Vote in support of Kerr and Gough got the flick. No matter what the Palace said, the Palace represents the people by the Constitution accepted by the people.

BAYGON, you already lost the argument about Kerr, remember?

The Australian people confirmed in the next election that the Queen was far more representative of the will of the people than Whitlam, and that Kerr had acted correctly, subordinately, AND contrary to all the opinions of all the Labor-voters in sacking Whitlam for his shameful abuse of arbitrary power totally unworthy of a Minister of the Crown.

Ha ha ha, fail, try harder LOL pfffft!

Ipso Facto,

Charles III is the most powerful man in Britain because, as has been pointed our on a number of forums, he is the Head of the 200,000 Armed Forces members who have sworn allegiance to him (except the Royal Navy) whose allegiance is implicit .
If he ever needs to call on the Armed Forces I am sure that they will stick by their oath.

One can add that when Charles was appointed Colonel in Chief of the Parachute Regiment he insisted on doing the full Parachute course so that he could justify wearing the Maroon beret and the Wings.
He is a fully qualified parachutist and that is the difference between a figurehead and a real soldier.

One more thing, Charles is also a qualified Commando.

Is Mise

"sworn allegiance to him (except the Royal Navy)"

Why is that?

King Charles went to Northern Ireland
To show the people their new king
While signing documents he lost his temper
A leaky pen was not his thing

It wasn't fitting for a monarch
To lose it quite so easily
Her Majesty would not have lost it
She'd have continued signing peaceably

We shouldn't blame Charles for having lost it
He's got a great deal on his plate
There's so much now he has to carry
Being a monarch is no easy fate

If he's wise he'll take it slowly
We can invite him to our shores
Where he can leave behind all the regalia
And bask in a country that he knows

The king is trained as a commando
This is something we've been told
He knows how to jump from a plane
But would he for us be so bold?

Can we rely on the British
If our country was attacked?
We didn't excite Churchill's interest
And sadly that's a historic fact

Signing treaties helps a lot
And the AUKUS we have got
So the only thing that we can do
Is trust our gut and stay true blue.

Cumberland,
The Royal Navy was created by the Crown and is considered loyal upon enlistment, whereas the Army was created by Parliament and by extension the Royal Air Force, and so, swear allegiance.

It was inevitable boys and girls - PRINCE Charles' funniest moments

http://youtu.be/Dp2t88_ZyuQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkOAUht3G5o

Maverick,
Doesn't Charles look just like Spike Milligan in this clip ?

Dear Is Mise,

You wrote: "If he ever needs to call on the Armed Forces I am sure that they will stick by their oath."

Like he stuck by the oath to his wife?

Its uncanny Indy

Maybe King Charles IS Spike Milligan!

Have they checked?

QUEEN'S FUNERAL SCHEDULE.

As at Monday, Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST): http://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-16/buckingham-palace-releases-funeral-details-queen-elizabeth-ii/101446348

Short Version:

5pmAEST Parade marching around Westminster Hall.

7:44pm: Queen's coffin leaves Westminster Hall with 142 sailors pulling (not themselves) but Queen's Gun Carriage. Followed by King and Royals.

Procession expected to arrive at Westminster Abbey 8mins later.

8pm Funeral service begins. 2,000 there eg. Biden and Albo.

UK PM Lizzie's Trussed reads scriptures.

Archbishop of Canterbury gives sermon before the Westminster Dean Davo gives blessing.

8:55pmAEST Service draws to a close. Last Post played.

2mins silence.

9pm Reveille, revised UK National Anthem and lament played by Queen's Piper.

9:15pm AEST: Coffin back to Gun Carriage. Procession, including King begins journey to Wellington Arch, Hyde Park Corner, about 3.5km away from Westminster Abbey.

Queen's coffin travels down Mall for final time, and past Buckingham Palace with

Foxy in Lady Godiver "suit"

Minute guns firing from Hyde Park, Big Ben tolling.

10pmAEST Procession arrives at Wellington Arch.

There, Queen's coffin placed in hearse. Queen leaves London to Windsor Castle. Royals follow in cars.

12 Midnight AEST Hearse arrives at Windsor

12:10am hearse joins procession to St George's Chapel Windsor.

King and senior Royals expected to join procession 30mins later, when it reaches Quadrangle at Windsor Castle.

Minute guns firing Windsor, Tower bells tolling.

Procession stops at St George's Chapel, before the Queensy Babe moved inside.

1am AEST: A "smaller" Committal service of about 800 guests will be held. Probably see Albo.

Dean of Windsor conducts service, Choir sings.

Before final hymn, Imperial State Crown, orb and sceptre, used in
Queen's Coronation, will be removed from coffin and placed on
altar.

King and Lord Chamberlain perform.

Queensy Babe's Coffin then lowered into Royal Vault as Dean Davo reads psalms.

Sovereign's Piper plays again.

The Archbishop of Canterbury gives blessing. God Save the King sung. You'll be surprised that the Kingdoms' of France and Prussia have used that very same tune here http://youtu.be/0j2j7t-4wAY

4:30am AEST a private burial service is held. Royals only.

Queensy Babe (sob, sob :( will be buried alongside Prince Philip.

Nighty night.

The KING's Coronation Anthem below is also a touching tribute to the QUEEN, best played Loud:

http://youtu.be/t2YVnJb9Ka8?t=27s

+++++++++++++

Even the Hitler Parody is sad about the Queen's passing. Adolf says nothing but is moved by the stirring scenes and music of the Queen, including "Land of Hope and Glory" and of course "God Save the Queen" at the Queen's End (Exit) http://youtu.be/bu9IxOwWRZw?t=12s

Mavers :(

Hmmm now to be serious.
If it ain't broke why fix it ?
A simple question without deep thought but logical.

Consider the Whitlam situation.
A locked parliament, with money supply blocked.
The government trying to bypass the executive council and parliament
by borrowing money illegally from a suspect Arab arms dealer.
So don't say "It couldn't happen here !".
The only person able to stop the government was GG John Kerr.

If we were a republic the GG would be a President, an ex politician,
be realistic, think they could resist it ?
Didn't I hear talk of Whitlam for President ? or was it Keating ?

Anyway, elect a president and you elect a politician !

SteeleRedux

>You wrote: "If he ever needs to call on the Armed Forces I am sure that they will stick by their oath."

>"Like he stuck by the oath to his wife?"

No, not like that.

Nor like your sinlessness neither, thank goodness