The key to this new model for an Australian Republic is based upon a Presidential candidate, and their Deputy, winning the majority of Electors in an Electoral College that already exists in Australia, namely the House of Representatives. Thus, the role of Prime Minister and President are to be fused. It's finally time to discard the relics of King George I.

I suggest that we use a ballot similar to the American ballot and replace the Ballot Paper for the House of Representatives with a Ballot Paper only listing Presidential Candidates and their Deputies. Therefore there will only be two ballot papers for a Federal election in Australia, the Presidential ballot paper and the Senate ballot paper.

A vote for a Presidential candidate and their Deputy will actually be a vote for an Elector within the Electoral College, that is, a candidate Federal MP of the same political party for that particular electorate.

The President and Deputy President shall attend question time as full members of Parliament, there electorates shall be the whole of the commonwealth. The Executive Power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the President-In-Council, except the power to dissolve parliament. This will be fixed to the first day, for example in March, every four years as prescribed within the amended Australian Constitution.

Presidential candidates must be chosen from political parties that already hold the minimum number of seats within the House of Representatives and the Senate.

This being proportionate, or as near as practical, to the number of seats that equate to an equal representation for each state. If the proportionate figure is a fraction it shall be rounded up.

At present there are six States within the Commonwealth, as such the minimum number of seats required for a political party to present a Presidential candidate would be one sixth of the total number of seats in the House of Representatives.

Therefore, a minimum number of 25 seats in the House of Representatives and a minimum number of 13 seats in the Australian Senate would be needed.

There is very little chance of a major of the constitution in Australia.
However we may get to change our 'Head of State'.
To keep it simlpe we should elect our 'Governor General', in this election we should be treating the nation as one electorate. From a list of 5 nominees created by inviting all citizens, if they would care to nominate any other citizen and the 5 receiving the greatest number of nominations would be put to the people.
The GG should have no extra powers then the current GG and these should be codified in the constitution.
More can be said about this, in fact I have written a paper on this matter for the ARM
So, no change in the 'names' - GOVERNOR GENERAL & COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA.
Australians would not countenance any great change in the way we do things politically.
We just need to cut loose the last apron string.

the recognition of equal rights between women and men in the form of a republic enacting law by agreement
between a women's legislature and a men's legislature would receive overwhelming support in Australia.

leadership comprising the offices of the President of a men's legislature, the current House of Representatives
and the President of a women's legislature, the current Senate, each elected by their own gender in the manner
described by the author of this thread, presided over by an executive of distinguished elders accompanied
by courts of women's and men's jurisdiction, would be a worthy candidate for discussion.

certainly government comprised of men's legislatures only to which women are admitted under male
supervision as defined by the doctrine of Australia's current archaic Constitution has become irrelevant
to the modern world.

JMCC,

You must fundamentally change your thinking. The role of the GG as a separate executive disappears altogether. Deal only with the role of the PM & Deputy PM.

Let's face it the GG & SGs today are useless relics of the historic battle between parliamentarians and the Monarchy, the parliamentarians have won - its time to cut the GG lose altogether.

Otherwise you tie yourself up in knots over reserve powers and possible conflicts with a PM, not to mention a messy nomination process. Its not going to work - it never will.

As far as name changes go, you must remember that we already a President and Deputy President in the Australian Senate.

Leaving out the changes to the constitution, my model would simply mean a name change from Prime Minister to President, from Deputy Prime minister to Deputy President and changing the ballot paper for the House of Representatives to a Presidential Ballot paper.

Simple!

simple Sense, and with the current Constitution's provision for men's legislatures only,
blatently sexist, archaic, obnoxious and irrelevant.

the role of an executive presiding over an equal rights parliament enacting law by
agreement betwen a women's legislature and a men's legislature is an important and
appropriate role for distinguished elders.

My Dear Sense,

I find it hard to discover logic in your proposal. You offer no place for the good citizens of the Northern Territory or the ACT.
But that is not the point, a head of state stands apart from the political aspirations of 'party politics'. He/She is the thread that binds the nation, the apex of the triangle of oue Westminister system - Head of State, Parliament & Judiciary.
Please remember the local member is the link between the citizen and their parliment, who else does the individual citizen call on with only 25 members, where would they be resident?

Another thing, look at nations with only a President witout balancing mechanisms, the likes of Zimbabwe.

Our Federal Westminster system, fashioned on the proven British system but with greater grass roots representation.

And another thing are you saying eliminate the states?

Sense- not a bad proposal!

-Absolutely 100% agree about scrapping the GG and making the Prime Minister the "President"- also agree that the GG IS nothing but an anachronistic link to feudal lords and parliaments. In fact, I personally find a separate HOS to the Prime Minister to be a useless anachronism in itself.

-Get ready for hordes of people jumping on about "oh no, not the American system- it's worse for some reason!"- ignoring that Westminster is also exceptionally bad as far as "democratic" systems go.

-Extra impressed about electorates being the entire nation- I think that government should in fact be entirely composed of separately-elected reps via a federal electorate to fill their respective ministries (health, commerce, environment, housing)- so I must actually disagree on the other appointment/election methods. The HOS should simply get whatever parliamentary responsibilities, regulatory roles needed to ensure public accountability and the ability to override sub-ministries by putting proposals as referendums (and ONLY referendums).

-Another note- Question time should be open to all registered parties (not just the opposition)- who each get a few questions to put forward each session.

Signed- someone who wants MUCH more than a minimalist republic!

JMCC,

I was thinking along the lines that the ACT and the Northern Territory would one day become States. If and when they became States the minimum requirement would only change marginally anyway. I suggest from the current calculation of 25 seats for the H.Reps and 13 for the Senate to 24 for the H.Reps and 12 seats for the Senate. I take your point, but there is very little difference in it.

When you talk about a head of state being the thread that binds the nation, you are actually talking about a British institution not an Australian one. Australians do not see the Governor General as a Regal figure, even though GGs may follow the script and pretend to be one of the Royals.

If you choose to mention Zimbabwe, then I choose to mention Japan.

I am certainly not talking about eliminating the states, every large country on earth has some form of Federal system.

On the contrary, I think a change to a republic should be a comprehensive all encompassing affair where the States are modified at the same time.

As such, this model could also be mirrored for each of the States, the Premier and State Governor could also be fused into one role.

The ballot paper for the lower house, in NSW for instance, could be considered as an electoral college for the candidate NSW Governor.

Note, the example of the infamous florida ballot,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Butterfly_large.jpg

The chambers could renamed to the NSW House of Representatives and the NSW Senate. To check the power of a State Governor I think each State would need an upper house, sorry Qld.

There maybe some temptation to keep the current titles of Prime Minister and Premier, but they historically cannot assent to legislation. I also think that a name change would, like at the time of Federation, signify a new beginning for this country.

JMCC,

I do agree with you that there does not need to be a name change to the country, it should remain the 'Commonwealth of Australia'. The Americans do not call their country the Federal Republic of the United States, its simply the United States of America. In fact, without checking, I think the word republic only occurs once in their constitution - when referring to the states.

I think all of Australian politics need a massive overhaul.

Why just focus on the GG/monarchs- merely one cumbersome anachronism in a system that is nothing BUT a cumbersome anachronism?

On the note of states- scrap the old ones, if necessary make a bunch of smaller new ones- that are actually created to reflect consistent geographical/local issues and affairs, and not the random colonial territorial land dispute we have now. For example, if a fertile, flood-prone region, a dry, arid region and an urban region were separate states, I'd imagine a LOT more would get done by people a little more familiar with the workings of these areas- accountable ONLY to people of those areas. In other words, more like local councils.
We should also ask ourselves if we need three tiers of government at all?

In less than a dozen posts it has become clear why we have a very long journey ahead, before Australia becomes a republic.

Everyone sees the process, the methodology and the outcome, differently.

What we need is a leader.

Fat chance of us agreeing on that either.

Hazza,

I agree with you that the country would be better off with more States, which is catered for in the Constitution under Chapter VI.But am still a strong supporter of 3 tiers of government. But if you throw that into the mix the change will be far too big, nothing will happen, we'll be back to square one, nothing will change for decades.

You need to stick with the simple issue of making the Prime Minister the President the Deputy Prime Minister the Deputy President and replacing the ballot paper for the House of Reps with a Presidential Ballot paper.

Hazza,
what is HOS?

Sense,
We should drop states and replace with 'Regions' made up of six federal electorates and having less responsibilly in matters like tax collection, health, police, transport and other items of national importance.
Local counceils only to act as a consultancy group with minium staff.
[governor/'n'. A person who governs] this is what the GG does, to oversee the actions of the executive as chair of the Executive Council who brings into law legislation passed by parliament, calls elections having checked the validity of such a request from a PM.

Pericles- good point, unfortunately; But on the note of a leader, it really boils down to the same problem that it will still be an issue not everyone can agree with (ie his/her views)- what we really need is a large open debate.

Sense- fair enough to separate the issues, although I think the Republic issue is probably the best point to make these changes.

JMCC- HOS = "Head of State" (GG or President).
Like your points;
By the way- when you mean six regions are you referring to per-state or nation? Personally I think we'd need many more regions (due to wide variety of climate, communities, indigenous land claim and other political and social issues that would likely vary considerably across each present state).

Hazza,

what I am saying is we should have single house regonal governments in lue of the current states each made up of 5 adjoining electorates, which could overlap current boundries, e.g;
NEW ENGLAND - Page, Parks, New England, Cowper & Lyne
ILLAWARRA - Hughes, Macarthur, Cunningham, Throsby & Gilmore
CARPENTARIA - Solomian (NT), Lingiani (NT), Lichhart (Q), Kennedy (Q)
and area north of Kalgooelie (WA)
MORTON - Petrie, Lilley, Brisbane & Bonner
etc;
each regon would contain 500 - 600,000 voters and the total would be
33 regonal governments.
ALL taxation would be the responsibillty of the commonwealth

Aye JMCC, that makes sense. I agree.
Especially that taxation should be handled solely by federal, along with multi-state affairs (roads, etc) with local/regional government/councils having similar share of authority as local councils share between the state government.

the only govt reform that will swork
is getting rid of states...
just fed overrseeing local school district/'size areas

run council/police/hospitals...all govt services out of the schools
decentralise...this too big too fail govt

minesters oversee the council
thats it

deal making is treason

then we sell off the state assets
[first to local councils...
non transpherable..non a-lienable

more consumer protections against frauds

One under God,

For heavens sake!

Most of the work done by government in Australia is done at the State level. The Federal government employs only 230,000 people, the NSW government employs over 300,000 people, thus the NSW government is actually larger than the Federal government of Australia.

In total, the States employ 1.2 Million people, therefore if the Federal government were to take over the States you would have to increase the size of the Canberra public service by 6 times!

Under the current constitution you break the States up to as many as you like.

What need in Australia is local government reform, for instance in Sydney there are 39 mayor and 500 councillors, compared to Brisbane Sydney has at least 36 mayors and 400 councillors too many! All up NSW has 7,000 councillors.

What Australia needs is for local government in the larger cities to take responsiblities off the States, like buses, water sewerage, main roads etc. Otherwise a state like NSW will forever be nicknamed, Newcastle,Sydney, Woollongong.

sense quote..<<Most of the work done by government in Australia is done at the State level.>>>most of the work...and most of the expenditure

from todays paper..qld govt leases..the dairymple bay port/facilities to babcok/brown...for undisclosed ammount..but planning to spend 845 million boosting loading capacity/abbots point
planning to spend..1.1 billion..to build the so called northern missing link..lol..thats just two facilities..it pays to maintain..for some unmentioned peppercorn rent...to big business

the revenue grab is getting insane...we build bridges/tunnels..and infastructure..only so govt can give it to their mates..lest we forget gst goes in the majority direct to states...who grandiously spend it via their business mates

look at them go working for their real bosses..after leavig politics.look at the hoosp[ital system..or the water seisures..or the doubling of electricity etc...things arnt working

govts are giving the common weal away to their mates bit by bit...thge current state system is no system...then lok at the pension obligations...we only have a reps/not even a house of recvieuw/senet type ovesight

im over the whole scam...of states/fed/council...we need a fed body..and a local body...thats it

<<In total,..the States employ 1.2 Million people>>TO SERVE THEIR MATES,...then get pensions..to get pensions...to pay them all..is sending us broke,

<<increase the size of the Canberra public service by 6 times!>>rubbish..decentralise...one local level of govt...overseen/audited/watched by the fed...one fed police force overseeing the acts of the local peaceofficer's...not police/policing policy..to revenue raISE

<<Under the current constitution..you break the States up to as many as you like>>>OK IM FINE WITH THAT.. they replace school districts/council.

<<All up NSW has 7,000 councillors>>how many getting life pensions/abouve basic pension rates.

<<water sewerage>>govt converted their future earnings...into bonds..and have defaulted them...no media covers this..they sold even the inground assets

<<,main roads/etc.>>why/nopt..all roads...were getting the govt we deserve..letting idiots do as they chose...no one is watching...or overseeing a thing they do..

pull politics into line...scrap the states

Under One God,

The majority of people who think scrapping the States is a great idea like yourself actually live either in NSW or Victoria, only at most several hundred kilometres from Canberra.

There is no way in hell! That someone who lives thousands of kilometres away in Queensland or Western Australia, or the Northern Territory or even South Australia is going to agree to scrap the States. Its a recipe for disaster spread by people ignorant of the facts. Its never going to happen - you are wasting your time!

we have opinion and we have adgenda...this quote reads like adgenda

<<<There is no way in hell!

That someone who lives thousands of kilometres away in Queensland or Western Australia, or the Northern Territory or even South Australia is going to agree to scrap the States.>>>DREAM ON

<<Its a recipe for disaster>>>DISASTER FORWHO?
the goveners or the guverned?

<<spread by people ignorant of the facts>>>facts are the states ARE BROKE,,,fact is so is govt...thats why bankers stole control over govt issue of money....fed govt is bankrupt..TOO

<<Its never going to happen/you are wasting your time!>>>

its my time
please advise
why your so sure
your voice holds the rule..as law in this mater

this seems like an adgenda...
to hold the staus quo

no change...after raising the issue of how...lol
any brand is poluted by the brands it was before...we need new product..not new lable....the state serves the crown...and that is not hrh...,#

beatey..reportedly was the one that signed the qld constitution..into act 70 of 2002...at the top...not under...putting those colonial/regal bits..into the addendum..

how can lawyers..write the laws that oppress the people/one day lawyer./next politition..making the law

try finding the qld con..on one page..the copy i tracked down eventually..had an attatchment of the magna carta...in latin not greek...who knows...

all i know is im sick of lawyers making laws..sick of hearing we got constitution..into a colony...lol...we shouildnt even be in the un...think why we help form that..yet dont adopt its treaties..

because we arnt a country...nor state..but colonials..run by gg figureheads..pandered to by lawyers..

.to let the bankers/lawyers loot the states and its people/dry

Under One God,

Tell me more, what did you find out about the Qld consitutition?

Just a quick heads-up, oug.

>>try finding the qld con..on one page..the copy i tracked down eventually..had an attatchment of the magna carta...in latin not greek...who knows...<<

Magna Carta was written in Latin.

It would have been something of a surprise if the version you found had been in Greek.

But I guess no-one in Queensland would actually have noticed anyway.

ok...this is it

http://www.angelfire.com/id/ronajoyner/

quote from link

<<<<In the FOREWORD/..written by Premier Peter Beattie,..we have it "straight from the horse's mouth".

<<He says "Queensland's identity as a State,..and the democratic ideals..on which our State is built,..rest on the Constitution."

<<Which Constitution..is the Premier referring to..in this context -

<<the new fake Constitution/..or the true Constitution of 1867?

<<We do appear//NOW under these changed circumstances,..to have..two Constitutions...
...I will show you WHY and HOW shortly>>>.....from

http://www.angelfire.com/id/ronajoyner/

so go see..for yourselves...last time it took/..weeks to find it...
now a mere few hours
you in seconds...please ask..for the other claims..to be confirmed..it gets very messy

ok..you got the finshed product...there is more
[search out powers and immunities chapter 3..or part 5 proxy voting
or the definitions and addendums

but i searched out the info..
its difficult info..to find...now

but duplicate the effort...try...just a search..for qld constitution

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=qld+constitution&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

you get..a blury copy ..impossable to read

http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/item.asp?sdID=49

i posted the other two options...previous post..but you missed it?
note the smooth...reading...lol...each page sepperated/..hiden..in its own link...

like lawyers..hidding the flow...of what?

we cant read the origonal grant..easy on the web..
[lawyers been running this state ....since before sir joe]

there was a woman...i forget her name...[it vended up being rona joyner]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=rowena+qld+constitution+act+70+of+2002&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

a few more...google searches later
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=joyner+constitutional+convention+queensland+70&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

then the info..is possably..in here
but...its a fullsome site
http://www-personal.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/republic2.html

a closer search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=rona+joyner+constitution+queensland+act+70+of+2002&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

ok this might be it

http://www.angelfire.com/id/ronajoyner/

pericules...i was making a joke
stupidly i printed it out..[before realising it was all greek/latin..to me]

The United States model for all its failings is still the best model for the checks and balances necessary for political reform to occur.
This, simplistically, consists of presidential executive that introduces policy at a federal level. With a house of reps and senate similar to the Australian Westminster based setup.
The incumbent must surrender his elected political position if held, i.e. republican or democrat prior to taking up the appointment to the executive.
The person elected, irrespective of party allegiance , must have lived in their electorate for at least 10 years , and be living in that electorate for the time of office.
Next and the most important issue that would affect Australia is the local Government Issue.
In the United States everything is controlled by the people. All positions are elected whether it is fire chief or head of police, and as such can be remove from office, for lack of performance among other issues.
Voting is not compulsory and, all bills and funding increases must be passed by the elected members, only after a referendum to the voters is undertaken. I.e. the people have the right to vote in or out the initiatives at any given point.
These processes involve many billions of dollars. e.g. the local school funding is voted in annually to allow for the allocation of funds for unforeseen expenses.
The majority of funding is done by borrowings again with a multimillion dollar capacity. Thus if abridge is built it is paid for not continuing debt to local/state/federal government as our existing tax revenue base. Thus when n due date is reached the structure become the possession of the local government. Not a further tax burden which gets incorporated into general revenue.
I cannot stress enough the importance of this local government component as the essential underlying feature of why he USA system works.

I'm a Queenslander, in the Cairns area, so a long way from Canberra. However I strongly believe the current three tier structure of government, dating from Federation in 1901, is now outdated and really does need a re-jig. The country was federated before we had telecommunication and air travel, long before there was any sense or need for continental-scale coordination of natural resources (particularly water). Functionally, at the present time, in so many ways the continent naturally operates as a single country, rather than as a loose federation of semi-independent states, and the existence of the State legislatures just makes things complicated and tiresome, particularly when we are only around 20 million people. I would support the scrapping of Section 51 and the assumption of much of the current law making powers of the states by the federal government.

we need to sepperate power's..govts run to serve busness..when they were set up to control business...

we set up govt...to rule over business..now business has subverted govt..to rule over the people...holding us down while govt and big business sucks us dry

reveal in the constuitution..where govt got givenpowers/rights to tax wages...income is money made..by non value adding..ie on selling goods....not wages

but we have this absurdity..where lawyers are making law..[near half of all govt members are..or were lawyers]...yet this seems fine/with the sheeple..

the constitutions..arnt followed in court...see there is civil law..or contract law...and/or criminal law..in courts...

criminal law requires an injured party...civil law mearly requires an informed concent[its based on contract law]...see when you need say a liquor licence..you apply to fall under the liquer act[and so many other acts....these fall underr civil/contract law

see we gave civil servants certain powers..but also certain penalties..thus the powewr and the penalty...is all in the same act

you have to apply/[apply means beg]..to fall under the act...thus by applying under the transport act...you became a contrated civil servant..when you applied/begged for your licence

a licence is..permission to do that otherwise illegal..[for any one under the act]..if your not under the act the act has no powers over us[only those seeking the powers under the act]

yes ity sounds reasonable..to require licences..to drive automobiles..but we never granted govts that right...but because its reasonable...we let it slide...

so they turned up the temp a bit

intoduced other laws...till now..we get to the absurdity of a police state policing..medicine...[drugs...ie self medication..as a statuted crime...has via lies and deeceptions...deemed a plant a drug

a plant of course isnt a drug...just as willow bark isnt asprin..it contains a drug..but willow bark is bark..containing a drug...so to cannabis...is a plant

[containing 3000 other chemical/substances..one of which[thc]..is a drug...but the other 99.999 percent of cannabis..is not drug

yet we have 20 out of 21..cannabis/growers/smokers ...pleading guilty of possesing a drug...when any fool lawyer..can reveal to you that a plant..[in the ground...is a fixture..[look at real estyate law...a fixture belongs to the ground/earth....

thus idiots are conned/to believe they are criminals..for letting a plant grow..thus we have idiots saying they posses it...when a lawyer could simply say...no you dont...it belongs to the land

but the scams go-on...in qld the drug law rakes in one billion of income to the state...each year while criminalising one percent of its people EACH year

and thanks to free/legal aid..they get..free/advice to plead guilt...gaining an eternal criminal record...for a thing of no concern to the state..[but for the steady income..it provides..for lawyers...in court...

and lawyers making laws...and judges with fat retirement superanuastions..draining the state cofferes dry

see a judge should know law...but claim they dont...simply by refusing the terms of the magna carta..ie no man can plead guilt...testimony of two witness ...witnessinmg injury is required...not guilty/plea

plea is contract law..you lot been conned via civil juristiction obtained under lie of..being ..'a person'..under the act...

see we made laws for persons..[corperate fictions...allowing trade...somehow we all been elivated into..'persons''under'' the act

even contracted into it..[in ignorance]...only those seeking powers under the act fall under it..but thats not taught in school

Whilst don’t condone or approve of cannabis use I can appreciate where one god is coming from in that basis of law that is screwing all Australians the PPD.
Where there is no intermediate body that scrutinizes cases as in the USA where we have a DA that the police have to present their case before there can be arrest, let alone a court case let alone a conviction.
The PPD, because it is above any common law right, let alone any constitutional right. I.e. The right to have an attorney, diminished capacity etc; the assumption by law is that you are guilty if you go to court (on a police officers say so?)
Because they, the police, are just sooo truthful, BIG SARS.
Not as in the USA where you are innocent until proven guilty. The basic right of all peoples in DEMOCRACY.

if it is its important...to know to reset your mind.
..as well as recind the person..

'the licence'...is the person...persons are persons...under the act

see/..we formed govt...gave govt workers...special powers/..via acts...but built in controls...to control govt zeal..
..[to control..the mere humans...now made/..licenced ..under the act

but if you wernt...allready..under their act/,,public/servant
ie you havnt..'applied''..for their advantage,.,..[their licence]...
there is no person...to be..under/the act..

...many return the licence...demanding a reciept..when the realise...
that only if your...driving for income...do you need a licence

only if ...''licenced'....do you need a ...'registered' ...conveyance..
...thus..under the act..called...'vehicle'...

even ..simply nusing these terms...brings you under their act
its important...to be up-standing....and never to..under-stand

much hinges..on wether there is a person or property injured...
if there is a victim...or is it statuted/violation...

freemanry..is about..govt's..lack of informed concent..to contract us under their statutes...under the person

even if..there is no victim...the process of capturing back..'the person'..consists mainly..at their whim..[as they hold all the cards/courts jails guns and their statuted powers...

any linkage..to us claiming their..enacted/'advantages'...subverts our freeborn/god given..standing...'under'..their act

and the joinders...that..subvert our freeborn rights..are tricky.[a joinder]..is usually obtained..via un-informed concent...that tricked us into claiming...a power/privledge/licence...orUNDERstanding

..that bought us..under..their act...by virtue of us begging..[apply means beg]...we begged for the advantage...thus get bound..by/under..their act

if we realise we were tricked...into creating a person ..''under' their act..we can notice them...and advice them...we refuse their ...'advantages'...

and return the person...created...under the act...but criminal law dont care about..any person...law of injury/..needs only that it is proven..[beyond reasonable doudt...that you injured anyone..or anything

first do no injury
[first do no harm]..

Matthew 5:23-24
so/if when you are offering your gift..at the altar/you there remember..that your brother has any..[grievance]..against you,

24..Leave your gift at the altar and go.

First make peace with your brother,..and then come back and present your gift

Under one god ---- Er --- is that a FOR or AGAINST ?

JMCC
Where have you been living on another planet?
What’s so great about the Australian (non-)constitution and how does the proliferation of 3 tiered governments help the OVERTAXED economy.
We need less government, let alone a more effective government (that represents the people);
Not the system it so selfishly protects.
A “proven” Westminster system!
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
Firstly we don’t have a constitution based system at all. We have a bastardisation of 3 acts which allows for a worse than he Zimbabwean situation to occur.
Remember 1975 or are you too embarrassed.
The so called “ proven” Westminster system , still has the queen as the constitutional leader of Australia and the GG is her lapdog.
Tell me where the GG is protecting the rights of the citizen?
Where is the separation of power in example?
The Kapunda road royal commission perhaps?
Spare me the protestation!
The legislative council in the (state) government was only introduced to protect the queen powers.
It has no other purpose other than to maintain the status quo by basically informing on the Australians “radicals”
What joke?
You make me laugh. Your semi simian semantics are pathetic. Talk about can’t see the forest he trees you can’t even see the forest.
Remember you are the people that voted OUT an opportunity to have a democracy.
So now you have made your nest now justify it!

Thomasfromtacoma

What a nasty little person you are
It has taken over a month for you to attack me
i am a proud member of the Australian Republican Movement - ARM
It is obvious you have no knowledge of law or the federation nor the constitution or how it works - perhaps you aspire to revolution
Our first task is to rid our nation of a foreign monarch as head of state
We can then move to rid ourselves of the states, over time
To do any of this we have to bring most Australians on board via a referrndum
So please modify your vile tongue and debate these matters in a civilized manner

Thomas, I agree with you right up to the end for which I am forced to make only a single correction;
The 1999 Republic Model wasn't a democracy either- just a system where the tiers of government have more access to each other (but still not to the public- such systems WERE proposed to the ARM but never *quite* made it further due to the bigotry and self-interest of the senior members (many politicians and donors).

Jmcc
I am neither nasty nor little, however the last part of your description I must confess too. A man, a term I would say you know little about. I am , or more correctly , was a member of ARM , you know, the cop-out that liberal minded people think is actually doing something to form a democracy by paying lip service to the current establishment. They’re more ineffectual than Copenhagen and Kyoto 1 & 2 which at this stage all has done is given great paying jobs to public servants , obviously like yourself , ( and I use that term with utmost derision) that think they’re doing something.
And yes if it needs to sink it into your puerile defense that revolution is necessary then let it be so.
At least it might kill off a bunch of wxxxxkers called ARM.
What a joke

thomasfromtacoma

please explain how you would ceate your utopia in practical
terms

JMCC
Firstly I am human not a god , although given your humbling experience , I guess you must think that anyone who actually thinks about their politics is some sort of supernatural entity , I can understand your puzzlement.
The FACT that Australia doesn’t have a bill of rights (like the USA) is the first step to attaining a semblance of a democracy i.e. the basis upon which a democracy works.
Not like in Australia where there isn’t even a signatory to an international bill of rights, I wonder why duh.
Once you have the bill of rights which you can get at any newsagent here, it lays the basis upon which the democratic rights work.
I hate to repeat myself but you must be so thick as to think that ARM is anything but puppet model of lip service, I must.
THEN you have a constitution that is a constitution, not a mish mash of Westminster based garbage that deprives people of human rights, has a DPP that is so self-serving it’s full of corruption, and doesn’t allow the right to vote for say aboriginals.
The separation of powers doesn’t exist in Australia nor does it even pretend to, that in itself is a joke that must go.
Once you have a constitution, and I would suggest that adopting the American model as basis, ethically serving as the base for administering the checks and balances so necessary in any dynamic political ideal ,
Then you have the basis to change law with the changing political population. I.e. Dynamic.
Let me think duh
“How does this sound for start
The freedom of speech, freedom of representation without qualification, freedom of religious belief etc “look it up it’s in the USA constitution.
The problem with you ARM clowns is that you think it’s difficult to create political utopia, whereas it’s only difficult to incorporate the existing status-quo within this utopia

thomasfromtacoma

I never thought of you as a God - God forgive

What sort of egotistisal twit are you.

You have no knowlodge of our system of Government let allow how to change it. The USA system is the most flawed system in the english speeking world.

please study before making comment and thus making a fool of yourself

Jmcc
(Just moronic copy cat)
One can only presume.
Please read the intelligent article by Greg Lees, Australia’s shadowy wisp of a democracy, and then you might realize you’re in the minority as far an opinion is concern.
Btw to be called a twit by your self can only be considered a compliment.
You’re a boor , in the true sends of the word.
Run away and annoy the less intelligent of the forum and take your bigoted constitution and put it with your opinion, in the trash