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 > Australian Head of State

Australian Head of State

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
If we are going to make any changes, then let’s concentrate on how we can improve our system of governance in the interests of a prosperous future.

Our current system, which is hooked into a corrupt donations regime and which panders to continuous growth and is beholden to big business that is driven by the profit motive and forever pushes expansionism, is what we really need to fix.

While I tend to agree with your proposal JMCC, I see it as no more than deck-chair rearranging on a Titanic that is in dire need of steering away from a very big iceberg.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 8:14:37 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
Foxy,
Please do not think I am singlurly seeking you out but you did say in your post,quote "If it would not have been for John Howard's
interference during the last Referendum -
your proposal may have been achieved earlier"

I have heard this said often in debate about a republic and I ask where is the evidence of this alleged interference?

Now I am no fan of John Howard, or of either the major parties, but if i recall correctly JH opened the debate in Old Parliament House, made it plain he supported the Status Quoe and left them to the debate. He even allowed his liberal parliamentry collegues the right to have their say either for or against. He then allowed the referendum to take place with the model that the republicans wanted.

So where did the interference take place?

I am happy to conceed if you can show the interference, but please do not simply continue to give voice to allegations that may not have any basis.
Posted by Banjo, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 12:09:22 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
“Boazy/Polycarp/AGIR (SIGWB)

>>> Removing the Union Jack.. would cut us off from centuries of history.

I don't think such a move would find popular support.. oh.. it might if you bring in umpteen zillion non British or Commonwealth migrants...hey now that's an idea.... <<<

Never mind the history of Australia's first inhabitants or the mixed ethnicity of people who arrived with the First Fleet - they weren't all WASPs, Boazy.

Besides, Canada hasn't lost any of its "British" heritage since the introduction of its Maple Leaf flag, the British heritage which you value above and beyond any other.

In conclusion, a flag that actually represents all Australians would be a great start.
Posted by Severin, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 1:09:40 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
.

AN AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND REPUBLIC

.

Hi everyone !

Perhaps you may be interested in reading this article, published recently in "Rethink Australia" ...

http://rethinkaustralia.org/submissions.htm

Have a great day !

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 7:40:26 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
Australia and New Zealand united?

The name of the new country could be….. Auszealand…. (or Aussieland or Auzzieland).

And the new flag could simply have an emu and a kiwi….and the Southern Cross.

Simple.

So let’s do it!

Gillard’s empire would expand. John Key would become a state premier.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 8:02:39 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 Banjo,

Surely you couldn't have forgotten the so
called "flaws"
that were argued over in the Republic model
that we were presented with in the last
Referendum? It was Howard's biggest trump
card and he milked it for all it was
worth by making public statements at the time,
over the control that politicians would have.
He made public statements in newspapers, on
TV shows (Kerry O'Brien's)and so on.
He did not just walk away and let people decide
for themselves as you claim.

The end result was Howard got what he wanted.
A significant number of people
who voted "no" still wanted a Republic, however,
they feared the one that was being proposed.
John Howard exploited that fear and the "no"
campaign very strongly. He thoroughly
exploited the lack of trust most people have
in politicians generally.

But don't take my word for it -
do your research.
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 6 July 2010 8:50:04 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. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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