Gday Liz hows it going?
Hope its all good.
We have met, Sydney some thing or other ground, Mum bought me clean white shirt and shorts for the trip.
I was one of thousands cheering as you dashed past in that land rover.
Actually had a bottle of Shelly's Lemon aid but no opener.
So as you past me I and another kid had our backs turned, trying to open it to share.
Never forget the day after your dad died, yes day after, see just a little fella, we had got used to singing God save the King.
Mrs Rose heard us little kids laughing at the change, God save the Queen!
She ran down the isle,crying and screaming! knocking the kid at each lines end down as she went.
Gee I am pleased we are not like that now.
Liz do you mind? see I like being me, Australian.
So will dash down the isle here, to turn you off,every time.
See you gave Mr Howard a name or something, ok fair enough, Curr/Kerr got his reward.
What say you give Charlie a go?
enjoy ok?

<< What say you give Charlie a go? >>

Oh goodness no!

Whatever you do Liz, don’t give Big-Ears a go... pleeeease!! ( :>0

I’ve just watched the three-part series; ‘The Diamond Queen’. Fantastic stuff. I’ve never really been much of a royalist or monarchist, nor a republican, but I have always been a great admirer of Queen Elizabeth II… and now moreso than ever.

60 years and still going strong. How good is that??

I'm a Republican and would one day like to
see Australia grow into a mature independent
nation with its own Head of State. Having said
that, I have been watching all the pomp
and ceremony that's been going on in England to
mark Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee. It has been
quite magnificent - and I wish her and her family
well. As for who will succeed her? I dare say it
will be Charles - according to the order of succession.
And that means we shall probably see Queen Camilla.
Yeah or Neigh? (Sorry, couldn't resist). Hopefully
by then we shall be a Republic.

I see the monarchy as an anachronism, a hang over from the days of British imperialism. I agree with Lexi "I'm a Republican and would one day like to see Australia grow into a mature independent
nation with its own Head of State."

My partner who is Maori, would also agree with Lexi
"I have been watching all the pomp
and ceremony that's been going on in England to
mark Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee. It has been
quite magnificent - and I wish her and her family
well."
Spends $8 a week on mags just to read all about Kate, Wills, Harry etc etc Princess Mary, she's from the other mob. loves em' takes all kinds as I tell her.
I suppose Te is just a very forgiving person.

Dear Paul1405,

I also buy "The Australian Women's Weekly" and
"Woman's Day". Mainly now - for my mum who's in aged
care - and she passes it on to all the other ladies.
She also loves doing the cross-word puzzles and of course
catching up with all the gossip. And why not.

I've got to confess though, that when I was living overseas -
and I came across a copy of "The Australian Women's
Weekly," It brought tears to my eyes and heaps of nostalgia.
I hadn't realised just how homesick I was at that time.
That magazine is an Australian icon and to me at that time
represented home. There you go. I wouldn't dream of
ever knocking it. Just like Anzac bikies, or Waltzing Matilda.
Or Banjo Patterson or even Rolf Harris.

Bowral a rich mans England in Australia, my dad came from there, the son of Servants, serfs is another term.
Some of my childhood was blighted near there.
I learned in school to hate school.
MH had her servants there too pasty faced sons of the extremely rich,in Church of England collars not where near tight enough.
The quartered Que Cumber sandwich's, no salt bland like his words.
The constant talk of home? ENGLAND? even from folk who never saw it.
HM has only to put her purse on the floor at high tea and lackeys rush to remove the boringly ordinary person beside her,to another seat.
Charlie? do you know he won as a lad a peeing competition against west Australian stock men?
The object was to see who could achieve the highest mark,up the tree.
Now there is a monarch for Australia.
He on one side a Blue cattle dog on the other, both one leg in the air, what a symbol for our Parliament!
I proved my Republican thoughts on joining S.A.C.K..
Society To Assert the Constitution over Kerr, servant of HM, in 1975.
We took up collections to buy posh grog,to keep him in his usual state, DRUNK, did a great job.
Never the less he was not unusual,many in those top hats and tails washing down the quey Sanger , talking of home, blessing HM had opened the third bottle by noon.
Lexi watching it?
I dare not! drive me to drink it would.
Happy what ever Liz,but give Charlie a go, he can have a garden party out the back, show me how to turn the mulch and I may spare him a tomato sanga. tree is there but I bags standing on the 44 gallon drum.

Good on ya BELLY !

You've taken me back a few years too. With the ironed 'white shirt' during her first visit here, singing 'God save the King', particularly at the Pictures on Saturday 'arvo'. They were good times, in my memory at least.

I certainly hope we don't become a Republic in my time. The thought of an individual appointed by some, MORALLY CORRUPT politician... well, I couldn't stomach it, I really couldn't.

So let's hope that we don't move towards creating the machinery, to establish a Republic.

Really, the Queen is a great lady. She doesn't interfer with any of the internal wranglings associated with the running of government - Sure, we did have the "...may well we say, God save the Queen, for nothing will save the Governor General..." occurrence, but generally speaking it's not often we even hear from her.

Something I will share with you all, though most of you probably won't believe me...

I've searched both the Queen's and the Duke's bedrooms, after they put the K9 through them both. They do sleep in seperate rooms. Searched her Rolls Royce motor vehicle too. It's one of the M/V's set aside for State visits, I'm led to understand. They (2 x RR's) both form part of the Governor General's personal M/V inventory, amongst other less prestigious M/V's as well.

I'm very sorry folks. 'Boasting' is empirical evidence, of a rather lonely old man who's bereft of company, and who unabashedly lives in his past, I'm afraid. Sorry !

Thanks Belly,
For reminding me of the special occassion of our Queens first visit. In my case it was that mum took us kids in a packed train to Caanberra and we went all over to catch glimpses as the royals drove past. Mum was so proud to say that we saw Elizabeth at four different locations in one day. Then back home by train, and there was much cuck-a-doodle-doing from the train whistles, both coming and going. Our grumpy old school teacher said we should have gone with the rest of the school, but mum paid no heed to that, it was her day and she bought all the Womens Weelkly's, New Idea's and Womans Day,s that were available.

Frankly, I have not yet seen any good reason to become a republic. Our governance is not perfect (especially the current one) but is not too bad compared to other countries. When I think of the money this government has wasted on climate change, I shudder to think what they would spend on getting rid of the monachy, all for no economic gain.

When I saw the considerate and civilized way the crowd walked from the Abby to the Palace, after the recent royal wedding, all controled by a handfull of Bobbies, it gave me a small ray of hope that the UK may just survive. BY the way, at both the wedding and current celebrations I have noticed few pakis or burkas in the crowds. Wonder why as it different from most crowd pics taken in the UK these days.

The crowds are smiling and happy, respectfull of the monach.
Beats abusing and spitting on returned service personel parades.

Good luck to Liz and I hope she is still around when I depart.

o sung wo! be proud of you, and your achievements, we can not all talk of such a past.
Forgive me, if you can, I would in all probability have passed wind ,deliberately,on that search.
Yet too, without doubt, throw my self at any attacker.
I too live alone,but never lonely, you would not believe the crashing and bashing as I removed cupboards and installed new radio shelves last two nights.
Would get my ears boxed by any woman, making my lounge dinning room PC and ham radio too.
Look in the end I am anti Royal, no family should inherit so much.
Yet the Queens mum was an angel, I do not bestow that on Liz.
She had to be dragged out of the palace after Diana's death.
And we would have been a republic if self serving Polly's had not wanted to pick one of their own to be President.
Not pulling your leg, but Dame Edna, yes Barry, would be great.
Or more importantly less humor? Noel Pierson.

Hi again BELLY...

That's the real beauty of this great country of ours, even though you and I can disagree on some minor issues, we're still all aussies, we all share the same dreams and aspirations, just want sufficient money to keep our collective heads above water, enjoy our footy and cricket...League of course, not that 'aerial ping pong' - sorry VIC. SA and WA, I didn't mean to be provocative, sorry. Just a touch of humour :-)

I thoroughly enjoyed my school days, mid 1940's through to 1957. The Queen's first visit was marvellous. Lined up , thousand's of us kids in the summer heat, at Concord Park, in the inner western 'burbs of Sydney. I wish I could've shared that bottle of Shelley's Lemonade with you Belly. Gee it was hot that day !

Take care ol' man, and best of luck with your carpentry pursuits.

For that visit I was lined up in Bathurst showground with thousands of kids from all round the district, for Liz & Phil to whis around in a Land Rover. I don't know what I had been expecting, but she looked just like one of the teachers marshalling us to me.

A mates father managed a property a few miles out of Bathurst, & the railway line ran along it's back boundary for a couple of miles. Liz went to Sydney by train straight after the Bathurst tour, so 3 families all drove out there, where we had horses waiting.

As the line was climbing into the hills there the train [a steam train of course], was traveling fairly slowly. About 15 horses & riders, at a mild gallop, were able to keep up with it for about 1.5 miles. Liz & Phil came out onto the observation area at the rear of the coach to wave to us, & appeared to enjoy the company.

This impressed me much more than the drive by in Bathurst, & made me a bit of a fan for life.

O sung wo my hobby's exactly! NRL the game my team is performing badly, an under statement, I am a dragon, via Saints.
Yes here in print prior to this hung Parliament I told of our great one ness.
Even now on polling day, Liberals manning the polls will play verbal tennis but offer coffee and jokes.
A mate, Conservative to the boot straps, ex union branch secretary,no not mine, will hand out his forms, while his wife hands out hers, mine.
He insists she wear a motor bike helmet! she tells me it will be him who needs it.
I am the product of my life's learning, nothing can turn the Aussie V pommy banter in to war.
I LOVE the Barmy Army.
But can not get a handle on Royalty.
WW1 was a family fight, big mustaches hiding little brains convinced a different people to die for nothing.
Captain Blimps shouting God save the,well we know.
Not joking Barry Humphreys would suit me, he is a conservative but the Dame eating those soggy sangas in Mittagong.
And sending Sir Les doing his impersonation of Sir John C Kerr to the next event?
Australia needs a laugh
Give you a tip o sung wo, my trip from high income is not stopping me enjoy every day.
My past is unchangeable, would not want to.
I live well on my restricted income and health is returning enjoy every new day.
Liz, do those Corgis eat what you give them, Mini Foxy crosses will not.
Then again I do not feed servants to them.

Oh! Our Conservative brethren are having an orgasm with this thread. Their adulation for the old stick from England knows no bounds.

All I can say is I quote the godfather of conservatism in Australia
Pig Iron Bob Menzies:
"I did but see her passing by, and yet I love her till I die."

I'm getting all chocked up, I going to cry.

I've been trying to compile a list of Liz's greatest achievements over the last 60 years but all I've managed to come up with is -

1. Stay alive for 80+ years.
2. Don't do anything embarassing or controversial.
3. Read speeches written for you by the PM's of incoming Governments.
4. Open things cut ribbons as required.

Anybody care to add anything meaningful here?

Well first stop the conservative rot.
All sides of politics are represented on Republican and HM PTY LTD.
Liz made headlines after PK put his arm around her waist.
3 gallons of smelling salts needed, and that was just for the male lackeys in her entourage.
Who would eat the soggy cuey sangas if not for her mob.
What would we do with all the some what different gentle men serving her?
And talking on her be half.
Not to worry only about a week of isolation from TV it will all be over until Fergy puts her foot in some ones mouth.

Good grief.

I think I am going to chunder.

Perhaps it's time that our nation looked
again at the question of our nationhood
and whether we want things to remain the same
or whether we want things to change.

Under our Constitution the British Monarch is
the font of all legal power in Australia and is
our formal head of state. Until we break our
last Constituional links to the mother country
our nationhood is incomplete.

Now 112 years of
Federation, perhaps it is time that Australia
finally joined the world of nations as a full, equal,
unshackled to any other - nation.

Do Australians
want to continue to be the subjects of a foreign
unelected figurehead monarch especially
when they are treated as any other foreigner
when travelling to Britain.
And when the British
monarch travels overseas she represents British
interests - not Australian.

Then there is also the
question of telling one's children that they can achieve
anything in this country - except the top job.
That it belongs to someone who is selected not through
merit but hereditary - and Catholics are specifically
ineligible. Does this go with our Australian values?
A fair go for all?

Australia's contribution to the Diamond Jubilee was
$5.4 million. Could that money have been better used in
this country?

yes a sick bag for agronomist first purchase!
Say what you think not a generalized swipe ok.
Lexi my post style here is meant to highlight my thoughts HM and the whole tribe, are pomposity at its worst.
Not appropriate to modern Australia.
And to question every time, that any person should inherit this degree f respect nd honor just because f birth in one family.
Now she had Ned Kelly in her family,different thing

Hi there BELLY...

Yes, I too like the 'Balmy Army' evident during every Ashes series. They lend to the event an enormous amount of character, volume and colour, creating a real spectre of what Test Cricket's all about.

However, I must confess BELLY, I'm still very much an anglophile, thus by dint, a Royalist. I'll probably remain one until I eventually fall off my pearch.

Seriously, probably one of my greatest concerns when we do ultimately choose to become a Republic; by what methodology shall we select our first and subsequent President(s) ?

Any method that permits a politician to get their greasy, unscrupulous paws upon, then I'd prefer a simple (unarmed) insurrection or coup d etat ! A much more noble and honourable course than anything a politician might seek to introduce.

I do recognise a Republic will happen, there's absolutely no doubt of that. But before it does, let's hope they've sorted through all the necessary 'machinery' matters, BEFORE it's ratified or enacted, whatever terminology they might adopt for Republicanism, or we'll all end up in one 'helluva' mess.

Gday o sung wo, well while firmly anti monarchist I have over emphasized my views, with a smile not hate.
Our relationship with England's interesting.
Many years ago, over 50, each morning in the Loco sheds of a QLD sugar cane mill.
A recent arrival English,man and I rehearsed our mutual insults, then as I climbed in to my loco he launched in to me,I returned serve.
Every one thought we would one day kill each other we became the best of mates.
Bit cranky with agronomist- that comment may well have been aimed at me- if so say it- to leave it thus is a general insult to every poster.
Now we have more grubs in politics than we should have, on both sides.
I would lie,if I said top job should ever go to a politician.
VOTERS CHOICE or stick with the old bird.

Belly,
Yes I recall Liz's first visit, mainly because it was me mums big day and I wish Liz all the best. There are lots of other big events and days I recall as well. The most recent was the day Jessica sailed back through Sydney Heads. Well done girl, good onya.

Dispite my Pommy heritage, I think they have made many poor decissions since the war and they have gone downhill in a big way. Not Liz's fault though.

After all the help we gave them during the war and after, it was pretty rotten to dump us, and the Kiwis, to enter the EU. We fought and died for them, rationed our food to help them, I can remember butter rationing, and took all their surplus kids and people as immigrants. Now we have to line up at UK customs in the foreigners queue while the Europeands waltz straight through. Not happy at all about that.

We should take note of their stuff ups as we are heading the same way.

Yet, we did inherit a governance system that has proved stable for over 100 years, and shown to be better than most others. The foundations of our culture.

So until the republicans can adequately show their proposed system will be far better, I do not intend to discard what we now have for a pie in the sky and some yank style raz-a-ma-taz. I look at other countries and am thankfull we are far better. We need to get lots of benefits from any change.

Well said Banjo. Too many here are showing a lack of maturity. True maturity means one can be prepared to show their heritage with out shame, or feel the need to beat their chests like some dumb ape, to prove they are tough & independent.

Nothing will make us any more independent, including changing a flag, or having a president, rather than a governor general.

About the only thing a change would do is make hundreds of lawyers very rich. The "constitutional lawyers will be in court for years, for every word changed.

There are an awful lot of people today, living in independent countries, who are a lot worse off because their country is no longer a British colony.

Yes the Brits ripped many off, but no where near as much as their own did, once they had the opportunity. About the worst thing that happened to the poor people of the world, in the last hundred years, is the loss of pommy "Gun Boat" diplomacy, it protected much more than the poms.

Dear Belly,

I watched some of the Diamond Jubilee Concert on the telly
last night - and couldn't help thinking when the cameras
scanned the Royal Box in which all the Royals sat - what
do these people actually do to deserve the lifestyle they
have - and is it worth it to their nation?

I guess it must
be as 80% of the British are pro the monarchy. To me it's
the Disneyland of Britain. Still I have read that there
were some protesters at the river Thames.

One lady had
actually cross-stitched a placard whose message was -
"Sod the Jubilee!" and another protester carried a placard
with the message - "I'm nobody's subject!" and so on.

One man summed things up - "When we celebrated the
Golden Jubilee ten years ago - the Sex Pistols were
featured - today we have Cliff Richard headlining an
arse-licking event!"

Ah well, to each his own.

cont'd ...

Dear Belly,

I've read some of the posters who claim that we owe so
much to Britain for having survived so well over these
past 112 years. Really? Is that actually true?
Or did we actually function on our own despite Britain?
And do we really need a de facto head of state? In the
past it used to be cheaper to buy Australian wool products
in Britain than it was here. We used to support them in
so many ways - did they really support us during our
times of crisis? Perhaps we should study our history a bit
more and see who really owes what to whom?

Those who speak of a republic are committing treason and shell be sent to the tower, from where their heads shall be so removed from their bodies, by the axe.

QUEEN ELIZABETH I

Boy oh boy, those b's talking about a republic, Oh! how I wish for the "good old days."

QUEEN ELIZABETH II

Yes Lexi, I except the English as cousins, but never rulers.
To be honest, no one in my family will admit it, but we came via convict ships, in our case.
Bit harsh saying the Brits dumped us in joining the EU actual it would have been insanity if they had not.
And this country opened its doors as a result, a positive out come.
Popularity of Royalty *the firm* in HRH own words, is up and down.
The lack of early respect at Lady D's death was a low.
Read the body language, it is there to be seen, in all of us.
HM Lix showed extreme displeasure at the singing of the Royal Hymn by a bloke standing behind her.
Often, if you look with honesty, you will see petulance and spoiled rich toff attitudes from the firm!
To day we hear Britain's tax payers, some who could not afford a party for those they love, are to pay for the whole thing, we dipped a huge amount in!
WHY.

Belly, see it this way. The whole Lizzie 2 shindig is a huge money
spinner for the British economy. London runs on tourism, and she
is part of that circus, sold to foreigners, who love it, especially
Americans.

So she is actually earning huge money for Britain.

Dear Yabby,

I agree - as I stated in my previous post -
the monarchy is the Disneyland of Britain -
and they have nothing else. But what's that
got to do with us in the 21st century.
Why do we need a head of state of a foreign
country? And as has been pointed out in the
past - making changes to our Constitution is
not as complicated as John Howard and other
monarchists have stated in the past. In actual
fact there's just a few minor things that need
to be changed and they won't have any disastrous
results. Poor old Howard did his best to get a
knighthood - but ended up with a medal instead.
Apparently he wasn't considered to be of the
right calibre - as Sir Robert Menzies was.
I guess it should tell us something that
knighthoods seem to be conferred with greater
ease on British celebrities.

*Why do we need a head of state of a foreign
country?*

Well we don't Lexi and she's really only a figurehead.
I think it will all change once Lizzie 2 falls off her perch,
which is probably not that far off. That will be a good time
to bring in the changes, as oldies like Howard and other old
monarchists will be doing the same.

Sometimes timing matters.

Dear Yabby,

Thank You. I hope you're right.
Although you usually are. ;-)

Let us not let Sir Robert Menzies lay in his grave truth untold.
From another time, he was both a statesman and a lover of all things English.
Few know he thought himself a worthwhile Prime Minister of wartime Britain for a while.
He tried to get Churchill's ear, may well have got some of the other end.
Ming [RM] actually true, wanted to name our dollar the Royal!
Even then I cringed at his brown nosing!
yabby has it about right as has HMTQ she named it the firm,Lexi too dissy land may suit better.
Robert of the long brown proboscis was without a doubt one who thought of England as home while consuming vast plates of soggy Q Cumber sandwiches.
I however have No trouble in saying his version of Liberalism, his ability's , made him a great leader and much loved, by others/most not me but respect him, yes still.
Not his crawling to Royalty

Just for you, Belly.

"I did but see her passing by and yet I love her till I die."

(Robert Menzies on behalf of Australians to HRH Queen Elizabeth)

Hello there BELLY...

Look ol' son, don't let 'em get you down, when they cast a few deprecatory remarks your way. Generally, it's because they've exhausted all other compelling arguement, so they go for the throat.

Notwithstanding the appreciable affection I do harbour for old Blighty, I can't forgive the position taken by Mr Churchill and ors. (as related to me by my Dad), when our then PM, Mr Curtin begged him to allow our troops to return home because the Japanese troops were knocking on our front door.

Nor can I praise the UK Immigration Authorities. They, in late 1974, at the Heathrow Airport 'primary line', unmercifully interrogated me like a criminal, as to whether I intended to work or stay in the UK, for a period in excess of six months.

And before I was sent to SV, I spent six months in Malaya, at the RAAF Base, Butterworth. Occasionally, we got leave to go into George Town Penang. And as young grunt's do, we'd go a 'few rounds' with our sworn enemy, gentlemen from the 1st Green Jackets Bn. a British Para. Unit, who were stationed on the Island. We hated them, and them us !

Yet, I'm still very much an Anglophile and a Royalist. I do realize Australia will ultimately become a Republic. When it'll come to pass,
who knows ? But come to pass, it will as sure as night follows day.

As I stated in an earlier thread, my greatest fear, politicians will get their mitts all over the process, instead of what BELLY said "...it should be the peoples' choice..." or words to that effect.

LEXI puts forward a very persuasive position. And goes on to rationalize very intelligibly, why it's now necessary that we ultimately embrace republicanism. It's just very hard for an old goat like me to accept such a portentous change.

dear o sung wu,

I wish there were more "old goats" like you.
Bless Your Big Generous Heart!

Belly, not you specifically. As Wobbles said, the only accomplishments Queen Elizabeth has are: not falling of the perch in 60 years, cutting ribbons and reading speeches other people have written. In return, she has never had to want for anything, has lived her whole life in luxury and all because of where she was born.

The only reason her family had so much money is because in past centuries they exploited peasants and abused their power to gain wealth. Now, her family’s wealth is paid for by the working people of the UK, none of whom will ever have the opportunities she had. None of them can aspire to be a head of state, but the Queen gets to be because of who she is related to, not because of any merit.

To see people fawning over her because she is rich and powerful, not through any merit but because of family influence, I find nauseous. You might just as well fawn over James Murdoch. But that is just me.

Agronomist,

"...she has never had to want for anything, has lived her whole life in luxury because of where she was born."

Well everything is relative - your sentence above could apply to most of us posting on this forum compared to someone who was born as an urchin in the backstreets of Calcutta. It was Lizzie's fortune to be born into royalty and to become Queen. It was my fortune to be born in a wealthy and peaceful country - how lucky am I!

We shouldn't waste our time lamenting hereditary opulence, etc...haven't you noticed that societies arrange themselves in to hierarchies. There's always someone at the top sitting on a gilded perch. It's what mankind does.

Yabby's right, that the pomp and pageantry generated by periodic royal celebrations is a psychological and financial shot in the arm for the British people and economy respectively.

(Just have to say that the interior and ceiling of St Paul's is sublime)

*There's always someone at the top sitting on a gilded perch. It's what mankind does.*

Well that's it. If they are not there, society creates them. Look
at Lara Bingle or Paris Hilton. Hardly hugely skilled people who
worked for it.

I'd personally hate Lizzie 2s job. Always on guard over every word,
always watched, can never let her hair down and say what she really
thinks. Her whole life. For what? If she had told them to shove
the job, she would have had a far more enjoyable life, IMHO.

Thank you LEXI, that was most kind of you.

And I'd have to agree with YABBY when he says that the Queen needs to watch everything she says or does, in public or in her private apartments. There's been many a story emerge about the private activities of the Royals. Usually from some aggrieved or disgruntled staffer, page or attendant.

Think about it for a moment, there's always somebody lingering or loitering around them, every minute of everyday. Even while they're attending to their own personal ablutions, someone is usually within earshot (legitimately). Privacy, is not part of their vocabulary, even when they sincerely believe they're relaxing in private.

Then there's always the 'threat assessment'. Neither imagined nor overstated, that you CAN believe !

With their immense wealth and every personal luxury. Never being able to outwardly express how they truly feel. Or, when in the eye of the public, they can't appear downcast or moody, even when they may feel really awful... The stiff upper lip, must always prevail !

No, I'd much rather enjoy my own mundane lifestyle. Where nobody really gives a tinker's cuss as to who I am, or how I feel. It's just me, my marginally inadequate police pension, and my lovely wife, and our two fantastic dogs. All three have graciously consented to share in my somewhat banal, occasionally monotonous existance.

The Royals can keep all their trappings, the absence of privacy etc. They'd not enjoy, 'the grand life of Reilly' as many of you might believe, I'd respectfully wager ?

Thanks to Agronomist and o sung wo, just that I like to know who the target is.
had a look about last night and this morning.
One page, bit out there anti Royal, had RF on a balcony pointing and laughing.
Speech bubble was saying go on laugh you stupid slaves!~
More mainstream 7 or 9s online news page said our Liz had barred some of the flock, including Fergys daughter of the hat!
Come bit rude that, they all feed off the same tax payer udder.
My family reunions see some real dills but they get to come, after the Blue, some get to go too.
Bit of mud wrestling on the lawns or toe sucking might brighten Buckingham Palace up

Yes, St Paul's Cathedral is a masterpiece of
English baroque architecture. And nobody
can deny that many of England's best-known
traditions involve the Royal Family. They are
part of their nation's great history. We can all
marvel at magnificent architecture,
foreign queens and kings, and the links they provide
with their nation's history. And just as we enjoy
Disneyland - we can appreciate and enjoy what a
country like Britain has to offer in pomp and
ceremony.

At the same time, until we break our constitutional
links to the mother country our nationhood will
be incomplete.

I have read recently that Prince Charles and his wife
shall be paying a visit to Australia shortly.
Why? And how much will this cost us?

Lexi,

It's called "nurturing ties", and it is standard diplomatic behaviour between countries who wish to maintain a close relationship.

Lexi, I seem to recall that we spent around 100 million on the
pope circus, when he came to Aus. The Charlie circus is alot smaller
then the pope circus and not half as rich as the Vatican.

ABC radio had this subject today and it had interesting views.
One was to remind us how the French rid them selves of Royalty.
England indeed has a long history of Royalty, including the beheading of Charles the first.
The Magna Carta, and the importation of the Dutch, or was it German Royals after the line died ed out.
Saxon invasion was another break in one family rule.
I doubt we can avoid talking about the costs or understanding Royalty harks right back to tribal chieftains, strongest rules, and at its start was maybe a self appointed thing.
Just as all those medals on Idi Armins chest, all for show.

Dear Poirot,

Nurturing ties? It has to be a two way street.
The cost of Charles and Camilla's visit
to Canada cost Canada $2.57 million.

Dear Yabby,

The Pope's visit and World Youth Day was a great
expense. I think in the vicinity of $139 million.
However, pilgrims paid registration fees ranging
from $50 to $395, depending on their country of
origin. The Sydney Archdiocese contributed close
to $20 million. Then there were numerous corporate
sponsors who contributed - such as Qantas, the
Commonwealth Bank, numerous Catholic organisations,
Mercedes Benz, just to name a few.

And of course the celebration did bring in millions
of tourist dollars into the state.

A bit of a different scenario to a Royal visit.

As I understand it Charles will focus on economic,
environmental
and military issues while touring the Scandinavian
countries this year, while promoting Britain as a centre
for business opportunity. Nurturing ties? You betcha -
Britain takes - the colonials give.

Not sure what he will focus
on in Australia - perhaps showing Camilla his old haunts
where he spent his salad days - amongst the Colonials.
Who knows?

Lexi,

"Nurturing ties?...."

I'm not defending it or criticising it - only pointing out that this is standard procedure between allies.

*A bit of a different scenario to a Royal visit.*

Well yes, a royal visit would be cheaper for the Govt than
a pope visit, as the evidence shows.

Lexi, history needs to play out here. Its not long now, Lizzie 2
can't live forever, soon you will see changes. But I think it would
be a real snub to act before that. Lots of Australian oldies have
grown up and spent their whole lives tied up with Britain, Lizzie
and the clan. It means something to them and we are hardly spending
a fortune on it, in fact probably far less then if somebody like
Rudd was prez and was flying around the world at our expense.

I have no problem with Australia becoming a republic, I just think
that the timing should be thought about. Once Lizzie goes, it will
all look a bit different.

*Royalty harks right back to tribal chieftains, strongest rules, and at its start was maybe a self appointed thing*

A bit like those union leaders who run the Govt.

Dear Yabby,

How often does the
Pope come to Oz compared to the Royals?
And as I tried to point out - we were compensated
quite well financially for his visit. We may even
have made a profit out of it or broke even.
Anyway, Yabby -
point taken. My personal feelings don't really
matter much on this issue. The nation will eventually
decide which way it will go.

Dear Poirot,

I was merely trying to point
out that "nurturing ties,"
should be of benefit to all participants.
It wasn't meant to be taken personally. And I did not
mean to imply that you were taking some sort of stand
on it.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/nswbudget2008/popes-visit-will-cost-taxpayers-139m/2008/06/03/1212258826301.html

Lexi, according to this article, the final cost to the NSW Govt for
the popes visit was 86 million $, with another 20 million chipped
in by the Federal Govt. Yet you worry about a couple of million
for Charlie.

Dear Yabby,

Thank You for the link.
And I'd like to now quote to you -
from the link that you gave:

"The government maintains the economic
benefits of World Youth Day could exceed
$180 million..."

I hope this clarifies things for you.

I don't have a problem with any members of
the royal family - I wish them all the best.
They do an excellent job for Britain.

See you on another thread.

Dear Lexi,

It certainly does clarify things for me. If the Govt had to spend
100 million$ every time they wanted 180$ million of economic
activity, the country would frankly be bankrupt.

My neighbour alone would generate a couple of million $ of economic
activity for Australia, by way of wheat and lamb exports. All he
gets is a carbon tax and other charges, to make things even more
difficult.

We really don't need to pee in the pocket of the Catholic Church.
We already let them earn huge amounts in Australia, all tax free.
Unlike the rest of us Australians, who can't sell tickets to heaven
to make a quid.

With respect to Lexi, and it may be true we made more than it cost, I think no more of Catholic Church than Royalty.
We all have over looked Phil the Greek here been unwell, sure we wish him well.
There is a point, how long can it be,for him and Liz?
Will Charlie step up? or down?
He may let his recently wed son take over the three ring circus.
Folk will fall at the feet of the new cast and a whole new diversion/tourist attraction in place.
Republic please.

Belly,

I tend not to really care whether we remain as we are or become a republic, although I'm inclined to think that a republic is a likely eventuality, and I'd support a ceremonial President.

....but, noting your call for "Republic please", I'd just like to remind you that it's Presidential election year in the U.S.. If you want to see the ultimate three-ringed circus then look yonder in America's direction. You wont see hoopla, the likes of that from your average constitutional monarchy.

<< Republic please >>

Belly, why??

What would we gain out of it?

Would we get better governance?

Would we less strangled by the intimate association of big business and government?

Would it facilitate better planning for our future?

Nothing, no, no, and no, are the answers.

So what’s the point then?

Secondly, why couldn’t we have both a republic and a monarchy?

In other words; why couldn’t we have the sort of government that we’d have if we were a republic (whether we call ourselves a republic or not) AND retain the British monarch as our traditional head of state.

Surely we are capable of standing on our own two
feet as a nation - we don't need to look at the
US - or become their satellite, no more than
we need to continue to be subservient to Britain.

From separate colonies to one nation, from ardent
royalists with loyalty to the British throne to
nationalists who see Australia as a nation able to stand
for itself. In the space of several centuries, there has
been significant change. And surely by now we do have
the maturity to become a nation in the full sense of
the word. Currently we're not. We were founded as a
British colony - and according to our Constitution -
and laws have remained one ever since. The British
monarch remains the font of all legal power in
Australia. "Nurturing ties," should be about an equal
relationship - not a subservient one. Therein lies the
difference. Perhaps I'm not putting it well - but surely
people should be able to see the difference. This is
nothing personal against the British royals. It's simply
a wish for Australia to become a full, equal, unshackled nation
in the world of nations. As long as we continue to be
the subjects of a foreign unelected figurehead monarch -
our nationhood is incomplete.

I have nothing more to say on the subject. These just
happen to be my feelings. If you don't agree with them -
fair enough.

Lexi,

Name me a country that doesn't ally itself with others?

Standing on our own?...what does that mean?

It's really a matter of aligning ourselves with those we see as enhancing our prospects.

No man is an island - and the same goes for relationships between countries.

Dear Poirot,

It was not alliance with other nations
that I was discussing. It
was Australia's subservient relationship with
Britain. There is a difference. And as for "standing alone,"
I meant it only in that context - that it was time we unshackled
ourselves from this subservient realtionship - and became a
nation in our own right

Fair enough, Lexi. It's nice to see you feel passionate about it : )

(As you know, I'm a fan of passion)

(Psst - have you noticed that as far as "regular" female contributors to OLO go these days, it's basically down to you and moi - unless I'm overlooking someone?)

cont'd ...

I forgot to add that:

While earlier generations often put Britain first,
the reverse was not forthcoming!

All I am suggesting is that it is time for Australia
to forge a National State for the 21st Century and get
rid of the shackles of the past.

Belly,
I agree with Ludwig. What advantages would we get with a republic? I do not see any economic, nor any better governance. I know you do not like the royals and i don't care one way or the other, but it is the governance that is important here. As Piorot said about the raz-a-ma-taz in the US, do you really want that and are they better off than us?

Lexi,
You are forgetting that many Poms put a lot of capital into Aus that helped develope it. I can think of many companies here that had UK beginnings. Many of our great pastoral firms, for instance.

No doubt they, or some of them, did well from that but they put the capital up. Some went broke as well.

Would yopu really discard our stable system of governance for a tinpot republic and what garrantees are there that would not happen.

*it is time for Australia
to forge a National State for the 21st Century and get
rid of the shackles of the past.*

I told you Lexi, it will happen, but is just a question of timing.
There really is no hurry and its not as if they don't have more
important matters to deal with in Canberra.

Lizzie is nothing but a figurehead, has no influence really and
costs us far less then any Prez with delusions of grandeur. So
in reality, she really does not matter, but provides lots of
entertainment for many an Aussie woman as they read the latest
gossip in New Idea. Millions love that stuff. Marx was correct
about one thing: give the folk bread and circuses. Now we have
cooking shows and political circuses to keep them amused.

Dear Poirot,

I have noticed that female contributors on OLO
have become scarcer. I haven't seen Pelly for
a while, hope she's allright. I miss Pynch,
Bronwyn, and quite a few others. But hey, you
and I are still here - and I think that's a
good thing.

Dear Yabby,

I'm not going to go into this complex subject
any further - especially regarding the Constitution
and the antiquated laws that are still a part of it.
If you're really interested in knowing more about
the full extent of our subservience to Britain -
you can always Google the topic. It's quite interesting.

Dear Banjo,

My in-laws are British. Stud-farmers in NSW. When my first
son was born he had a prize-winning bull named after him.
However, that doesn't change my views that Australia must
look to themselves if we are to find a basis for national
advancement. However, I'm not pushing for a Republic.
It has to come from all of the country's citizens.

Lexi/Poirot… It should be of some comfort that it only takes the two of you to raise the average IQ and the tone of the threads you join.

Just imagine what it would be like here if it was only up to us who are anatomically challenged…

WM Trevor as usual I am quite prepared to do my bit to lower the average IQ.[you are however right]
Ludwig! Bloke! Why not? bit feeble now come on admit it, how would we ever become America?
We kick our kids for wearing the cap back to front!
Our republic will never be driven by politicians, we just will not have one if they want to control it.
Just think Dame Edna as President?
Sir Les full as a goog, drunk you teen agers!
Standing in for her
Thats my Australia.
Liz could be a guest at the swearing in and dance a jig with Dame E or Les!

"…as usual I am quite prepared to do my bit to lower the average IQ"

In that case, Belly, you're not trying hard enough.

(Now you've had a compliment as well)

Dear William Trevor,

Thanks, I really appreciate reading that.
However I have to add that there are some
posters on this forum that have really
brilliant communication skills (and intelligence),
that I couldn't possibly hope to match. Poirot is one,
Pelican is another, then there's - Squeers, Pericles,
of course yourself, Anthonyve, Thinker 2, Houllebecque
(who scares the daylights out of me - he's so brilliant),
and of course I love Belly, and there are others also (too
numerous to mention). Overall - I would have to say -
this forum is a very good mix of diverse opinions - and
I keep learning from it.

Again - Thank You.

<< Ludwig! Bloke! Why not? bit feeble now come on admit it, how would we ever become America? >>

Tis not me Belly who is comparing an Australian republic with the USA example!

<< Our republic will never be driven by politicians.. >>

Huh? Erm, I think it would be!

<< Just think Dame Edna as President? >>

Mmwaaahahahaaa. Somehow I think she, er… he, er…. Ms Everage, would make a damn sight better pres than whatever goose we end up with as our first republic leader!

I mean, most of us think very little of Gillard or Abbott, or of any recent PM. So what do you think we are going to make of the first president? Ridicule ad-nauseum…..unless it is someone who can ENTERTAIN THE MASSES!!

So…yeah… Dame Edna for Pres!

If she were to become our first pres, I could almost support the idea of us becoming a republic!! ( :>)

<< Lexi/Poirot… It should be of some comfort that it only takes the two of you to raise the average IQ and the tone of the threads you join. >>

Pfpfpfff….. Ludwig razes it twise as much as them too cobm…cobmined…comboined…er,, put togetha!

<< Just imagine what it would be like here if it was only up to us who are anatomically challenged… >>

Anatomically challenged?

Phoowey. I’ve got a really big……erm, brane!

.

<< I have to add that there are some posters on this forum that have really brilliant communication skills (and intelligence), that I couldn't possibly hope to match. Poirot is one, Pelican is another, then there's - Squeers, Pericles, of course yourself, Anthonyve, Thinker 2, Houllebecque (who scares the daylights out of me - he's so brilliant), and of course I love Belly… >>

LEXIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII…… what about MEEEEE?? ?? ?? ??

Pericles? ? ? ?

Ohhh… puleeease!!

You're welcome of course, Lexi… But on rethinking my arithmetic I'm not sure that I worded the expression as best I could since I said it took the 'two of you' - whereas for comparison, Pericles and Houllebecq can do it single-handedly.

(And I've heard a rumour that one of them actually does!)

Now… Ludwig. Hmmm – a strange conflation of claiming IQ raising whilst simultaneously misreading anatomically challenged as a reference to… 'erm, brane' size, when it was cleverly indicating the mere presence of a… 'erm, brane' (to use your euphemism) regardless of size. But at least now we know you've got a really big… erm, imagination. And at a guess it's fevered too?

As a method of begging for it – do you find "Ohhh… puleeease!!" works?

Lexi and Poirot on a thread together is a joy to behold, all that feminine wisdom with a hint of moustachioed detective is a hard combination to beat.

WmTrevor,

"(And I've heard a rumour that one of them actually does)"....which allows Poirot to ruminate upon a theory of his : )

Morning all , frosty as Liz smile is some times here this morning.
Please forgive Ludwig.
Look we chucked the whole deal because Polly's wanted their way.
But not joking you know,remember it was my mob who made the old girl a dame.
And not kidding, conservative and all, if both party's do not take out the rubbish soon I will support the Dame as PM.
We already regard it as a circus so why not laugh to gether.
Any other nominations for our head of state.
Seeing its us, and we like a grin why must it be president?
Lets call it say the *Top Swamp Wallaby*
IF we must be fair dinkum, Dawn Fraser, Noel Pierson, a host of them.
Belly's list?
Dame Edna, All of the above in the good posters list except me.

I was thinking, as the old duck has been top cocky here in Oz for some 60 years, and with all the scandals this mob have been involved in since the year dot. The latest scandal being the whole crowd hanging out with convicted sex offender Harbinder Singh Rana, but then again I ask you, what family doesn't hang out with sex offenders in turbans.
I think this pommie mob have gone stale on us and its about time we dumped on them and adopted a new royal family. So I've done a bit of research into the matter to see if we in Oz could cut a better deal.
Your not going to believe this! But Queen Bittiewantoo XXVI of Ethiopia, the great granddaughter of Emperor Haile Selassie, and wife of Prince Waddibogbog, are at this point in time, as they say in show business, between engagements.
As I understand it Queen Bittie and Prince Waddie along with Crown Prince Totietoto-Hubshambobo are ready, willing and able to relocate to Oz at a moments notice, and all they require is that the royal estate has a bit of space for the royal herd of 600 rare Ethiopian Bongo Gazelles and other assorted animals.
So if any of you royalist out there have a spare back room and a bit of a yard Queen Bittiewntoo and Prince Waddiebogbog along with Crown Prince Totie what's his name, would love to hear from you. I'm sure there is a knighthood in this for the right person.
p/s These royals only dine on the fruit a the Sabarchie vine, so it would pay to check out if you local green grocer has a good stock of Sabarchie melons.
I told you you wouldn't believe it!

Dear Ludwig,

What about you? - you ask.

You're included - of course.

I did say - "and all the others too numerous
to mention."

I read somewhere that as far as
being "anatomically challenged" Men have a slight advantage -
its a little harder for women who have their plumbing
optimised for other things.

Dear Wm Trevor,

So you want to debate the ins and outs of being
anatomically challenged. Perhaps we should start a new
thread? As for your compliment to the two of us (Poirot
and myself) - we make a good team. Like coffee and cream -
combined - we're really something!

"…debate the ins and outs of being anatomically challenged." No thanks. Such a debate would be lost before it started in favour of females.

I've long suspected that, psychologically, tension between the sexes boils down to jealousy:

A woman knows with absolute certainty she is the mother of her children – whilst a man can only hope and believe that he is the father of his.

"Like coffee and cream - combined - we're really something!" Arguably true… but with the addition of one more space, it would have been unarguably funny:

"combined - we're really some thing!"

Dear Wm Trevor,

Humour is a reminder that no matter how high
the throne one sits on, one sits on one's
bottom.