banjo, that last sentence is the problem, alright. as far as i know the list of nations that have cir is as follows:

1. switzerland.

all the other democracies- ain't.

lesley, i may be older than you. i wuz dropping bombs on laotian peasants and beginning to wonder if john wayne was telling the whole story back in '68. mylai, and the profound indifference with which americans greeted this story, suggested i was on the wrong team.

ozzies can have democracy if they want it, but most have no notion of what it is. it certainly is not participation in election of people you wouldn't to loan money to, so they can do as they please with the nation's future.

democracy is cir, direct election, and open conduct of public affairs. accept no substitutes.

c'mon,ozzies- the electorate in a body is wiser, fairer, and stronger than those parasites, let's sort them out.

Thank you demos. I received some information today regarding our topic. So, for a Citizen Initiated Referendum, the proponent only needs 2% of the population (what is 2% of 20+ million?) (or in State figures NSW ?5 million?). My advisor says that it is a herculean task of communication and organisation. He also says that The Feds. have nothing to do with the States with regard to something like this. Also the signatories have to have the correct copy for their own State. If a petition is not worded correctly, or sent to the appropriate House it will almost certainly be rejected. His organisation in Vic.(Dying with Dignity)
has 8,000 signatures 90% of which are hand written, only 10% electronic. (This is a petition, not CIR)
He is sure that 100% electronic signatures will be rejected, but that the Rejection would make a good story for the Press.
A Newspoll professional survey earlier this year showed 80% support for the terminally or hopelessly ill person to have controlled access
to medication in order to die on their own terms. Only 14% opposed.
If any of you want to see the results of this survey go to
www.dwdv.org.au and follow the links.
Switzerland and Italy have CIR's, and I think just one other country
(possibly America)
So folks, I've just about exhausted my resources on this one, I'm
sure there will be much more out there. I was hoping that there were professionals, either on this Forum, or known to people who contributed to this Forum who would feel strongly enough on this issue
to do a pro bono job for their Auntie Maude, Mother Father, or Grandma. Over to you guys. Let's get this show on the road.

Lesley

lesley, several countries use referenda quite often, but i believe only switzerland has citizen initiated referenda. big difference: if you write the question, you control the answer. remember that farce about the republic?

the federal government of the usa does not use referenda, although about half the states have some form of citizen input. california, for instance, recently fired their governor, giving arnie his big chance.

the fatal flaw in cir, is the 'c'. no matter what howard says, you're not a ctizen, you're a subject of the crown. all legal activity in a monarchy springs from the will of the monarch(as translated for mortals by the prime minister). consequently, no matter the language or form, the people can only petition, never command, the crown.

the result is in new zealand with immense effort, the people have brought 2 (clayton's) referenda to parliament, only to have them simply ignored.

i'm afraid a monarchy can never be a democracy. if you want euthanasia, or anything else, you have to start by establishing a democratic republic.

fortunately, pollies have a finely tuned sense of survival. given a choice of euthanasia legislation from parliament, or civil unrest threatening the guild members, they will give a little.

Thank you Demos for explaining so clearly why we can't get past first base with politicians.

We do need to be citizens of Australia in order to have a genuine say in how this country is run.

I genuinely believe we already have civil unrest with the subject of voluntary euthanasia because there is now documented evidence of at least 40 people knowingly and willingly putting themselves forward in the legal wrangle of manufacturing a prohibited substance. At 80 what can a government do that ill health hasn't already set the tone for?

The real drama for the government is that the elderly, breaking the law, has everything to do with the frustrations felt for thelack of support. Support for a growing number of people who wish to die at a time of their choosing, and nothing to do with profit.

The fact is that theirs is a victimless crime, undertaken only to bring a sense of peace and tranquility to an otherwise terminal prognosis. Already severely traumatised with their living status, their dying one, needs to be better managed. With Nembutal!

We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking our fight right up to both the State and Federal Government doorstep. People are getting to a point where they don't care what is considered lawful because their wellbeing is a much more personal and immediate need.

Given the way people are kept "alive" by being drugged into a stupor it is rather a toothless tiger the Government keeps terriorising us with. The one real problem we have is that unlike lobbyists in general we have neither the physical nor mental capacity to be truly representative in an open forum...sometimes just breathing is an effort, making it hard to have governments heed us.

The baby boomers will help us through the ballot box hopefully.

Graham Y - how does one access 'the petition site' you mentioned?

Communicat, You are only compelled to vote or pay the statutory penalty because you agreed to that when you applied or requested, in some form or another (contract), to be added to the electoral roll for the specific purpose of being an elector and voting for these grubs who purport to represent the interests of the voting public. The law requires that an elector must vote but the law does not require that you apply to be an elector or be on the roll. If you have some disagreement with the so called rule of law made by the elected politicians then first remove yourself from the electoral roll and out from under their false authority.
If you wish to have the politicians change to laws to prevent you from further suffering, pain and low standard of life, you do not ask, you notify them of your will and if they prefer that you suffer that is something that the law then does not allow. Petitions are provided for those who can be misled and who are not able to claim or enforce their personal inalienable rights. How many petitions have ever been successful, it only gives them to opportunity to so no when in fact you don't require their consent as it is your decision and not theirs.