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 > Should Australia maintain its Constitutional Monarchy

Should Australia maintain its Constitutional Monarchy

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Given the likely destabilising alternatives I would say we had no choice...imagine Australians having to compulsorily attend the ballot box to choose a President.
Posted by Communicat, Friday, 6 July 2007 8:42:24 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
Hello All,
I believe the Founders of the Constitution left just enough room to get out of the ties to the 'motherland' in the future. They called us a 'social laboratory' around the world back then and i cannot imagine them thinking we would stay tied to the Monarchy forever. We were more or less left to fend for ourselves in the beginning, so the break-away factor was already in semi-swing. To change it would be a monumental task, but well worth it. Our President could also be elected non-compulsory voting, for all ministers. Why? To get them into gear and really earn our vote. If they get out there and became much more accountable then perhaps people will want to vote, instead of wasting time donkey voting. That serves no democratic pupose!
In 1891 barton said; "adhering to that which we individually have found to work as well as anything else can work in the present stage of political development", (Maddox,Power Parliament People, p70-1)
Does that not signal there could be change i the future? Without a Bill of Rights, which back then would have looked like too much of an American colony revolt to be included, needs to exist, we really have no safe guard, govn. put it there, gov. can take away. Thank goodness for hte High Courts capacity to intervene...
Perhaps start with non-compulsory voting?
Posted by go-mum!, Friday, 6 July 2007 3:35:34 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 never wanted independence. Quite the opposite, Australia was pushed away from Europe when they formed the European Economic Union. If there was a referendum now, most Australian would prefer to be an EU country rather than being in APEC or ASEAN or at risk of being over-powered by the US. It is just confusing that we have our unique culture in such a unique geography.

Many in the EU are not European in culure, just European in geography. Just as most in Australia are not Asian in culture, just in geography.

Begs the question, is a European resident a resident of geography?

This confusion is a serious mind spinner for many Australians.
Posted by saintfletcher, Friday, 6 July 2007 5:53:28 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
From some posters here: Could you tell us how much Australian taxpayers pays for being a Constitutional Monarchy? Please give Government statistics not retoric. Compare the costs with the maintenance of a President.

Please demonstrate how powers would be allotted under an alternate system! The current Monarch has very little administrative powers, and is there only as a peoples release from corrupt and opressive laws and government. They are the administrator to protect our constitution as agreed to by the people at Federation.
Posted by Philo, Sunday, 8 July 2007 7:26:14 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
Whilst no, i don't have the current figures, going by the Constitution, PartI-General, s2, states the salary to be paid out of the government coffers, ie the people, to the Queen for the G-G's wages.
This means we pay the Queen a salary to pay the G-G her rep, who don't forget has the Constitutional power to sack our elected PM.
However what crossed my mind was that, if there was a Pres instead of a PM, the Queen and GG would be gone, that logically saves money!
What is not logical is why, the Australian people's Government is not headed by the Government but is in fact stated as; Part I, s1: "shall consist of the Queen..."
Posted by go-mum!, Monday, 9 July 2007 4:47:58 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 could have been part of the EU (and really should be) but Labor put a stop to all that when they started the "we have to be part of the Asian region" mantra which seems to have hypnotised the majority.
Now we seem to have politicians of all persuasions saying that we are some sort of leader in the region (nonsense) and that we all need to learn Asian languages (more nonsense).
If it is a choice between joining the EU or becoming another state of the USA or being part of the Asian region I would rather join the EU because the Asian region does not see us as part of it and we are making ourselves unpopular by demanding inclusion where we are not seen as part of the family rather as visitors. And I would rather a constitutional monarchy than the US presidential debacle anyday.
Posted by Communicat, Monday, 9 July 2007 5:07:42 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. All

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