I really do think that we should seriously consider the Republic question, after we solve the lack of National defence capability, the electricity generating problem, the housing problem, the homeless problem, the condition of our roads , water rights etc. etc.

After all, important problems ought to receive priority.

We are very lucky to have such great royals in our story- when I think of them there's a lot to like- they aren't perfect but they're a big part of British culture- and roundly loved.

Our royals through their character have demonstrated duty and power in the service of the British diaspora.

But I agree that "National defence capability, the electricity generating problem, the housing problem, the homeless problem, the condition of our roads , water rights" are important issues.

When volunteering at an NGO a great leader said in hushed tones "there are do gooders and those who do good".

I am waiting for someone to point out a single republic whose system of government we can all admire, & which we would want to emulate holus-bolus. If those wanting a republic can't do that then any system of government instituted as a new republic of Oz would be an experiment, & bound to have so many stuff-ups that the only people happy would be the lawyers, running constitutional cases for decades.

Only idiots would want such an outcome, so find a totally successful, happy republic or shut up.

Am I wrongly assuming that Is Mise is being sarcastic, and pointing out all of real problems that need fixing before republicanism is even mentioned? If I got it right, I agree with him.

Similarly with this racist nonsense about an aboriginal voice to parliament, when most people with some trace of aboriginality are doing fine, but there are still too many in remote locations suffering and dying, thanks to the Whitlam/Coombes racist policy of keeping human beings in a living museum.

ttbn,
You ain’t wrong in your assumption and you ain’t wrong in the rest of your post and there’s a lot more things need fixing before any money is wasted on pushing republicanism.

Gentlemen,

The Queen has reigned during our entire lives. The
office she holds is infinitely older.

I can fully
understand why to so many people she has always
been a great asset and a re-assuring constant in a
world of constant change. And her life of service is in stark
contrast to a world becoming more self-centred and less
giving.

Many people don't have much faith in the integrity of our
self-serving politicians - and find it a comfort to have
our politicians have to go to the monarch's representative
to be given the legitimacy of governing us.

We now have a new government - which has stated in 2021
that "The party supports and will work towards establishing
an Australian Republic with an Australian head of state.
A modern Australian Republic is an idea whose time has
come."

However the PM has pledged that they will prioritize a
referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament and
Constitutional recognition for First Nations People in
its first 3 years. The Head of State question will come later.
There are also other priorities that the government has to
deal with as we know.

A discussion on a Republic will be "the next natural step."
It will probably be around the timing when the Queen hands over
the reign or passes.

"Many in the UK would see this as the next step for Australia
on the path to maturity and independence. In my discussions
people in the UK see us as a powerhouse economy in the Asia
Pacific, diplomatically independent, with our own culture
and identity, and many of them are amazed we haven't done
this earlier," said Matt Thistlethwaite the newly
appointed Minister for the Republic by the Queen's representative
in Australia, the Governor General, David Hurley.

If there is to be a change to a Republic in Australia that
maintains the Westminster System of responsible government
this will take time, considered thought, and debate.

In the very long term an Australian head of state may be
inevitable, so it's important to get it right.

Labor will use every bureaucratic weapon in the government’s arsenal to propagandise a republic, demonise traditional values and to lay the groundwork for entrenching left-wing power into the Constitution. Part of which will be the elevation of the so-called ‘first nations’ – a purely ideological concept lifted holus-bolus from the Canadian and American Left – in order to create further cultural divisions within our country, our legal systems and our individual rights based on the principle that we ‘non-indigenous’ are all living on ‘stolen land’.

Foxy,
You make an erroneous assumption in your first sentence, I was born in the reign of George V, lived through the reign of GeorgeVI, I was in my late teens when Elizabeth II. ascended the throne and there are thousands of Australians still living who were born in her fathers reign.

Your second is wrong also, the monarchy of Great Britain is not infinitely old, it dates from the cessation of the republican Commonwealth and the Restoration in 1660.
Hardly infinite.

Matt, the Thistle in Waiting, is already pushing a republic.

Do you not think that the homeless of Australia should be helped, and the problem of homelessness solved before any more money is spent chasing republicanism?

The period of republican rule for England was a failure. During the period no stable government was established to rule the English state for longer than a few months at a time.

Yet, there is a republican movement in the UK - people determined to repeat history that they didn’t learn about. The Restoration didn’t occur for no good reason, and the Monarch had a lot more power than any Monarch has these days.

Even with the idiot , Charles, there is no excuse for a republic, particularly in Australia, where we are only very  occasionally called upon to cough up for a royal visit.

Is Mise,

Thank You. You are so good to point out our serious
problems - the lack of our national defence capability,
our electricity generating problem, our housing problem,
the homeless problem, the condition of our roads, water
rights, etc, etc.

I am truly impressed by the fact that despite all these
problems in the 21st century you still have time to focus
on the sharp increase in the number of "WORD CRIMES."

These crimes are committed by criminals who ruthlessly
murder the English language by making stupid grammatical
errors on a daily basis.

In such a situation of hopelessness, brave warriors such
as yourself who go by the name of "Grammar Nazis" have come to
our rescue. Usually the catch-Grammar Nazis annoy the living
crap out of everyone. But in your case on this forum. We are
all extremely grateful for you to see us through these
dark times.

Is Mise,

There's more at the following:

http://storypick.com/shut0up-grammar-nazis/

Enjoy!

OOOOOOps - another typo. Sorry.

Here it is again:

http://storypick.com/shut-up-grammar-nazis/

Foxy,

You were blathering and it had nothing to do with grammar, merely statements that are untrue.
I don’t criticize your use of ‘infinite’ on a grammatical basis but on the basis of historical fact.
Likewise your opening sentence, anyone with half a brain can see that it is factually wrong.

You haven’t yet said if you support helping your fellow Australians to enjoy a better life before spending money on pushing republicanism.

Is Mise,

I was blathering?

You are quibbling!

So we're even.

I thought that my meaning and ideas and thoughts were
quite clear in my post. Had I written:

"The Queen has reigned during MY entire life and the
office she holds is MUCH older."

You still would have
found fault. That's what you do and most of the time
that is why I find that you're not worth the argument.

I've told you in the past - it's like playing chess
with a pigeon who craps all over the board, knocks
over the pieces, then flies off claiming victory.

You jolly well know, that there is a strong level of
support in Australia for the sitting monarch. The Queen
celebrated 70 years on the throne over the past week-end.

The reality is, we've ALL grown up with her. We ALL grew
up with incessant, constant images of the royal family,
the comings, goings, divorces, deaths, marriages
through all that.

As for the new government's priorities? And what I do or
do not approve of?

I made it clear in my earlier post
about the new government's priorities. A republic is not on their
first term in office. They face many
challenges. Give them time - and see what they do before
jumping the gun and criticizing them. They've only been
in for a few weeks. A republic is not on their agenda
and it may never even happen. It will be up to the Australian
voters to decide. I suspect at a later time when the Queen either
hands over the reigns or passes. It will be a natural progression.

Foxy,
Had you written your revised statement at the start then no one could quibble.
You still avoid saying weather the homeless etc., should come before spending public money on pushing republicanism, Matt the Thistle in Waiting, is already part of that expenditure and he’ll be spending on that theme during the next three years; if he isn’t going to push republicanism, what is his role?

Its a matter of Australia's development as a nation. Do we need a family of British dysfunctionals as symbolic leaders of our country. This notion that "problems" are some kind of ordered shopping list, and all focus must be on a single issue, on a one at a time basis is nonsense. I will agree that there are more pressing issues at this time than the republic, but we should not lose sight of the probability that when the dear old dear of Windsor is no more, and Charlie has become our titular head of state, Australians may hold a different view about the monarchy, republic, and who should be our head of state.

Hi Foxy, you have fallen into the echo chamber of old fartism, they are all in there, be careful.

Hi Issy, I believed you were born during the reign of George III.

.

Dear Is Mise,

.

You wrote in the introduction to this thread :

« I really do think that we should seriously consider the Republic question, after we solve the lack of National defence capability, the electricity generating problem, the housing problem, the homeless problem, the condition of our roads , water rights etc. etc. »
.

You are certainly not alone in thinking that, Is Mise. It’s the sort of thing our politicians have been thinking for the past 121 years, ever since our forefathers created the Commonwealth of Australia on 1st January 1901.

Unfortunately, the short term of office (3 years) of our political representatives induces a short-sighted view of what can be achieved.

Our old colonial constitution is still in force and has proven impossible to adapt to all the major changes and evolutions that have taken place over the past 121 years.

Of course, we need to “solve the lack of National defence capability” that you mention – not just from our increasingly hostile external environment – but also due to the vulnerability and lack of protection afforded by our hopelessly outdated and irreparable colonial constitution.

Personally, I see no reason why the federal government could not set up a task force to lay out a plan for a smooth and orderly transition to an independent republic including the draft of a new constitution to be submitted to the national electorate at a referendum.

We have a number of excellent constitutionalists in Australia who could participate in such a task force alongside some of our most eminent, highly experienced politicians.

There is no reason why this should distract our parliamentarians from all those other important tasks that you mentioned.

.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

A voice of reason.

Thank You.

It is my understanding that the issues Banjo P and others have referred to have been put firmly on the back burner for now.

Our PM has boldly stated that in the next cabinet meeting priority will be to resolve the diabolical problem that KFC is substituting cabbage for lettuce in its burgers.

Such terrible times we live in, thank god the real issues are front and centre!

I think Paul1405 and Foxy are old-fart dysfunctionals but others are free to believe what they want.

Foxy said- "I made it clear in my earlier post
about the new government's priorities. A republic is not on their
first term in office. They face many
challenges. Give them time - and see what they do before
jumping the gun and criticizing them. They've only been
in for a few weeks. A republic is not on their agenda
and it may never even happen. It will be up to the Australian
voters to decide. I suspect at a later time when the Queen either
hands over the reigns or passes. It will be a natural progression."

Answer-

It seems that Foxy may be subtly implying that a Republic may be a natural progression.

Well yes- Marx seemingly felt that Communism would be a natural progression from Liberalism too.

Evolution doesn't necessarily evolve in a positive direction but is based on the environment. Much of societies evolution seems to be a result of mass population

Talking about evolution and population?

The story of the British Empire helps to explain
the roots of most British people, white, black,
and Asian.

The empire made them what they are
forming their national identity. A country that doesn't
understand its own history is unlikely to respect
that of others.

This republic nonsense is just one part of the stampede by some people to rid Australia of it's history.

Australia faces many challenges from without and within. But the greatest threat comes from people inside Australia, intent on pulling the fabric of our society apart.

I'm still waiting for one of these republicans to point to a single Republic who's government works so well we should emulate it.

Most countries around the world acknowledge the British system of a constitutional Monarchy is the the best yet developed anywhere. Why the hell would you throw it out to install something far less satisfactory, unless of course you hate Australia.

"Why the hell would you throw it out to install something far less satisfactory, unless of course you hate Australia".

That's right, Hasbeen. If these lefty republican activists don't hate Australia, they are certainly acting as though they do.

What are the economic benefits of a Republic?

Is Mise,

You ask what are the economic benefits of a republic?

One certainly can be given as the ongoing cost of maintaining
the royal family. For example when a member of the royal
family visits. And - any member, not just the Queen - the
Australian taxpayer picks up the tab.

For example, it cost us almost $ 400,000 for a five day tour
by Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall in 2005 and
$1.8 million for a visit by the Queen to Melbourne in 2006.

Not paying for royal tours in future will be an ongoing
benefit for Australian taxpayers for the rest of the life of
the Australian nation.

The Australian taxpayer will also be excluded from the cost of
providing needless baubles and expensive gifts for the royal
family. The Australian government has paid a fortune for
all sorts of gifts including gaudy royal coaches that the
government has also paid to ship to Buckingham Palace.

The Australian taxpayer would be saved these kinds of needless
and frivolous costs.

All this was taken from the link given below:

http://abc.net.au/news/2010-07-28/35542

There's more current information on the web.

Royal visits are a rarity and chicken feed when they do occur; certainly a lot cheaper than the massive waste by socialists governments trying to get rid of our British history and traditions. Add to the waste of campaigning to ditch the monarchy all of the costs of name changing, changes to the Constitution etc etc.

When all these non-British malcontent's parents came here, they knew what the situation was. If their offspring don't like it they can always pack up and go to the countries their parents came from and see now they like it. This country would be better place without them.

Hi Foxy,

How is it in that old fart echo chamber, unbearable yet? I warned you not to enter and engauge. CM said; "I think Paul1405 and Foxy are old-fart dysfunctionals", that came straight out of the echo chamber.

How Australian ttbn to hanker after a bunch of foreigners, who are not Australians but the heads of another country. You have the hide to claim Australians who want Australia for Australians are disloyal in some way. You and others are the disloyal ones.

Issy, you see everything in terms of dollars and cents, we may live in an economy, but more importantly we live in a society. I hate the way our politicians from all sides bang on about nothing but the economy, like as if we only exist for the economic benefits, and nothing else counts.

Most people, in fact, will not take the trouble of finding out the truth, but are much more inclined to accept the first thing they hear". (Thucydides)

Especially ABC enthusiasts.

Foxy,
You didn’t take into account the economic benefits of Royal Tours nor the economic benefits that went to the coach makers and the makers of presents.

You still haven’t told us if you think that the various ills that beset our society, such as homelessness should be solved before money is spent on the republican issue.

Dear Paul,

Most Australians don't want to be Brits. Most Aussies
(or Brits for that matter) don't do that hyphenated
nationality thing that Americans are so keen on -
"Italian Americans" or "Irish Americans."

There are some Aussies who see themselves as having
British ancestry but they usually don't go around
proclaiming "I'm British," in the same way as
"Irish Americans" or "Italian Americans" proclaim
much to a bemused world.

Thank You for your concern about some of the strong feelings
being directed at me by people who mistake my views as being
anti-British or even anti the monarchy.

I am neither. I am pro-Australian.

Unfortunately some people want to suppress certain
opinions because they're not comfortable with them
through attempted slurs, labelling, or trying to shame.
This is degrading to a discussion forum and lowers the
bar.

Through accepting our differences and debating as adults
from equal standing we can do much better and learn even
more than we already do. We can all - stand to benefit.

Of course many British aspire to be Aussies.
Why wouldn't they want to come to Australia - with
bigger houses, better wages, and better weather.

As for my going back to the country of my parents?
I've travelled all over the world - and nobody has
suggested that I do that to me - in any discussion or
heated debate - until now by a man
who professes to be a conservative?

No. He's not a conservative at all. He's a toxic, little
person - who isn't able to jump mentally or intellectually
higher than his navel. And should be ignored.

Is Mise,

The federal government has made it quite clear that
a republic is not a priority for them in their first
term. They are not given it any priority at this time.

They are concentrating on solving the problems facing
the country. They are already working on an energy policy.
The first in 9 years. I'm sure that solving the other
challenges will follow. As they should. And also as Banjo
Paterson told you on page 3 of this discussion.

Then what has Matt, the Thistle in Waiting , got to do?
If he’s not there to push for a republican form of society, then what is he there for ?
Just to waste public money by the looks of it and for the next three years.

We need a Republic like we need an emetic in the drinking water.

Foxy,
May we take it then that you don’t care about the homeless and that we should go into a republic with all the ills that beset our society at present.

Keep Up The Road Toll could be a slogan

Did you know that parts of NSW. highways have had the safety standard up graded by new wider lane markings?
They still have the interrupted centre lines going around blind corners and over crests (sometimes the two are combined) thus inviting the unwary to exciting head-on collisions.

The effectiveness of our defence forces, in all but a small tiff, is deplorable and a republic won’t make an iota of difference.

Republicanism will be well down the list of concerns over the next three years.

Over the next three years, Australia is likely to be transformed into a mixture of modern New Zealand and Argentina - nations shackled by debt and welfarism, strangled by red and green tape and stifled from expressing democratic dissent. That seems to be the goal of the new Labor government, as Anthony Albanese boasts his intention not to waste a single one of the next thousand or so days in changing Australia. He seems intent on turning Australia into something quite unrecognisable, and using ‘climate denialism’ to cancel legitimate democratic debate.

A quick glance at the sorry history of Argentina shows how easily a wealthy, self-sufficient nation with an abundance of natural wealth and agricultural and mineral resources can squander the lot through bad political choices. With seven out of ten Australians having voted for parties other than Labor, it is difficult to see how the government can truly be regarded as representing the wishes of us all. Yet thanks to our ludicrous compulsory preferential voting system, Labor is free to impose its hard-left ideological values across the land.

Climate change policies will ruin many small businesses, hurt families and the vulnerable and threaten manufacturing and enterprise in this country, as has happened in Europe and the United Kingdom.

The pathetic whining about republicanism will fade to nothing under the Green Labor lunacy of massive power price increases, blackouts, food shortages and increasing costs of living.

Hey ttbn,
The climate crap is just one part of the problem.
What's bothering me today is the serious realisation that we are being used to start a war with China, not only are we paying for it in loss of exports and increased trade tariffs, but we'll pay a whole lot more if the US does actually start a war with them.
We've already lost billions.

Chinese official have discussed that if they are sanctioned further they may move to take Taiwan.
http://www.theregister.com/2022/06/07/china_must_seize_tsmc/

These new submarines whether we buy (will be too late by then) or lease them aren't going to protect us.
We just being used to spy on China by the US and help them do provocative stuff that makes our domestic situation worse, when they're our largest trading partner.
- And US air defense isn't as good as Russia's which will likely be shared with China if push comes to shove.
So we'll have inferior systems.

None of this is really in our best interests, unless you think China plans to invade, and if so what can we do anyway?

The US can't manage a war with China from the other side of the Pacific, so where are they going to manage it from?
- Probably here, Japan, South Korea and anywhere else they've installed puppet rulers or military bases.

We're jumping into a fire.
Like Japan did when they bombed Pearl Harbor.

This is what it's all about:
Biden says China won't surpass U.S. as global leader on his watch
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-china-idUSKBN2BH2ZE

I can't find the article I had yesterday, but the reason Albanese went to Indonesia was because of security and trade.
http://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2197091-australia-urged-to-diversify-exports-away-from-china

.

Dear Hasbeen,

.

You wrote :

« I'm still waiting for one of these republicans to point to a single Republic whose government works so well we should emulate it.

Most countries around the world acknowledge the British system of a constitutional Monarchy is the best yet developed anywhere. Why the hell would you throw it out to install something far less satisfactory, unless of course, you hate Australia »
.

What I value most in life, Hasbeen, is personal freedom, independence, honesty, courage, loyalty, and justice. I do my best to live up to those values even though they are sometimes mutually antagonistic.

It is these values that guide me, not any political, social, or religious ideology or dogma. I try to keep my options open, check the facts, and judge things on their perceived merits (or lack thereof).

I prefer the democratic to the hereditary – particularly since the latter is largely (though not totally) symbolic in the current Australian polity – and while Queen Elizabeth II merits our deep respect and gratitude for the manner in which she has carried out her official duties, given her age and declining health, I think it is time for her to retire and help facilitate our transition to a republic. The image of the “ fairy-tale golden carriage” and the idyllic scenes of the members of the Royal Family united on the Royal Palace balcony have served their purpose.

The time has come to turn that "Dreamtime" page of history and look to the future.

According to the Democracy Index of the Economist Intelligence Unit in the UK, Hasbeen, of the top ten democracies in the world, 3 are absolute monarchies, 2 are constitutional monarchies and 5 are republics. The UK is rated as the 18th best democracy in the world – not the best as you indicate.

As of November 2021, 34 of the 54 member states (63%) of the British Commonwealth have now become republics.

And, at the latest count, of the 193 member states of the UN, 159 (82%) declare themselves to be republics.

.

A report released in April by the Institute of Public Affairs, “The economic and employment consequences of net zero emission by 2050 in Australia”, identified:

.At a minimum, all coal, gas and oil projects in the construction pipeline must be cancelled to achieve net zero by 2050.

.Net zero will cost the Australian economy at least $274 billion in forgone direct and indirect economic output, which is the equivalent to 13.5% of Australia’s annual GDP.

.Net zero will prevent the creation of over 478,000 jobs across Australia.

That's as well as the daily increase in cost of living, fuel prices, power prices, food shortages, empty shelves in supermarkets, rising power prices, power shortages, the increasing threat from the Chinese Communist Party, our lack of a defence capability.

But, hey! Let's bang on about a totally unnecessary republic, and all that stuff might just go away.

Much of the antipathy in Labor against the Crown is said to be driven by a primal need for revenge over the dismissal of Gough Whitlam. Living in the past; not very "progressive". If they still remember what happened to Gough at the hands of the GG, they should also remember what happened to Gough at the hands of voters afterwards. Driven as they are, they have outsourced their policy to the Australian Republican Movement, which keeps messing it up. Those ghouls are now hanging their hats on the passing of the Queen. We shall see; but the ARP head man might need replacing: he really doesn't have a convincing personality or manner, even without that silly bandanna.

Lets set the record straight and deal with the
facts.

We have a newly elected government. They've only
been in government for a couple of weeks. The newly
elected Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has appointed
the country's first ever "minister for the republic"
but that does not mean that constitutional change on
the republican front is anywhere near the top of
Mr Albanese's agenda.

This new ministerial position - as assistant minister -
is a comparatively minor one and its role will be
limited at least for the near term, mostly to testing
the waters for what sort of enthusiasm there would be for
a change.

The Labor Party has made it clear it will not seek
a constitutional revision to make Australia a republic
during its first term. Which means that any change is
unlikely before 2025 at the earliest (if then).

Mr Albanese has also made clear - his government has
lots of other challenges to deal with - which is what
he and his government intends to do as promised in their
election campaign.

Foxy,
Then why appoint Matt the Thistle in Waiting if there is no agenda for a republic, seems pointless.

I really think that a republic for Australia is unnecessary and unwarranted we have a system of Government that has worked well and continues to do so and I say that as a citizen of a Republic of which I am proud to be a member, I have held executive positions in one of it’s avowedly Republican parties and I have served in its army and when I’m “in country” I vote and I vote republican.

As I said earlier I’m an Irish Republican Monarchist because the system that we have has ensured, in part, for the remarkably steadiness of Australian society.

Change it for the unknown and you risk losing that stability.

Is Mise,

The newly appointed Assistant Minister for the Republic
is as explained earlier there to test the waters so to
speak for the future so that the government will know
what the wishes of the public are in the event of the
Queen handing over the reins or passing. It's called
being prepared.

You are entitled to your opinion.

There are however - Australians who would not agree with you.

And, of course - we can make a cordial effort to understand
each other's beliefs without necessarily sharing or
accepting them. It's called tolerance.

Foxy,
Believing the Government is not tolerance it’s being naive.

. .

.

Is Mise,

I was not referring to the government regarding
tolerance but to - "making a cordial effort to
understand each other's beliefs without necessarily
sharing or accepting them."

.

I see that Matt Thistlethwaite, Federal MP for Kingsford Smith NSW, cumulates three portfolios in the new Albanese federal government :
.

Reporting to the Defence Minister :

1. Assistant Minister for Defence

2. Assistant Minister for Veterans’ Affairs
.

Reporting to the Attorney-General :

3. Assistant Minister for the Republic
.

That’s quite a mixed bag – obviously minor portfolios. It makes me wonder just how minor is minor – sinecures, perhaps ?

Assistant Ministers are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952 :

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Chamber_documents/Senate_chamber_documents/standingorders/d00/Procedural_orders_of_continuing_effect/d08

.

Whitlam/Coombes
ttbn,
Spot-on !

Hi BP,

Matt Thistlethwaite seems a decent bloke, having met him several times when I was living in his electorate of Kingsford Smith. He big in the life savers org.

Indyvidual

We are regressing to the Whitlam days. We go one step forward with a Coalition government, then two steps back with a Labor one. Albo chunters about being like Hawke, but he is more like Whitlam and Rudd. Like Rudd in that he has opened the gates for illegals again with those horrible lawless Sri Lankans, who were knocked back for asylum status 7 times! Yet, here they are, back in a hick town, feted by the local morons, who have collected a quarter of a million dollars for them. The loony left is determined to ruin Australia; republicanism is just part of their plan.

Outdated, undemocratic, a bizarre anachronism -
all these things have been said of the monarchy,
but to many the monarchy remains popular in part
because it has been around for so long that few
can quite imagine what the alternative would
be.

However talking about the republic and debating
the pros and cons does not equate to hatred of the
Queen or the monarchy, or England or be anti-Australian.
If there is to be a change to a republic in Australia
that maintains the Westminster System of responsible
government this will take time, considered thought,
and debate. So it is important to get it right.

Trying to suppress certain opinions because we're
not comfortable with them lowers the bar in a discussion
forum. However through accepting differences and
debating from an equal standing we can do much better
and learn even more than we already do.

The recent election results have illustrated that people
are sick of the same old well worn and tired attempts at
divisiveness - new approaches are needed. And the newly
elected government is attempting to do just that through
consultation, negotiation, and listening.

They should be given a chance to show us what they can do.

.

Dear Paul1405,

.

Many thanks for sharing your personal appreciation of Matt Thistlethwaite. Sounds like he was a keen surfer or swimmer – probably both. That’s a good healthy occupation.

The Sydney Morning Herald published a couple of articles by their national affairs editor, James Massola in November 2021, which you may have seen, on the political factions (right and left) in the ALP and the Liberal Party.
.

Massola describes the two ALP factions as follows :

« Traditionally, the Left has been more progressive, focused on social issues and more supportive of intervening in the private sector, whereas the Right has been more economically dry, more supportive of the US alliance and in some cases, more socially conservative »
.

Massola asks :

« Who are the powerbrokers in the Right ? » … and replies :
.

« While factional conveners play an important organisational role, the convener is not always the powerbroker (or faceless “man”) with the most influence.

While Thistlethwaite is the national convener of the Right – and his state faction – frontbench MPs Chris Bowen and Tony Burke are the most influential in that state. »
.

Here is the link :

http://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/what-are-labor-s-factions-and-who-s-who-in-the-left-and-right-20210210-p5718j.html
.

For some reason, Thistlethwaite’s political career seems to be blocked in the eternal role of Parliamentary Secretary / Assistant Minister – 6 appointments in all, from 2013 to 2022.

.

Dear Banjo,

I sent a post to you on the wrong thread.

"Australia's new parliament - most diverse ever."

My apologies.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

Thanks for that.

I guess the best we can do if we’ve got any ideas, comments, and suggestions to make is to get in touch with Matt Thistlethwaite.

Apparently, that’s what he’s there for and Paul1405 says he “seems a decent bloke” – so why not ?

I’ll keep it in mind. He might be interested in the pros and cons of the French model and its future evolution.

.

Hi Banjo,

The only time I was dirty on Thistlethwaite, and didn't preference him was in 2013. I wasn't happy with his unexplained meetings with Eddie Obeid, a lot of people couldn't explain their meeting with Eddie, Thistlewaite had I think 9 such unexplained meetings. At the time I got to know Professor Michael Feneley the Liberal candidate, having had several discussion with him. Michael was a terrific bloke, a surgeon at Prince Alfred, and very progressive. I did make what was for some the outrageous suggestion that the Greens should preference Michael in front of Matt, it was not to be, if they had Michael would have won the seat, and become a future Health Minister under Turnbull, me thinks. Although Matt had redeemed himself by 2016, Michael had another crack that year but suffered a swing which I think was undeserved and it about finished his political ambitions. He went around not only in his "bus" which he paid for himself, he had a go a couple of times at Mike Daley's state seat of Maroubra without success, Daley has too much of a personal vote to be unseated.

Back in the day, like 30 odd years ago, I was a left wing member, in a very right wing branch of the ALP, I made a lot of enemies over pre-selections and branch stacking, etc, etc, which seen me walk away from Labor, never to return. P/s when I moved to Qld I applied for ALP membership, they knocked me back, they must have long memories or something, my wife is a Labor Party member, only because she's pally with the state member around here.

.

Dear Paul,

.

Thanks for that insight to your political background, Paul. I appreciate it. Sounds like Rafferty’s rules and no holds barred. I’m glad politics never tempted me – apart from voting, of course.

My professional experience as international director of France’s (and continental Europe’s) largest insurance broking group was enough politics for me. I still bear the scars of all the knives that were plunged into my back – not from outside competitors, but from warm and friendly colleagues within my own group, over the years.

That’s life, I guess.

I’ll see if I can connect up with Matt Thistlethwaite and engage with him on matters that could be of mutual interest regarding his ministerial republican mission.

Thanks, once again, for your input.

.

We are regressing to the Whitlam days.
ttbn,
It's a worry alright to witness such a frightful pace of snow-balling stupidity !
I'd always thought the more information humans have to learn from the better they become, alas !
Are the educated so conniving that they deliberately dumbing-down our young or are they so (as is my suspicion) unintelligent that they're incapable of comprehending sense ?

Hi Banjo,

I could tell you a lot more, about dirty tricks within, but there are people still around who wouldn't like such things made public, including a couple of MP's.

BTW; Not all Independents are independent, ha, just an observation.

My son who also has the name Paul, recently tried to join the NSW Labor Party, twice he's been knocked back without explanation. He's never been politically active, although he is a union member, but not particularly active in his union. I did say on the Forum I was not displeased with the defeat of Kristina Keneally, I'd call it poetic justice in some respects.

.

In their book The Role of Monarchy in Modern Democracy (Hart 2020) Professor Robert Hazell and Bob Morris write :

« No new political theory on this topic has been developed since Bagehot wrote about the monarchy in The English Constitution (1867) »
.

The comments on this thread about Prince Charles remind me of the following passage in The English Constitution, pp 98-99 :

« I am afraid, looking to the early acquired feebleness of hereditary dynasties, that we must expect him to be a man of inferior ability. Theory and experience both teach that the education of a prince can be but a poor education and that a royal family will generally have less ability than other families. What right have we then to expect the perpetual entail on any family of an exquisite discretion, which if it be not a sort of genius, is at least as rare as genius ?

Probably in most cases the greatest wisdom of a constitutional king would show itself in well-considered inaction »
.

Here is the link :

http://play.google.com/books/reader?id=3g0QAAAAYAAJ&pg=GBS.PP8&hl=fr

.