Railpage

 

 
    • RTT_Rules posted
    Posted in The Lounge » Will Australia ever become a Republic?


    To put it simply, Australia had a referendum and was asked the question, and the overwhelming majority voted NO (repeat NO) to a republic. And look at the strife being a republic causes. EG: Look what the republicans tried to do to the USA.
    Newcastle Express
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_republic_referendum,_1999

    I don't think Australian's at the time voted down the concept of a Republic, they (and me) voted down the way it was proposed in that planned to fail referendum. The inclusion of the Pre-amble Question just made the process more complicated and prone to failure. John Howard was also very clever in encouraging referendum because, getting a referendum approved is very difficult in Australia (8/44 attempts) but also historically impossible if the sitting govt opposes it.

    A proposed law: To alter the Constitution to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament.

    I think the Question should have simply been

    Do you Support Australian becoming a Republic?

    Then assuming overall yes (if No it ends there), go away and come back with series of models and if I recall at the time the discussions were along the lines of

    1) President nominated like now by PM (Answer will be No)
    2) President voted as overall majority of a joint sitting of both houses of Fed govt (answer will be No)
    3) President voted as overall majority by the population (I believe most likely to be a Yes)

    And just because there was a No, doesn't mean end of the story and I think with time many believe the population will shift in view due to immigration and dying out of the older more supportive people.

    Edit history

    Edited 23 Nov 2013 22:53, 8 years ago, edited by RTT_Rules

    Of course it's obvious why she said this just before her term is up. She should be sacked for saying that we should be a republic, especially when she is representing the monarch, at the moment, a queen.

    If she believes that, then why on earth (mind if I almost yell?) did she take the job?

    But isn't it interesting, if this subject was reversed, and she said that Australia needs to remain a monarchist country, that it would NOT even make the news. And it would be ignored completely by the Australian Biased Channel.

    And the title is incorrect. It should be say "Australia's Governor General is a hypocrite as she believes we should be a republic" or "Australia's GG stabs her boss in the back with republic comments"

    To put it simply, Australia had a referendum and was asked the question, and the overwhelming majority voted NO (repeat NO) to a republic. And look at the strife being a republic causes. EG: Look what the republicans tried to do to the USA.

    Newcastle Express

    I don't think Australian's at the time voted down the concept of a Republic, they (and me) voted down the way it was proposed in that planned to fail referendum. I think the Question should have simply been

    Do you Support Australian becoming a Republic?

    Then assuming overall yes (if No it ends there), go away and come back with series of models and if I recall at the time the discussions were along the lines of

    1) President nominated like now by PM (Answer will be No)
    2) President voted as overall majority of a joint sitting of both houses of Fed govt (answer will be No)
    3) President voted as overall majority by the population (I believe most likely to be a Yes)

    And just because there was a No, doesn't mean end of the story and I think with time many believe the population will shift in view due to immigration and dying out of the older more supportive people.