The Queen and Australia: Residences, Governor General, etc...

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by Suonymona

Theoretically, could any of the Commonwealth's take a vote of "no faith" in King Charles and only recognize King William (presuming HM the Queen Elizabeth II was dead)?

I'm trying to flesh out the politics of all the various places the Queen rules and see what could really become a mess. Not quite the thread I should be questioning in, but then this is close to "British/UK/et al Politics".

It's not a personality contest. If Australians vote no, to having a constitutional monarchy, then that's it, there's no, we don't like him so we'll have the next one down.
Republican Australians want a Head of State that isn't also the Head of State of another country and doesn't live in Australia. They believe that as a mature nation Australia should have a Head of State that lives in Australia and is Australian.
The 1999 referendum where the republican model was rejected wasn't a vote for QEII but rather rejecting the republican model that was on offer. That was that the President of the future republic would be appointed by the government rather than voted for by the people.
The media likes to make it a simplistic popularity contest I'd like to think that Australians are more intelligent than to reduce the choice of their style of government a version of 'Idol"!

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Charlotte1

I'd like to think that Australians are more intelligent than to reduce the choice of their style of government a version of 'Idol"!

I'd like to think so, too, but I don't.

[Prince Daniel Vincent]

Dear Sir,
"Fernberg" is the official residence of Quentin Bryce, GG of Queensland. She regularly has appointments here. It is in the suburb of Bardon.
Daniel V Healy.

Originally Posted by happy_27

Queen Elizabeth is also Queen of Australia, our Head of State.
As she spends most of her time in the UK, her representative here is His Excellency The Governor General. He represents Australia as a whole in the absence of Queen Elizabeth. But each of our 5 States (Vctoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania) also have a Vice Regal representative known as the Governor - who each represent the Queen in their own State. They each have a "Vice Regal Residence" which is also where the Queen stays when she is in the country. The pictures above show the Vice Regal Residence of Victoria, which is said to be the most palace like home is Australia.
And is by far the most beautiful of all the 6 residences in Australia.
Other countries in the Commonwealth have similar homes.

The pic below is an aerial view of Government House, Melbourne
Shane

[Skydragon]

William wants to be next governor-general

PRINCE William harbours a secret desire to abandon London's nightclubs and his favoured pound stg. 100 ($238) Treasure Chest cocktail for a stint in Canberra as Australia's next governor-general, according to a new biography.

William wants to be next governor-general | The Nation | The Australian

[chrissy57]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

William wants to be next governor-general

He may have indicated that he would like the job but I suspect that the majority of Australians (this one included) would be totally opposed to it.

The only thing really holding the republicans at bay in many debates is the fact that their arguement that an Australian can't be our Head of State is refuted by stating that in effect an Australian can be because our Governor-General and state Governors are all Australians. To put a Brit in that situation would push many people over the edge towards republicanism.

[LOSSEAN]

Your statement is contradictory i.e. "The only thing....republicans at bay..". I would imagine that the republicans would argue that an Australian should be your Head of State.

[chrissy57]

Originally Posted by LOSSEAN

Your statement is contradictory i.e. "The only thing....republicans at bay..". I would imagine that the republicans would argue that an Australian should be your Head of State.

I think you misunderstood what I said.

The only thing really holding the republicans at bay in many debates is the fact that their arguement that an Australian can't be our Head of State is refuted by stating that in effect an Australian can be because our Governor-General and state Governors are all Australians.

In many debates about becoming a republic the republicans argue that an Australian can't be our Head of State, because we are a monarchy, whereas the reply from anti-republicans uses the fact that the Governor-General is an Australian and therefore that our effective day-to-day Head of State is an Australian. This argument is the one that I referred to in my post.

[Madame Royale]

William (or any royal) as the next GG? Hmm, I think that boat sailed long ago now.

But, this is also an election year, and Kevin Rudd (Labor opposition leader) is a Republican as is Peter Costello (Liberal Treasurer and 'heir' to John Howard), so either way 'the' topic looms.

Interesting article to wake up to though.

[CasiraghiTrio]

It seems like some corners of the media (not sure which ones, honestly) have been hinting at PW being a GG for some years now. Maybe the Republican press put it out there to egg on their perception of him as alcoholic, lazy, whatever, or maybe the royalist press put it out there for whatever reason, pro-Commonwealth sentiment? The royalists might argue it would be a good move, showing the royals to be "reaching out" or something to Australia.
It can't be good, though, for someone in direct line to the throne to have a GG job. Maybe Harry or one of the Queen's other grandchildren, fine, but PW heir presumptive to be GG? The royals love precedent, are guided by it, and there is no precedent for that, not a direct heir.

[chrissy57]

According to our Prime Minister William would be 'unsuitable' as GG because he isn't an Australian citizen (a sentiment with which I fully agree).

Prince William not suitable as G-G: PM

The leader of the opposition, Mr Rudd, also opposes William as GG.

Party time if Wills becomes G-G, says Rudd | The Daily Telegraph


With these attitudes there are two chances of William becoming GG - Buckley's and none (and as we all know Buckley had no chance).

PS this is an old saying which essentially means that there is absolutely no chance at all ever of this ever happening.


In addition to these reports I have accessed a couple of online polls (SkyNews Australia Sky News Australia - [Poll Results] and the Sydney Morning Herald The Sydney Morning Herald: national, world, business, entertainment, sport and technology news from Australia's leading newspaper. sites which at 1.48p.m. on Friday afternoon Australian time are reporting approximately 60% opposition from those voting in these polls - down from much higher in both cases earlier in the day I might add). On neither of these sites can a person vote more than once from the same access point but of course there are ways around this I am sure so these aren't that scientific a poll but I thought I would report them anyway.


This last link is to the Daily Telegraph from Sydney and includes comments from a range of Aussies. It is clear from these comments that some people would support the idea and others wouldn't (as well as the fact that many Aussies need some educating about our system of government and the role of the monarch within it but... that's another story altogether!).

Reader's Comments: PM okay on porn, not Wills - The Daily Telegraph

[Skydragon]

Let's not forget where this rumour originated - Tina Brown. How on earth would she or anyone know it is Williams secret desire. This woman makes up facts as she goes along!

[Roslyn]

This G-G stuff is certainly a surprise to me. I read the Herald today and didn't see anything about it.

What is it with these Windsor boys? They seem to think that being G-G of Australia is some sort of work experience opportunity for them while they wait for a real job.

As a monarchist I am of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" school who likes the ongoing link to our English past and resents the republicans' pressure to change. However I certainly do not believe that the RF is in any way intrinsically better than the rest of us, and I am more than a little miffed - if the story is true - that young William might believe that he has some sort of entitlement to claim the office of G-G, which it seems his father may also have believed when he was young, and may do better in the role than one of our own. If he feels that way I find that it more than a little patronising, and am also irritated that the story will provide fodder for the republicans.

[Polly]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio

It seems like some corners of the media (not sure which ones, honestly) have been hinting at PW being a GG for some years now. Maybe the Republican press put it out there to egg on their perception of him as alcoholic, lazy, whatever, or maybe the royalist press put it out there for whatever reason, pro-Commonwealth sentiment? The royalists might argue it would be a good move, showing the royals to be "reaching out" or something to Australia.
It can't be good, though, for someone in direct line to the throne to have a GG job. Maybe Harry or one of the Queen's other grandchildren, fine, but PW heir presumptive to be GG? The royals love precedent, are guided by it, and there is no precedent for that, not a direct heir.

Two things: first, none of the press, Republican or otherwise, has ever painted William as alcoholic or lazy. Anything published about him is always lifted from the British press, directly.

Second, it's quite true that Prince Charles, the Heir, did indeed want to become Governor General of Australia and was politely rejected by the Labor government of the day.

Personally, I would be opposed to William, or any other royal, being appointed as Governor General. Even our current PM, an avowed monarchist, has not welcomed the idea. However, it's not clear that William has ever contemplated such an appointment but the author did get it right about Charles.

[Princess Robijn]

Is it in the law that the Governor General of Australia has to be Australian??

[love_cc]

I don't think there is a sentence like this in the constitution. But after dismissing Australian PM Gough Whitlam by the former government general sir John Kerr in 1975 under a constitution crisis, Australian public and the government were quite outraged and determined to then appoint Australians as government general not a British person. The dismiss of Prime Minister caused a Governor-General, using reserve powers

[CasiraghiTrio]

Then was Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester the last British HRH to be a Governor General of anywhere? I can't remember .... no, it was HRH The Duke of Windsor who was the last, wasn't he GG of Bahamas or something?

[WindsorIII]

Originally Posted by Princess Robijn

Is it in the law that the Governor General of Australia has to be Australian??

I don't think its the law that they have to be Austrailian but more of a tradition the current Prime Minister would like to go back too. I think the tradition was altered for the Queen and for Charles, and that he would like to see it go back to the way it always was before them. This is the take I got on it from what I have read.

Here is a quote from PM John Howard:

"Although I remain a supporter of our current constitutional arrangements, I do think the practice of having a person who is an Australian in every way, and a long-term and permanent resident of this country, is a practice I would not like to see altered," Howard told commercial radio.

Australia rejects role for Prince William

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by WindsorIII

Australia rejects role for Prince William

'In the book, Brown said that Charles "really wanted the job because he saw it as a way to get the hell out of the grip of Prince Philip and the Queen."'

That makes no sense. The GG is appointed by the sovereign, right?
So how then does Brown back up this thesis of hers, the suggestion that Prince Charles can't wait to be free of the 'puppet strings' of HM????
She tries to say Prince Charles wanted the GG job, to be appointed by HM as GG so he could be "free" of her?

[chrissy57]

Originally Posted by love_cc

I don't think there is a sentence like this in the constitution. But after dismissing Australian PM Gough Whitlam by the former government general sir John Kerr in 1975 under a constitution crisis, Australian public and the government were quite outraged and determined to then appoint Australians as government general not a British person. The dismiss of Prime Minister caused a Governor-General, using reserve powers

There is no law or requirement for the GG to be an Australian but every GG since 1969 have been. The last non-Australian to hold the post was Lord Casey.

The Governor-General is chosen by the government of the day and recommended to the Queen, who acting on the advice of her Australian government appoints the government's choice.

Sir John Kerr was chosen by Gough Whitlam, whom he later dismissed from office, using the reserve powers of the Australian Constitution. These powers still exist and thus the GG can still dismiss the elected government.

These powers are more widespread than those of the Queen in the British system mainly because we have never had a referendum to change them. No change to the Australian Constitution can take place without a referendum and only about 8 changes have ever occurred and always with the support of both sides of politics. Ever getting a majority of support isn't enough to change the consitution as there also has to be a majority of states voting in support as well.

[wbenson]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio

'In the book, Brown said that Charles "really wanted the job because he saw it as a way to get the hell out of the grip of Prince Philip and the Queen."'

That makes no sense. The GG is appointed by the sovereign, right?
So how then does Brown back up this thesis of hers, the suggestion that Prince Charles can't wait to be free of the 'puppet strings' of HM????
She tries to say Prince Charles wanted the GG job, to be appointed by HM as GG so he could be "free" of her?

The Queen doesn't choose the GG, though, and rarely sees the GG once they're in place. The only times the GG and Queen meet are before taking office and whenever one visits where the other is at.