The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 04-30-2011, 11:08 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lemuria, Kiribati
Posts: 9
The documentary is now up on ABC iview: ABC iview

As is the Q&A debate that followed: ABC iview
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 05-01-2011, 03:19 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
I don't think that The Chaser was intending to bully Catherine; rather, it was supposed to be a satirical look at the whole paraphernalia surrounding the big event. From the one excerpt which I've seen on the Q & A program, Prince Phillip was one of the targets, quoting some of the less felicitous comments he's made over the years.

I don't much like The Chaser, but I don't find anything alarming in satire of any sort: it's a time-honoured feature of literary and artistic expression, and England is the world-standard bearer in this sort of program, after all.

My view is that it's self-defeating to ban anything, even shows like The Chaser. Most of us, if we bothered to watch it, would have yawned and it would have died a natural death. As for Clarence House's decision to intervene, I think it ill-judged. Any institution or people who can't laugh at themselves is in trouble.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 05-02-2011, 02:54 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,377

Maybe Clarence House was aware of the national uproar that followed The Chaser's "satire" involving "kids with cancer" and was equally unimpressed.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:36 PM
JimmyA's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Midland, United States
Posts: 9
I do not wish to see any more of Her Majesty's Dominons abolish the Crown. Though the Imperial Parliament/British Parliament cannot directly interfere with the internal happenings of the Dominons for the most part, I consider the British Empire to be alive and strong. The Statue of Westminster in 1931 and the Imperial Conference of 1926 before that provided that the Dominons mentioned would be seen as 'Independent Countries WITH IN THE EYES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW' but as all sixteen realms still hold Her Majesty as Queen that still constitutes the continued existance of the British Empire. However none of the Dominons are suboridinate to the United Kingdom but equal parters and BROTHERS in the international community, the Empire is a BROTHERHOOD of countries. I believe in being proud of that. I fully respect individual identity of the Commonwealth of Australia, so please no one take any offense, I only mean to say we're in this together. In my heart I just want to say please don't leave us. And that being said, I would never consider the Queen a foreign Head of State. If you have a Canadian, an Austrialian, a Brit, a Jamacian, and a Chilean in a room there is only ONE foreigner present. I'm speaking from a poetic stand point of course. I love Australian culture and history, and believe that it is a very important part of a whole. Being loyal to and or toasting the Queen is not an insult to Australian identity. But forgeting your roots and history is an insult to ANY culture whether they are Republic or Her Majesty's Dominon. But Australia is a Dominon, and I beg that they will not forget their common root and history with the other fifteen dominions as well as with the United Kingdom. I love all the realms with all my heart and pray for their preservation regularly. I hope any Australian who reads this understands I say this with good intentions, and I hope it is taken that way. I respect everyone and their opinons in the matter.
__________________
It may be that our future will lay upon us more than one stern test. Our past will have taught us how to meet it unshaken - His Majesty The King George V
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 05-02-2011, 04:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
We are not a part of a British Empire at all. We are a part of the Commonwealth of Nations by prerogative.

Furthermore, Australia is not a dominion. It is a realm.

Australia is a sovereign state. A crown entirely seperate to that of the UK and no degree of 'poetic licence' will change that fact
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:30 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,450
The British Empire ended decades ago - thank goodness.

Australians are increasingly of non-European, let alone non-British backgrounds with no links to Britain. And many of those with 'British' backgrounds are actually Irish which isn't all that supportive either.

The Queen is a foreigner. She speaks with a foreign accent. She lives in a foreign country. She and her family promote a foreign countries interests over those of Australia. This is why Australians want an Australian as Head of State - in time.

We decided by a fairly small margin, in 1999, to keep the Queen mainly because the alternative offered was to have Parliament chose the Head of State. The vote was 55% against and 45% for. Had the option been for an elected Head of State we would probably already be a republic.

I notice that you are from the US - a republic - but you don't want other countries to have that same opportunity.

Personallyn I voted NO in 1999 but would vote YES now - as I simply would like to have a Head of State who is one of us. I would like to the next time the US President toasts the Australian Head of State that the toast isn't to the Queen of a foreign nation - or in fact the Queen of a series of foreign nations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:32 PM
JimmyA's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Midland, United States
Posts: 9
I most certainly understand. I know that Australia is part of the Commonwealth of Nations, I simply said that I think of it as the Empire, but WITHOUT it's members being subordinate to the United Kingdom, but completely EQUAL with it. I also use the term Her Majesty's Dominion interchangeably with Commonwealth Realm as do some others, I also have known people from both Australia and Canada who use the term respectively. I completely recognize the independence of the Commonwealth of Australia and apologise if my terminology may have been taken wrongly.

I am familiar with the situation concerning Republicanism in Australia, I keep tabs on the going ons of all the Realms. I know the Republican position, but I also happen to know there are those loyal to the Queen in Australia. Also I am American, but have had a devout interest in British and Dominion affairs since I was a child, I also have relatives in the United Kingdom, and intend to move there for good. I am a devout monarchist, and very loyal to Her Majesty. The UK is a constitutional monarchy and a democracy as well are all other Commonwealth Realms. Just because I live in America does not mean I am into republicanism. I do not align with US Party's because they are not applicable to me, but I do align with UK Parties and take a stance on Parties in the individual realms.
__________________
It may be that our future will lay upon us more than one stern test. Our past will have taught us how to meet it unshaken - His Majesty The King George V
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 05-02-2011, 06:29 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren View Post

Maybe Clarence House was aware of the national uproar that followed The Chaser's "satire" involving "kids with cancer" and was equally unimpressed.
True enough. That memory wasn't lost to me, either.

I was, however, reflecting more on what I believe is the folly of censoring any political satire. As I mentioned, the best in the world at this are the very clever Brits.

I've now viewed most of the intended program and with one exception I didn't think any of it up to much at all. Another, the spoof of Candle in the Wind was o.k., until it became, in my opinion, scurrilous.

Nonetheless, I would have let it go to air - the BRF has had to sustain much worse and much more clever lampooning over the years from locals and have remained quite intact and unscathed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 05-02-2011, 07:28 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,629
I do not watch "The Chaser", but I am cheesed off that I was denied the opportunity to watch that episode if I had wished to do so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 05-02-2011, 08:34 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyA View Post
I am familiar with the situation concerning Republicanism in Australia, I keep tabs on the going ons of all the Realms. I know the Republican position, but I also happen to know there are those loyal to the Queen in Australia. Also I am American, but have had a devout interest in British and Dominion affairs since I was a child, I also have relatives in the United Kingdom, and intend to move there for good. I am a devout monarchist, and very loyal to Her Majesty. The UK is a constitutional monarchy and a democracy as well are all other Commonwealth Realms. Just because I live in America does not mean I am into republicanism. I do not align with US Party's because they are not applicable to me, but I do align with UK Parties and take a stance on Parties in the individual realms.
I think jimmyA for you to comment that you know the Republican position in Australia is a little conceited. I don't theink anyone can know that position unless they are Australian. Similarly I don't understand the nationalism that is on display in America at the moment.

I obviously am interested in the British royals, but I voted for a republic in 1999 and would vote for it again. I have no problem being a member nation of the Commonwealth, but I do not want to have ties to the next generation of the Royal family, and I certainly don't want to have to pay for their lavish and in some cases outrageous lives. I don't beliee that anyone has the right to be called Your Highness and in particular the generation of British royals at the moment don't show me any reason why they have such an exalted title. Australia is a mature country, ties that were relevant and needed by both countries in past times are not now relevant.

Your own countrymen overthrew the English rulers in dramatic fashion, Australia I don't think wants to resort to that, but it is time to let the apron strings go.

Please don't presume to understand what other people feeel about their countries, it is offensive to other nationalities.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 05-02-2011, 10:09 PM
JimmyA's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Midland, United States
Posts: 9
Then I apologise to you, I only meant that I have researched it with serious interest, I meant no disrespect to anyone. I will watch the way I saw things a little better in the future.
__________________
It may be that our future will lay upon us more than one stern test. Our past will have taught us how to meet it unshaken - His Majesty The King George V
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 05-03-2011, 03:06 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyA View Post
I most certainly understand. I know that Australia is part of the Commonwealth of Nations, I simply said that I think of it as the Empire, but WITHOUT it's members being subordinate to the United Kingdom, but completely EQUAL with it. I also use the term Her Majesty's Dominion interchangeably with Commonwealth Realm as do some others, I also have known people from both Australia and Canada who use the term respectively. I completely recognize the independence of the Commonwealth of Australia and apologise if my terminology may have been taken wrongly.

Not a problem, Jimmy

Though to use the term 'dominion' does suggest that the particular place you speak of is a subordiante protectorate to a governing body. A dependency of a sovereign state, thus they would not be of equal standing.

It's not that I mistook the terminology, it just simply isn't correct.

Thanks for your response though.

Quote:
and I certainly don't want to have to pay for their lavish and in some cases outrageous lives
We, Australian's, don't pay for their lifestyles though?

The only taxpayer money used for royals is during official visits to Australia, being those visits have come at the request of the Australian and state governments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I would like to the next time the US President toasts the Australian Head of State that the toast isn't to the Queen of a foreign nation - or in fact the Queen of a series of foreign nations.
They don't toast the Queen of a foreign nation, they toast the Queen of Australia.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 05-03-2011, 03:53 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 5,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
We decided by a fairly small margin, in 1999, to keep the Queen mainly because the alternative offered was to have Parliament chose the Head of State. The vote was 55% against and 45% for. Had the option been for an elected Head of State we would probably already be a republic.
That's interesting.

May I ask what kind of constitutional power an Australian president should have? - That is, in order for the voters to vote in favour of Australia becoming a republic.
To put it very simple. Do you prefer:

A) To elect a head of state without political power, but whose job will only be to represent your country? I.e. among the candidates (and not least their spouses) you believe will be most suited to represent you. More a diplomatic post and "the face of Australia".

B) To elect a head of state with some constitutional power? I.e. signing bills in order for them to become valid as laws, to formally appoint a new government, new ministers and so on. No de facto political power but nevertheless some ceremonial power. A mix between the chairman of the Parliament and the Governor General.

C) To elect a head of state, who is also the head of the government? I.e. very much with political power. Akin to the US president.

or D)?
__________________
I love work, it absolutely fascinates me. I can sit for hours looking at people working.
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 05-03-2011, 04:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
B) To elect a head of state with some constitutional power? I.e. signing bills in order for them to become valid as laws, to formally appoint a new government, new ministers and so on. No de facto political power but nevertheless some ceremonial power. A mix between the chairman of the Parliament and the Governor General.
This would be my personal choice, Muhler.

I would not support a system by where an elected President has loyalties to any particular party.

Under no circumstances would I wish to adopt the American system of government in any way, shape or form.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 05-03-2011, 05:16 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale View Post
They don't toast the Queen of a foreign nation, they toast the Queen of Australia.

Who is also the Queen of New Zealand, Queen of Canada etc.

That is my point - she isn't just the Queen of Australia.

When these toasts are being done the Queen is rarely there as she is in a foreign nation - one where Australians travelling on an Australian passport have to pass through a barrier labelled 'aliens'.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 05-03-2011, 05:18 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
That's interesting.

May I ask what kind of constitutional power an Australian president should have? - That is, in order for the voters to vote in favour of Australia becoming a republic.
To put it very simple. Do you prefer:

A) To elect a head of state without political power, but whose job will only be to represent your country? I.e. among the candidates (and not least their spouses) you believe will be most suited to represent you. More a diplomatic post and "the face of Australia".

B) To elect a head of state with some constitutional power? I.e. signing bills in order for them to become valid as laws, to formally appoint a new government, new ministers and so on. No de facto political power but nevertheless some ceremonial power. A mix between the chairman of the Parliament and the Governor General.

C) To elect a head of state, who is also the head of the government? I.e. very much with political power. Akin to the US president.

or D)?

B - the powers currently held by the GG without the power to dismiss the elected government (as happened in 1975 and 1932 - the 1932 dismissal was of the NSW elected government by the way).

Definitely not the sort of powers that the US President has - too much power in the hands on one person is anti-democratic in my opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 05-03-2011, 05:21 AM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
I agree with Madame Royale. Probably, it's what we would have instituted had the referendum succeeded.

The failure of the referendum was strange, considering that some extreme left-wingers whom I've met around the university all voted 'no'!!!!! Their reasons were the usual ones - they wanted to elect the President directly, rather than have him/her appointed by consensus of parliament. To me, this last would have assured that the President remained a-political, so far as possible.

Interestingly, the tv program which we saw as part of Q & A repeated Prince Phillip's comment: don't they know what's good for them? The Queen's response was 'they just couldn't agree on a model'. As usual, HM was fully aware of what's happening throughout the Commonwealth: she really is remarkable in this and much admired, everywhere, for it.

The American model of government would be unacceptable to me, as well. No doubt it suits them, admirably, and works well for them, but it's a long way from the Westminster system, which, with the legal structures we've inherited, is England's greatest gift to the Commonwealth of Nations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 05-03-2011, 05:33 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
I entirely agree, Polly. Well said.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 05-03-2011, 07:56 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 5,088
Thank you for your replies.

I would chose option B as well, should DK ever become a republic. With one difference: I would prefer the head of state to be appointed by the Parliament.
__________________
I love work, it absolutely fascinates me. I can sit for hours looking at people working.
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 05-03-2011, 05:42 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
My preference,too, Muhler.

I don't wish to start a discussion here, but I'd be interested to know if the republican movement is a serious proposition in Denmark.

My feeling is that when these constitutional issues come to a head, people tend to vote for the status quo. After all, neither the Queen of Denmark nor the Queen of Australia can do anything to impinge on our lives or freedoms, the ultimate considerations.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
australia, british commonwealth, elizabeth ii, governor general, julia gillard, monarchy versus republic, parliament, queen elizabeth ii


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Queen and Canada, Residences, Governor General, etc... Duchess Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 398 08-15-2014 03:31 PM
General discussion about royal residences auroraDaniel British Royal Residences 87 08-09-2014 08:29 PM
Swedish Residences General Discussion Josefine Swedish Royal Residences 54 06-21-2014 10:12 AM
Official Visit from Australia to The Netherlands; September 26-27, 2006 fanletizia Dutch Royals 46 10-08-2006 01:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman picture of the month pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]