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
 
  #681  
Old 09-15-2015, 10:37 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
As I see it, Australia has the best of both worlds: a de facto republic in practice, but without the trouble of an elected president clashing with the prime minister or overruling parliament as in France or in Portugal.
It's a matter of principle. The desire for an Australian head of state burns within one or it does not. Until recently I was a monarchist.

I do not favour a republic model that would allow for an elected president clashing with the prime minister. I would not vote for that sort of republic. I would only vote for a republic that provides for an appointed president or a parliamentary model with a president whose role is essentially ceremonial, along the lines of Ireland's.
__________________

__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #682  
Old 09-15-2015, 11:09 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Our appointed GG can do more than simply overrule parliament - he/she can actually dismiss the elected government (as the then GG did in 1975 and the NSW governor did in 1932).
Yes, but doesn't the president of Portugal or the president of France have the same power and actually many more ?

My point exactly is that a directly elected president, because he or she will be necessarily partisan and will have democratic legitimacy, will be far more tempted to exercise whatever reserve powers the constitution may grant him/her than a monarch or a Governor General who have no democratic legitimacy of their own.

Besides, if the problem is to cut the reserve powers of the Governor General, again you don't need to have a republic to do that. The UK Parliament for example stripped Queen Elizabeth II four years ago of her power to dissolve parliament (either on her own discretion or on the advice of the PM) and didn't have to turn the country into a republic to do that. In Sweden, on the other hand, since 1975, the king has no executive or legislative powers at all: he doesn't sign any bill, nor does he appoint or dismiss the government; the government is only constitutionally required to meet with him regularly in Councils of State to keep the king "informed" about State affairs and he only has some residual official roles like serving as chairman of the advisory council on foreign affairs or signing the credentials of Swedish ambassadors. The King of Sweden, however, is still constitutionally the Head of State and Sweden is not a republic.

I understand that any changes to the powers of the Governor General would require a constitutional amendment in Australia, but such amendment doesn't necessarily have to make Australia a republic. Likewise, as I argued before, Australia doesn't have to become a republic to have an Australian-born head of State. In fact, it appears to me that all grievances that Australian republicans claim to have could be easily addressed without having the abolish the monarchy. What is the rationale for a republic then ? Unless you genuinely believe that monarchy and the hereditary principle that comes with it are inherently wrong, I don't see any really.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #683  
Old 09-15-2015, 06:19 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
What is the rationale for a republic then ? Unless you genuinely believe that monarchy and the hereditary principle that comes with it are inherently wrong, I don't see any really.
This question has been niggling away at me since you first raised it yesterday and I want to address it.

The question itself raises further questions. Are you talking about absolute monarchy or constitutional monarchy? I do not believe that absolute monarchy is a good idea; I believe in democracy and do not believe that one family should have the right to rule merely because of who they are. Absolute monarchy is not a concept that fits well with the 21st century. There aren't many absolute monarchies left where the head of state is head of government, and those that persist are in the Middle East and Africa, and Brunei. Those societies don't have much in common with ours. The Vatican City is an absolute theocratic monarchy but its head is elected.

In western countries that have a constitutional monarchy where the monarch is little more than a figurehead, and the monarch doesn't have the power to do any real damage and interfere with the government the people have elected, it's pretty harmless and provides a desirable element of stability and continuity, and entertainment for the people, and income by way of the tourist dollar. Though I believe that a person should be head of state based on merit, not accident of birth, it is up to the people of those countries to determine what they want for their system of government and if they want hereditary monarchy to continue.

However I am definitely opposed to the idea of Australia having a hereditary monarchy, and our Head of State - our representative on the world stage - being restricted to the person who happens to be the monarch of the UK for the time being because he or she was lucky (or unlucky) enough to have been born to the right person and in the right order. In that sense I do believe that monarchy and the hereditary principle that comes with it is inherently wrong - for Australia.

Constitutional monarchy worked here in the past but since Federation Australia has changed, particularly since since the Second World War. We Australia has changed and the UK has changed and our relationship with the mother country and our monarch changed significantly. We are now a totally independent nation and I consider that the fact we still have a head of state who is a foreigner and whose only claim to entitlement to the position is the fact they are the hereditary monarch for the time being of a foreign country is anachronistic and completely inappropriate.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #684  
Old 09-15-2015, 06:30 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post

However I am definitely opposed to the idea of Australia having a hereditary monarchy, and our Head of State - our representative on the world stage - being restricted to the person who happens to be the monarch of the UK for the time being because he or she was lucky (or unlucky) enough to have been born to the right person and in the right order. In that sense I do believe that monarchy and the hereditary principle that comes with it is inherently wrong - for Australia.

Constitutional monarchy worked here in the past but since Federation Australia has changed, particularly since since the Second World War. We Australia has changed and the UK has changed and our relationship with the mother country and our monarch changed significantly. We are now a totally independent nation and I consider that the fact we still have a head of state who is a foreigner and whose only claim to entitlement to the position is the fact they are the hereditary monarch for the time being of a foreign country is anachronistic and completely inappropriate.
Would you be OK with an Australian-born hereditary monarch then ? Seriously, I'm trying to understand if your issue is that Australia has a non-Australian Head of State (which is a non-issue in practice IMHO as the GG is the de facto HoS), or if the problem you have with your constitution is that Australia is a monarchy (barely).
Reply With Quote
  #685  
Old 09-15-2015, 07:29 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Would you be OK with an Australian-born hereditary monarch then ? Seriously, I'm trying to understand if your issue is that Australia has a non-Australian Head of State (which is a non-issue in practice IMHO as the GG is the de facto HoS), or if the problem you have with your constitution is that Australia is a monarchy (barely).
And I cannot understand why you cannot comprehend that the Australian public do not wish for ANY form of hereditary monarch to be our Head of State?

It's not a case of 'if', but rather 'when' Australia becomes a republic. We do not want a monarchy. It is simple as that.
Reply With Quote
  #686  
Old 09-15-2015, 07:37 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownPrincessJava View Post
And I cannot understand why you cannot comprehend that the Australian public do not wish for ANY form of hereditary monarch to be our Head of State?

It's not a case of 'if', but rather 'when' Australia becomes a republic. We do not want a monarchy. It is simple as that.
So all these people are just pretending to be Australians?

Popular support for a republic flags to a 20-year low, new poll shows | Australia news | The Guardian

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #687  
Old 09-15-2015, 08:11 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,192
That poll was taken in February 2014.


The issue hasn't been in the mainstream of Australian politics for at least a decade or so although Mr Rudd said he would have a plebiscite on the issue in his second term - which he never really had (6 weeks isn't a second term).


The Guardian, like its British counterpart, is a largely republican paper anyway so will always show a slant that way.


When the idea was raised by Mr Keating in the early 1990s the polls weren't all that much in favour but after nearly a decade in the front of the political agenda it had a lot of support although the proposed model didn't.


I don't regard those Australians who are still monarchists as anti-Australians but I have changed camps personally and know many people who voted NO in 1999 due to the model but next time will vote YES regardless of the model.


The issue will continue to raise its head every so often, until such time as the republic is a reality. The ARM isn't going to give up until it achieves its goal.


What has now happened though is that the former head of that organization is now the PM - the first time we have had a republican for a Prime Minister from the Liberal Party. Obviously we have had republican PMs from the ALP before but not the Liberals.
Reply With Quote
  #688  
Old 09-15-2015, 09:40 PM
RoyalistRiley's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 510
Talk of a renewed push for a republic now that Malcolm Turnbull is Prime Minister is highly overrated. Any move for a republic plebiscite/referendum is complicated by promises from both the Government and Opposition to have a referendum on indigenous constitutional recognition by 2017 and by the Government's promise to have a plebiscite on same sex marriage after 2016 if re-elected. It is likely nothing re: the republic will happen until these 2 issues have been voted on. It is even more likely that nothing will happen until the Queen dies, regardless of whatever the politicians and republican movement say. Much like Sir Robert Menzies, "I love her [the Queen, and by extension all her family] till I die" and very much believe in the system of constitutional monarchy, but I am resigned to a republic happening in my lifetime.
__________________
God Save the Queen! Advance Australia Fair!
"Life is a game in which the player must appear ridiculous" - The Dowager Countess of Grantham, Downton Abbey
http://twitter.com/FutureSirRiley
Reply With Quote
  #689  
Old 09-15-2015, 10:43 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Quote:
The inside story of the knighthood has not been revealed before and this information does not come from Abbott. But Abbott gave Philip a knighthood because he learned the Queen wanted her husband to have one.
I don't believe in this nonsense.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #690  
Old 09-16-2015, 06:45 AM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian



I don't believe in this nonsense.
Well, whatever the reason, it was pathetic! What the hell was Abbott thinking?!
Reply With Quote
  #691  
Old 09-21-2015, 03:54 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
He is speaking about a possible republic from 8:25.

__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #692  
Old 09-21-2015, 09:40 AM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 891
Yes indeed, we have other pressing matters to be sure!

I imagine however that the Republican Movement will have some encouragement as there are way more republicans in this new team than the previous one. Some in fact, who have actively served in the Republican Movement!
Reply With Quote
  #693  
Old 10-01-2015, 10:30 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said his decision to award Prince Philip a knighthood was "injudicious".

The move earlier this year sparked widespread public and political backlash with many questioning whether the British royal deserved Australia's top honour.

It came after Mr Abbot revived Australia's honours system last year.
Read more: Prince Philip's Australia knighthood was 'injudicious' admits Abbott - BBC News
Reply With Quote
  #694  
Old 10-02-2015, 12:49 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,416
I guess he figure Prince Philip's appointment wasn't really worth all the unnecessary noise. I'm still shocked his knighthood caused all that crapola. I guess none of the future King's and Queen's and other senior royals won't be getting any knighthoods from down under in the future.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #695  
Old 10-02-2015, 04:22 AM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 891
Lesson learnt too late!
Reply With Quote
  #696  
Old 10-21-2015, 11:16 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,416
Video:
Australian Governor General, Peter Cosgrove met with the Queen at Buckingham Palace this morning. .

Home - ITNSource News
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #697  
Old 11-01-2015, 09:05 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 357
Knights and Dames from the Order of Australia has been reversed:

Malcolm Turnbull confirms Queen agrees to scrap Knights and Dames from Order of Australia
Reply With Quote
  #698  
Old 11-02-2015, 09:59 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,416
Such a shame a big fuss was made over Prince Philip's knighthood and now the honour system has been scraped. If I was Philip, I would give my Order to Charles to take back to Australia and let them know I didn't need it.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #699  
Old 11-02-2015, 10:22 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Such a shame a big fuss was made over Prince Philip's knighthood and now the honour system has been scraped. If I was Philip, I would give my Order to Charles to take back to Australia and let them know I didn't need it.
One thing for sure is that if Philip did that, it would add fuel to the fire of the republican movement in Australia and most likely his wife would make him sleep in the stables with her horses. Even though Abbot made a huge mistake reviving the knights and dames, I do think Australians would take offense if Philip returned his.

Just to clarify here. HM is the epitome of diplomacy and most likely would advise Philip against returning his order. Best move in this kind of situation would be to do nothing. The issue has been rectified and that's all that matters.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #700  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:47 AM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
One thing for sure is that if Philip did that, it would add fuel to the fire of the republican movement in Australia and most likely his wife would make him sleep in the stables with her horses. Even though Abbot made a huge mistake reviving the knights and dames, I do think Australians would take offense if Philip returned his.

Just to clarify here. HM is the epitome of diplomacy and most likely would advise Philip against returning his order. Best move in this kind of situation would be to do nothing. The issue has been rectified and that's all that matters.
I'm not sure the biggest mistake that Tony Abbott did, was to revive kinghts and dames in the Australian order hierarchy. If done correctly, as with most other things, it should had been explained properly to the Australian people, as a way to honour Australias finest, by way of an expert panel recommendation, and not at a PMs whim. I think a Dame Kate Blanchett or Dame Helen Reddy would be more understood than knighting a Prince.

The wider issue about Australia and the monarchy will flare up from time to time, but it always puzzles me, because the only argument I seem to ever pick up on, is that the Australian head of state should be Australian. Very few people say that it must be an elected president. Why does the Australian Monarchists not advocate adopting a branch of the current Royal Family as their own, ie Prince Henry of Wales as King of Australia? If done, I'm sure the 2 monarchist models, the one today and one with a resident Royal Family, would have FAR more support than a retired politician or businessperson being elected as figurehead every X years.

A future monarchy in Australia is entirely possible, even after the Queens reign, but the republican campaign should be countered, by planting the thoughts of a homegrown monarchy, to set Australia apart, from every other dull republic in the world, where few people even know who the head of state is, and even believe in politicians ability to handle power.
__________________

__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
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 552 11-14-2016 07:12 PM
The Queen and New Zealand: Residences, Governor-General, etc... wbenson Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 51 09-08-2016 11:29 PM
Brazilian Imperial Palaces, residences etc Marengo The Imperial Family of Brazil 23 03-14-2015 10:01 PM
General Discussion about Dutch Royal Residences Tina Dutch Royal Residences 20 10-06-2014 05:13 AM
The Queen and the Caribbean: Residences, Governors-General, etc... wbenson Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 48 02-25-2012 05:56 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 beatrice borromeo best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit 2016 catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events dom duarte duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll felipe vi grand duchess josephine-charlotte grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess charlene fashion princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:44 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises