The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #781  
Old 12-17-2016, 06:47 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 10,002
That's a shrewd suggestion.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #782  
Old 12-17-2016, 08:54 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
It is not only shrewd but to me, very respectful. It shows just how highly thought of and respected HM is.
__________________

__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #783  
Old 12-19-2016, 03:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,998
Quote:
Federal government MPs who support a constitutional monarchy have questioned an address by the Prime Minister to the Australian Republican Movement, with one warning that Malcolm Turnbull had a “political death wish” if he kept talking about the issue.

While some Coalition MPs considered his speech to be “very mild”, others warned it was a distraction the government could not afford to have, amid debate about power prices and the health of the economy.
Read more: PM's 'Keatingesque' support for republic a 'political death wish' | The New Daily
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #784  
Old 12-19-2016, 08:07 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,917
Who knows which government will be in power when the Queen passes on. The Turnbull government is not very popular and there are so many other things to worry about than this very expensive measure.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #785  
Old 12-19-2016, 09:06 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,112
The ALP have the Republic as part of their manifesto and more of the Coalition are moving towards republicanism than monarchy so it really won't matter which side is in power as both are increasingly moving to support that position - even if, at the moment, the population as a whole aren't doing so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #786  
Old 01-05-2017, 02:57 AM
eya eya is online now
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: -, Greece
Posts: 9,218
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...h-of-the-queen

Australian Monarchists urged to brace for the death of the Queen
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #787  
Old 01-05-2017, 06:02 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 10,002
Easy now, folks. She isn't dead yet.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #788  
Old 07-11-2017, 03:13 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Malcolm Turnbull‏ @TurnbullMalcolm
Although I am a Republican, I am also an Elizabethan. It was an honour to meet Her Majesty today at Buckingham Palace.
Picture: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEdj66eUIAAf_qf.jpg

Video:
The Queen has held an audience with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at Buckingham Palace:
Home - ITNSource News

He has meet her before, but this was his first time audience, and he seemed a bit nervous (who can blame him). He walked straight towards the Queen - even before her equerry Wing Commander Sam Fletcher had presented him to her.


Malcolm Turnbull says he is a Republican and an Elizabethan as he meets the Queen
Quote:
"Even Republicans like myself can be, and in my case are, very strong Elizabethans as well," Mr Turnbull said.

"Discussions are always confidential, but I'm sure her Majesty will be keen to know what the major issues are and developments in Australia. I look forward to her advice and wisdom, she has after all advised many, many prime ministers.".

"The Queen has embodied selfless public service, dignity, wisdom, leadership for longer and more magnificently than anyone alive today, there is no doubt."

Mr Turnbull said that, back in 1999 when he was head of the defeated Republican campaign, he had never imagined that 18 years later he would meet the monarch as Prime Minister of Australia.

"She has been a remarkable leader of the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth, she has been our head of state for all of that time, and I will be very honoured to meet her as Australia's Prime Minister and to share my thoughts about Australia and hear what she has to say."
Nice of him to say, and I agree with everything, she's second to none.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #789  
Old 07-29-2017, 04:07 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Read more: Bill Shorten renews push for Australian republic, vows to hold referendum within first term of Labor government - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Quote:
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has promised a national vote on Australia becoming a republic during the first term of a Labor Government.

Mr Shorten said he would hold a referendum with a simple yes or no answer to decide whether Australia should remain in the monarchy.

"One question — do you support an Australian republic with an Australian head of state? 'Yes' or 'No'?" he said.

Key points:

Bill Shorten says if the yes vote prevails then it can be considered how head of state is chosen

Second vote could be in a different term of parliament

Announcement may place political pressure on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
1. I actually think that the Republicans will have a chance to win if they ask the question like that.

2. If they had chosen the model (an apolitical president elected by the people or parliament) before asking for a republic with an Australian head of state, then the monarchists would have had a better chance of winning.

3. But the two monarchist organizations are almost confident of victory and 'Australians for Constitutional Monarchy' argues that the Governor-General is the head of state, while the HM is the sovereign.

4. I understand that some Australians want an Australian head of state, but Bill Shorten could have waited until after the Queen's death. She has been your monarch for 65 years and is 91-years-old, and this is the thanks you give her.

5. And yes, she have seen other realms go. But that was countries that became independent after she ascended to the throne, with the exception of Ceylon, Pakistan and South Africa, which already was independent when she become the monarch. The last independent realm who replaised her with another head of state was Mauritius in 1992.

6. But there is something else about Australia, who has had her as monarch since she ascended in 1952.

7. From me to australians: I'm so tired (as a half-Brit) of this nonsense, so just spend a lot of money on electing that president of yours, who will not have a fraction of the Queen's popularity. So do it now, it's Australia's loss. It was nice to share the world's most popular/iconic and famous head of state with you, but goodbye and good luck!
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #790  
Old 07-29-2017, 04:24 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,917
Hold on a minute, there's some time to go here! The next Federal election isn't due to be called until November 2019. At the moment a Liberal govt is in headed by Malcolm Turnbull. Yes, Turnbull is a republican but has stated on the record that in his opinion nothing should happen with reference to a republic until the Queen's death.

IF Bill Shorten wins, and he may well do, he says he will address the issue of a republic at the END of his first term. Most terms in Australia run for three years. There have been exceptions, but we'll say three years. That brings things to the end of 2022. If the Shorten govt holds a referendum in its second term, (if it gets one) that may well be in 2023.

Plus the Constitution put in a lot of checks and balances that has historically stopped a lot of referendums from being passed. So there is certainly time before anything happens. It could well be in Charles's reign before a republic is declared.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #791  
Old 07-29-2017, 04:31 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Yes, I'm aware of all that.

Read more: Australians 'couldn't give a toss' about being a republic: Joyce mocks Shorten's vote pledge | SBS News
Quote:
Liberal Senator Eric Abetz said the plan was just "a peek into the ultra-left wing agenda" the nation would be subjected to under Labor.

"Australia is the best country on earth yet Bill Shorten and his Labor Party want to change everything about it," he said in a statement.

"Our system of government, our flag, our national anthem and even Australia Day are on the chopping block under Labor in favour of a political correctness crusade of which extreme Green Senator Lee Rhiannon would be proud."

Senator Abetz said Australians would "not stomach these divisive distractions" that were designed to shift focus from issues that mattered.

Mr Shorten is expected to promise to appoint a minister with direct responsibility for driving the debate, during a speech to the Australian Republican Movement in Melbourne on Saturday night.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #792  
Old 07-29-2017, 05:37 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,112
If the story is true then Shorten isn't actually proposing a referendum at all but a plebiscite. A plebiscite is an advisory vote in which the government seeks the opinion of the population while a referendum is a binding change to the constitution. The story, as I am reading it, is that it will be along the lines of 'do you think Australia should be a republic?' - a plebiscite to find out the views of the Australian people. This has be ALP policy for many years and both Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd both promised to hold such a plebiscite in their first term in office and neither did (probably because neither lasted a full term before being stabbed in the back by the other).

We had a referendum in 1999 as that was a vote to change the constitution as it set out not only that we would be a republic but how that would work. The second part of this isn't included in Shorten's proposal but would follow when they could agree on a model - and that is a major sticking point - the Republicans themselves can't agree on the model and they certainly don't seem to get it that the people seem to support a directly elected president, if they support it at all.

Of course his first term could be much closer than the next election as well - with all these MPs being found to be ineligible due to their dual citizenship status it is possible that Turnbull could lose his very slim majority within a short period of time.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #793  
Old 07-29-2017, 06:56 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Bill Shorten wants a plebiscite in his first term on a straightforward question: "Do you support an Australian republic with an Australian head of state?"

Shorten's promise means a first vote (the plebiscite) on the issue would be held sometime between 2019 and 2022, and would be followed by a second vote that would settle the tricky issue of the best model - for example, whether a president was chosen by direct election, or the parliament.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #794  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:34 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 10,002
How do you change the Australian Constitution in the first place?
This, I imagine, is very much a change of the Constitution.

Would a 51 % majority of votes be enough?
Or do you need a X % majority of the voters to vote in favor of a change? (That makes a huge difference!)

IMO a yes/no to a republic cannot be anything but a political guideline, if there are no concrete alternatives presented to the voters.
The republicans can't say after a yes, to a republic, that a republic is now certain and that the monarchy has been finally rejected, on the basis of such a referendum.
It only means that a majority of the voters wish to be presented with alternatives to a monarchy.
So a yes to a republic, does not automatically mean a no to the monarchy.

It could be binding if the referendum presented these alternatives:
Do you prefer:
A) A monarch as head of state, status quo.
B) A politically neutral president as head of state
C) A president with executive powers?
D) The Speaker of the Parliament as head of state?
- and so on.
But presented with such an option, the republicans would extremely likely to loose the first round. Because the republican votes would be divided.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #795  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:52 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
Read more: Bill Shorten renews push for Australian republic, vows to hold referendum within first term of Labor government - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


1. I actually think that the Republicans will have a chance to win if they ask the question like that.

2. If they had chosen the model (an apolitical president elected by the people or parliament) before asking for a republic with an Australian head of state, then the monarchists would have had a better chance of winning.

3. But the two monarchist organizations are almost confident of victory and 'Australians for Constitutional Monarchy' argues that the Governor-General is the head of state, while the HM is the sovereign.

4. I understand that some Australians want an Australian head of state, but Bill Shorten could have waited until after the Queen's death. She has been your monarch for 65 years and is 91-years-old, and this is the thanks you give her.

5. And yes, she have seen other realms go. But that was countries that became independent after she ascended to the throne, with the exception of Ceylon, Pakistan and South Africa, which already was independent when she become the monarch. The last independent realm who replaised her with another head of state was Mauritius in 1992.

6. But there is something else about Australia, who has had her as monarch since she ascended in 1952.

7. From me to australians: I'm so tired (as a half-Brit) of this nonsense, so just spend a lot of money on electing that president of yours, who will not have a fraction of the Queen's popularity. So do it now, it's Australia's loss. It was nice to share the world's most popular/iconic and famous head of state with you, but goodbye and good luck!
Bill Shorten wants a simple "yes" or "no" question because it is the republicans' best shot to win. I doubt the monarchists will agree to that though and they have a point. How can people vote for a republic without knowing what kind of republic they will get ?

Having said that, it is likely that Australia will eventually become a republic at some point in the future, The question is whether that will trigger a domino effect, most certainly in New Zealand and perhaps in Canada. Interestingly, I suspect the percentage of hardcore monarchists is actually probably lower in Canada than in Australia, but a republic is so low in the agenda of most Canadians that their attitude seems to be that they simply don't care.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #796  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:58 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
This is going to be the stumbling block here. I would only vote for an Irish-type presidential system, i.e. replace the current G-G with someone doing essentially the same thing but called President. (This is also the sort of model envisaged by the ARM.) I would not want a popularly-elected political president. IMO once you start giving the president real power you get into the sort of strife they have in the US. I would rather have one of the ineffectual but benign Windsor chinless wonders as the head of state than a Trump. We have a system that works. It has its flaws but it works.
But the president of Ireland is popularly elected ! Maybe you are thinking more along the lines of the German system, which is actually a good one that I wish the US had adopted.

Quote:
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 9,506
How do you change the Australian Constitution in the first place?
This, I imagine, is very much a change of the Constitution.

Would a 51 % majority of votes be enough?
Or do you need a X % majority of the voters to vote in favor of a change? (That makes a huge difference!)
As I understand it, a constitutional amendment must be passed by an absolute majority in both houses of the federal parliament (or passed by at least one house twice by absolute majority), and then it must be approved in a referendum by a majority of the voters nationwide and by a majority of the voters in a majority of states (what is called a "double majority").

I don't quite understand Bill Shorten's proposal. Since he is not proposing a vote on a specific republican bill amending the constitution, should we conclude that his proposed plebiscite is non-binding (as BTW the Brexit referendum was in the UK) ? If specific legislation is introduced thereafter (assuming 'yes' wins), then would a second binding referendum be necessary with the double-majority constitutional requirement for it to succeed ?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #797  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:58 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,584
I imagine the biggest question for voters would be how would any new Head of State be chosen? If they were to be directly elected by the people then I think more people would be supportive whereas if the plan was the President (or whatever they would be called) would be chosen by the Parliament or other group (as in Germany) I think it would be much less supported as people may well feel it they are not going to directly choose their own head of state then why not stick with the status quo.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #798  
Old 07-29-2017, 10:00 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,917
This below is a quick guide to plebiscites in Australia, and their history. The most famous I suppose was held on conscription of Australian males in World War One, and was defeated.

A quick guide to plebiscites in Australia – Parliament of Australia
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #799  
Old 07-29-2017, 03:20 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Read more: A big night for the Republic - but a long way to go
Quote:
18 years on, the question of how we would chose a President, remains the biggest sticking point in the debate.

Mr Shorten knows that, so does Mr Turnbull. Both are republicans, both want change, but the Labor leader is proposing a time frame.

If the majority of Australians vote 'Yes' in Mr Shorten’s national vote, then a model would have to be chosen.

Would Australians vote in their president? Would the Prime Minister appoint a prominent Australian like they do with the Governor-General? Until that question is answered, the Republic won’t be a reality.

"Once Australians have said whether they want an Australian head of state, the next thing is Australians have to decide what kind of president we should have, how the person should be chosen,” ARM’s Michael Cooney said ahead of the gala dinner Bill Shorten was headlining.

Some Republicans even suggest that too should be put to the people.

That would mean one vote to see if there’s an appetite to change. A second vote on how we’d pick the President. Then finally a referendum to change the constitution.

Referenda are notoriously hard to pass – requiring a majority of voters and a majority of states. And right now support for the monarchy is as strong as it's been in some time.
If they are going to do it like that, then I actually agree with the two monarchist organizations, and believe the monarchists would win.

There have been some polls on the net today (including in this article) and most of them show a lead for the monarchists (not to be taken seriously, i know). I also read the Facebook comments on ABC/Sky News Australia sites, and the vast majority were negative to spend a lot of money on this as long as the Queen lives.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #800  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:22 PM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
Easy now, folks. She isn't dead yet.
Well my thoughts exactly ..... but this thread has unravelled .....
__________________

__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
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 636 10-25-2017 08:04 PM
The Queen and New Zealand: Residences, Governor-General, etc... wbenson Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 59 10-23-2017 02:12 AM
General Discussion about Dutch Royal Residences Tina Dutch Royal Residences 21 07-18-2017 05:01 PM
Brazilian Imperial Palaces, residences etc Marengo The Imperial Family of Brazil 23 03-14-2015 10:01 PM
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
birthday books carl gustaf catherine chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess elisabeth crown princess mary crown princess victoria crown princess victoria daytime fashion current events denmark earl of snowdon family general news grand duchess maria teresa guillaume hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein margherita monarchy news noice prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess diana lady spencer princess estelle princess eugenie princess leonore princess madeleine princess margriet princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia shaikh zayed bin hamdan bin zayed al nahyan sofia state visit state visit from argentina stephanie sweden swedish royal family uae wildlife victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:23 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises