Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,469 Year: 3,726/9,624 Month: 597/974 Week: 210/276 Day: 50/34 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Queen Elizabeth and the U.K.?
Boof
Member (Idle past 268 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 41 of 102 (657240)
03-26-2012 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Modulous
03-26-2012 12:57 PM


Re: Long live the queen
Modulus writes:
Most of this is symbolic of course, she doesn't make any decisions that have not been decided already.
She does have the power to dismiss the prime minister, but this would only be exercised if the prime minister loses a 'no confidence' vote and does not resign, and it's never actually been tested in modern times.
Not in England at least - she has previously sacked an Australian Prime Minister. Not that long ago either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Modulous, posted 03-26-2012 12:57 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Straggler, posted 03-27-2012 5:42 AM Boof has replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 268 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 61 of 102 (657382)
03-28-2012 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Straggler
03-27-2012 5:42 AM


Re: Long live the queen
Straggler writes:
I assume you are talking about this - 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis
That isn't really accurate. The idea that the UK monarch can go round dismissing Australian prime-ministers is borne of misunderstanding how (an admittedly rather archaic) method of appointments in the common-wealth is actually implemented in practise.
Must we let factual infomation get in the way of a good yarn?
Personally I find it bizarre that Australia has a Queen and that we need the Queen's representative to sign off on our legislation and appoint Ministers etc, whether or not that power is largely ceremonial. On the other hand It's hard for me to believe our politicians here could devise a better system without introducing additional bureaucracies so why bother changing?
Edited by Boof, : Expanded my thoughts a little

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Straggler, posted 03-27-2012 5:42 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Straggler, posted 03-28-2012 5:15 AM Boof has replied
 Message 63 by Tangle, posted 03-28-2012 5:24 AM Boof has seen this message but not replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 268 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 87 of 102 (657485)
03-28-2012 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Straggler
03-28-2012 5:15 AM


Head of State
Straggler writes:
It's not like we are all desperately wishing that the leader of our government was also head of our state.
God no! But then again I'm not keen on separate elections for this post either.
Best off just appointing our most recently retired (and successful - no losers) cricket captain methinks.
Edited by Boof, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Straggler, posted 03-28-2012 5:15 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Straggler, posted 03-29-2012 7:42 AM Boof has replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 268 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 92 of 102 (657695)
03-29-2012 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Straggler
03-29-2012 7:42 AM


Re: Head of State
Straggler writes:
All in this thread seem to agree that having a head of state that isn't the political leader of the day is a good thing.
Boof writes:
Boof writes:
But then again I'm not keen on separate elections for this post either.
That does make selection rather difficult. Unless hereditary "selection" remains in place.
Not necessarily. The Governor-General in Australia is nominated by the Prime Minister and then appointed by the monarch and it seems to work pretty well. All we need to do here is remove the need for royal assent. I'm sure you could do the same.
One negative of this system is that the G-G's tend to be high profile judges, lawyers and politicians, which in some ways means they don't have much connection with the majority of the Australian public, however I myself think that's a small price to pay compared to introducing another round of electioneering. Interestingly the Australian states have a similar Governor system representing the monarchy, and in many of these states more recent appointments to Governor have moved away from the political and legal regimes and include former sporting heroes such as the Lithgow Flash, prominent business people and health professionals. There has even been the odd scientist in there. Maybe this will start to happen federally as well.
Ricky Ponting as the head of state at formal banquets and suchlike. The mind boggles!!
Would seem like a good way of antagonising our former colonial masters, but it would be at the risk of some international embarrassment. I'm sure some would think we were being ruled by G W Bush.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Straggler, posted 03-29-2012 7:42 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Straggler, posted 03-30-2012 9:57 AM Boof has seen this message but not replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 268 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 96 of 102 (658179)
04-03-2012 2:32 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by caffeine
03-30-2012 6:54 AM


Re: Head of State
caffeine writes:
The only universal role for heads of state seems to be the ceremonial, but this all leaves me scratching my head as to what the point of it all is. If people want to prance around in daft costumes or what-have-you on their own times because it gives them a warm cozt feeling of tradition, all well and good. But it all seems a bit of a waste of public money to go doing it officially.
Possibly. Personally I like the idea that the government publicly and officially recognises it's citizens for meritorious work in the community (eg Order of Australia award) or has a representative at important memorials or to receive and entertain foreign dignitaries. I just don't want the Prime Minister to waste her time on those things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by caffeine, posted 03-30-2012 6:54 AM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by caffeine, posted 04-03-2012 7:49 AM Boof has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024