Downunder republicanism

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 6:18 am

I take my hat off to Smoking Joe and Peter FitzSimons this week. Joe would have known his boss wouldn't be impressed.

I think it's good to see life in this issue again. In NZ I'm really hoping we vote to change our flag. I think that will kick more life into the republicanism issue on both sides of the Tasman.

I signed up to the NZ republican movement this morning after being irritated by reading how Prince Charles is to going to be made an Admiral of the fleet of the Royal New Zealand Navy, a Field Marshal for the army and Marshal of the Royal New Zealand Air Force when he's in NZ in November. I felt we were going in the other direction - loosening these ties.

For me this isn't an anti-royal family or anti-British issue and I'd expect and hope a NZ republic remained in the Commonwealth just with our own head of state. Most Commonwealth countries have their own head of state and it's long past the date where NZ and Australia need a foreign head of state.

One problem for republicanism in NZ is that the young royals are very popular and this makes in my opinion too many people happy with the status quo. Another problem is indigenous politics. I think Maori leaders won't be keen on a republic unless there's something in it for Maori. They see the Queen as helpful to their interests. Maori politics is complicated so it's hard to read this but it will be an important issue needing working through here.

I suggest as we chat in this thread that we just be mindful there will be some British readers. And the thread will disappear at times but I would expect it to keep resurfacing. Downunder monarchists are welcome too.

Post by **papafarang** » August 30, 2015, 7:39 am

actually i'm a royalist, but my point of view is irrelevant, England would I like a president? no . the queen has one purpose and that's to represent our country that's it. if we had a president what would his job be exactly, look at the states, billions of dollars wasted on voting, and as we would have a president we can't just ask the queen if we could use Buckingham palace as the place belongs to her. nope we would have to build new palaces all over the place, not to mention a couple of hundred official residences all over the place. anyway thinking about it you would lose your prime minister, you can't have both, all you would in reality would be changing the title from one thing to another, then being a head of state you would have to build him a great big expensive palace, a few dozen rolls royces, hundreds of new full time staff , oh and don't forget you would need a nice shiny big plane for him for him to go jetting around to meet and greet. good news it would help the economy as all the ships would planes would have to repainted , millions of new flags. new bank notes and coins with cute little kiwi's on . and you could all chip in when he and his entourage fly's over to go shooting grouse with queenie up in Scotland. the queen now lives on a fixed income a bit like a pensioner, any extras she has to pay for herself . just plain old new Zealand navy no more HMS or royal. but a whole heap of new taxes to keep someone in a life of ultimate luxury, got to keep up appearances as he would have nothing better to do than go jet setting around the world spending all your hard earned money, I think you should all buy him a crown too, maybe a big boat for him to cruise around in... and every 4 years it could start all over again, and of course you would still have to waste money on taking care of your last president, give him a huge farm, huge pension and millions of dollars every year just to keep the ex president safe.
of course the bad news for us is we would have to keep sending our royal family to meet your head of state. the irony being you would end up with our royalty paying a lot more visits to your lovely country .
nope i'm in the odd position of being a royalist but not having any issues with you all having your own posh people.
do you have posh people down under ?
as for the commonwealth, up to you, but it is something that binds us and benefits us all. hey a weird one would be we would have to say you all speak "new Zealand English " or "Australian English" anyway good luck to any slimy politician that will get a dream job of a life time

Post by **Aardvark** » August 30, 2015, 9:34 am

Republican's are like Gay's, they wont shut up until they get their own way. When it doesn't work out the way they want they will blame it on everyone else. We have already voted against change in Oz, and wont be following NZ any time soon ....

Post by **noosard** » August 30, 2015, 9:41 am

Australia will get to become a republic before NZ
You are right about won't shutup till they get their way and then blame everyone else it is not exactly what they wanted

Post by **papafarang** » August 30, 2015, 11:28 am

heres a thought when you become a republic , what difference will it make to your lives ? will lamb be cheaper ? will living standards improve ?. will more schools be built? will the roads get repaired faster? I can see politicians point as their going to get rich out of it, of course by raising taxes. to pay for a more lavish lifestyle, but what will joe public benefit ?

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 11:53 am

I'd hope for a ceremonial president who simply replaces the Governor General and is perhaps voted in by a 2/3 thirds or 3/4 quarters majority in Parliament. He or she just wouldn't represent the Queen. Sod all cost. It's not NZ's style to pomp it up too much. The current GG, a former distinguished Maori soldier, probably drives his own car around at times. Quite a few people might not even recognize him particularly if he was in casual clothing. I like to think he wouldn't currently need security unless he was on official duty.

If the head of state was elected by the public then we might risk former sportspeople as head of state.

If that change was wanted then that could come later. For NZ I think a former judge or soldier might make the best first head of state. I think former clerics and politicians would not usually be good candidates.

Post by **noosard** » August 30, 2015, 12:13 pm

There lies one of the problems
When the time comes who decides this new head of state is to be
The pollies will want to.
As gives more chance for one of them to stay at the trough

Post by **noosard** » August 30, 2015, 12:20 pm

Joe Blow will get nothing out of this change

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 12:29 pm

In terms of his wallet yes you are probably right. Hopefully enough Joe Blows would feel better about their country and their national identity with an Aussie as head of state. You wouldn't accept an English captain of the Baggy Greens. Well, I hope bloody not. Losing in England isn't that bad and the Ashes should anyhow be returning to Australia once the English batsmen are taking guard on Aussie pitches.

It would have to be a very special politician to be acceptable to both the main parties. The Tories here once appointed a former Tory PM as GG - Sir Keith Holyoake (1977 to 1980). That was back in the days when Tories were still quite wet rather than very dry. It's a big risk if there's a constitutional crisis.

In Australia it might work like perhaps an ex-state governor being voted by the federal parliament as commonwealth head of state for some fixed term? You'd have the advantage of seeing how she or he had performed as governor.

Post by **marjamlew** » August 30, 2015, 1:16 pm

Aardvark wrote:Republican's are like Gay's, they wont shut up until they get their own way. When it doesn't work out the way they want they will blame it on everyone else. We have already voted against change in Oz, and wont be following NZ any time soon ....

Some of us have moved beyond the need to suckle at the ancient tit of Mother England. We are Australians who would like to see an Australian head of state. A person selected to represent our country based on merit and not just some hiso soap dodger who has been born into the right Anglo-Saxon family 17,000kms away. Time to be rid of the geriatric pommy bird, her foul mouthed husband and her horse like children.....it's not the 1800s anymore

Delete the words individual and queen from the constitution - change the word Governor General to president - carry on.......

Post by **papafarang** » August 30, 2015, 2:05 pm

so truth is joe blow would not even have a choice, just more jobs for the boys. now if they were just a figure head with no political power and just voted in by politicians , what exactly would be the difference the and an unelected person like the queen ? maybe you could have a executive prez like the US ? (dictatorial power). no look how that worked out. yes to being a republic, but how would it work, if politicians voted them in you could end up with a head of state that the populous despised. a good example from the uk is chris patten ,tory mp, big buddy of
Maggie thatcher and a complete jerk. lost his seat as an mp and effectively ended up on the dole... but...next thing he's governor of hong kong

. so think of the worst politician in NZ and imagine they made him/her president , not only plausible but more than likely to be the case, mind you I suppose hating your own head of state is better than hating the queen, an easy way out would be sending one of our pregnant royals over so she can drop the baby there, then you got an instant real NZ royal family

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 2:12 pm

Lew please don't be a wally, you'll get us locked down. You aren't at the MCG.

If Parliament has to choose the head of state it's extremely unlikely that a partisan figure such as an ex-politician will be appointed if more than a straight majority of votes is needed. So John Howard or Kevin Rudd wouldn't be back. It is very likely to be a distinguished citizen.

I think the head of state is unlikely to arouse strong feelings as is largely the case with Governor Generals.

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 2:55 pm

At the risk of a rollicking from downunder I'll attempt to translate Lew's strine for British readers:

some hiso soap dodger = well groomed monarch
the geriatric pommy bird = the long serving Queen
her foul mouthed husband = her gentlemanly husband who can speak as well as any Australian
her horse like = her dedicated

I think I have saved the day. Strine isn't easy to follow.

Lew comes from Victoria. He might be concerned that I think next month the state will have to change its name to Elizabeth.

Post by **Barney** » August 30, 2015, 3:31 pm

GT you have started the thread and now seem to be lord and master of some of it's comments. I did not need any translation regarding Lew's perceived strine. Lew has called a "spade a spade". Is that PC these days.
Anyway you have involved sport, politics and slightly knocking other comments to grey the water.

It is a subject that has been debated many many times and the benefits and negatives of it's implementation have never been able to be agreed upon by the yes and no teams, hence the no vote by an educated public.
Unfortunately politics will always lead the debate and depending on who is in power that's how it will steer.
Some say it will happen some say not but I doubt it would in my time.
I'm not losing sleep and happy to retire to Thailand and not concern myself.

Post by **GT93** » August 30, 2015, 3:48 pm

I just don't want it to get locked Barney. I fear a big storm will be coming. I was hoping a small punch back on behalf of the Prince might lessen the damage from the storm. Yeah, I'm dreaming. Royal threads, which I guess this partly is, only partly, arouse great passions.

Post by **marjamlew** » August 30, 2015, 5:37 pm

If ya can't handle the heat GT ya shouldn't open the door to the kitchen brother. You start a largely superfluous topic that you know will arouse strong passions (trolling??) and then soil ya dacks when a spade gets called a shovel and an opinion is bluntly offered. You already got rid of True Brit so I don't have to worry about offending him and the majority of the other lizzie lovers are far to smart to bite at the drivel I write. If ya can't grow a pair GT you should stick to commenting on the weather in Nong Khai

Post by **downunder** » August 30, 2015, 5:57 pm

:-" Well said Lew, he has no creditability when it comes to knowledge of what he thinks is reporting the facts, he just goes on spewing out bull nonsense and expects all to think he is intelligent. In the last few days he has received a fair share of flak from other posters. If you ask him he will tell you that he knows everything about everything, yet gives out the opinion that he really knows nothing about anything. $\:D/$

Post by **GT93** » August 31, 2015, 2:10 am

Actually it wasn't a trolling post. I felt the issue has some life and would attract interest which it has. I wasn't expecting a response worded so "strongly" as yours. More than a few posters might think the Queen is an awesome woman and be quite upset at your post Lew. Some British posters might consider her the greatest living Briton. Now that you have said "drivel" perhaps we can stand easy.

I'm not sure if your comments reflect more your desire to be a republic or your thoughts on the royal family's performance. I think the former. I can't think of any terrible acts by the Queen acting as Queen of Australia or NZ. Was she part of the problem with Whitlam's removal? I thought the shxt stopped with Kerr.

I think the best argument will be we have a great political system, the Queen has done a great job but we want an Aussie / Kiwi head of state. Once Abbott and Key have gone and if the Queen has passed on, the playing field will be looking much much better.

Post by **Laan Yaa Mo** » August 31, 2015, 3:31 am

Then you can look forward to Charles and Camilla providing good governance. God Save the Queen!

Post by **wazza** » August 31, 2015, 10:31 am

Well any Republic would get rid of Knighthoods, to the Royal Family of United Kingdom !!

For me, I am an Australian , wishing that before my thongs turn up , I would like to see an Australian head of State.

Papafarang is correct, no change, and just print a few Cathy Freeman $5 and not Betty.

Some have said, judges, military etc, but aren't they exactly what the establishment are , full of tradition,

Boonie, wont accept as his public speaking isn't great.

Dick Smith, yeah,

Couple of Fantastic Drs who have won Nobel Prizes, yeah,

and Im sure the list goes on,

But it needs to be Bi / Tri Partisan support from all the major parties to get it back on track. and then the Model Issue becomes a problem...

I would even go so far as to say what are the exclusions :

Politicians , who have not been unseated, or voted out within 5 years.

Prev State Governors, as they were politically appointed at the time

No prev GG's - Costello etc

No previous High Court Judges - all politically appointed, even though say Hon Michael Kirby might have been ok with his Huma Rights Reports into North Korea , but Hon Dyson Heydon , no

It has to past the Pub or Sniff test first and sadly the divisions will divide and conquer again.

The only chance would be a Labor Govt with a sympathetic Senate, to get it moving.