A Terrific Victory. Excellent news from Australia

A bit disappointing for you, though, Grany that the release of the letters shows that the Queen had nothing to do with Whitlam's dismissal.

Of course, I was a bit slow on the uptake there!

It's not really anything to do with what happened nearly 50 years ago, is it! It's another stab at the monarchy and is agitated by the Republican movement in their quest for an even more expensive presidential system.

If that is seen as a “Terrific Victory”, life must be pretty sad for Republicans down under, perhaps that’s why there is a majority for not changing.

I guess I was a little lazy in copying from Republic but it said what I wanted to say. I am against the monarchy on principle being unelected and hereditary.

The Queen and PC was very much involved in Australian politics as the letters and correspondence show when we are led to believe that the Queen is above politics clearly not and still to this day.

OPINION POLL: 62% of Aussies want an Australian citizen as head of state.
Peter FitzSimons of the Australian Republic Movement said:
“We don’t need to stay holding Britain’s hand. It is demeaning, and unworthy of us, particularly at a time when Britain has left Europe, and we are still seen to be clinging to ­Britain.”
www.dailytelegraph.com.au/…/8807f7f6c42f914aece5654…

Davidhs

If that is seen as a “Terrific Victory”, life must be pretty sad for Republicans down under, perhaps that’s why there is a majority for not changing.

?

I think this link works. theconversation.com/is-australia-ready-for-another-republic-referendum-these-consensus-models-could-work-142646

A president Elected Head of State is not so expensive as the monarchy
By the way I think the palace letters news is interesting it's a part of history uncovering what was fraught to be covered up.

I can't see how an Elected Head of State could be cheaper than the Monarchy as Australians pay nothing towards the Monarchy, although they do pay for their Governor General, who is an Australian.

Davidhs

If that is seen as a “Terrific Victory”, life must be pretty sad for Republicans down under, perhaps that’s why there is a majority for not changing.

That's clearly not true now A poll show 62% want a Republic

theconversation.com/is-australia-ready-for-another-republic-referendum-these-consensus-models-could-work-142646

I actually find it a bit weird that the Queen is the Australian Head of State. But they did opt to retain her last time they were asked.

However, I'd have no problem with them wanting to become a republic, same as I have no problem (every sympathy, actually) with Scottish independence.

I just don't fancy having a president in the UK...

MaizieD

I actually find it a bit weird that the Queen is the Australian Head of State. But they did opt to retain her last time they were asked.

However, I'd have no problem with them wanting to become a republic, same as I have no problem (every sympathy, actually) with Scottish independence.

I just don't fancy having a president in the UK...

Why does no monarchy = a president?

Wouldn’t it just still be the Prime Minister?

I think it's because you Head a HeD of State to represent our country and its people's interests here and abroad.

A Head of State preferably an elected one.

Summerlove. Wouldn’t it just still be the Prime Minister?
No. The Prime Minister has to be accountable to someone other than Parliament.

Oh of course
Old age moment.

Thank you Jane

I didn't know this!

1954 the young Queen Elizabeth on her first trip to Australia as Queen personally signed a law in Canberra that permitted the ethnic cleansing of the Australian Capital Territory, clearing it of resident Aboriginal Peoples. When she was on Australian soil she was the Queen of Australia exercising all authority and power that she had as Queen of Australia.

nationalunitygovernment.org/content/history-repeats-ethnic-cleansing-1954-act-and-now-wa-removal-homelands