1
   

The coming Oz election thread ...

 
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:09 am
i noted, with humour it may be added, that you australians still have to ask english approval to have your elections Laughing

and sorry to interfere with your politics msolga but from what ive been reading on this thread it seems like whatever latham does he will be preferable to howard..

lets hope that the same doesnt occur to you as occured to us where after 11 years of conservative rule we eventually elected labour and tony blair and they turned out to be just the same as the conservatives Shocked if not worse Shocked

peace and love Very Happy
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:14 am
Er ... Col Man .... This is a biased thread! :wink: Not everyone in Oz necessarily agrees with the views expressed here. It's looking like a close election at this point.
0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:27 am
ok Smile
i understand Wink
well the closeness of the election will add to the excitement 4u all Very Happy
same is happening with 'your new best friends' in america Wink
it looks like its going to be a decisive year for the planet Smile
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:27 am
Col Man wrote:
i noted, with humour it may be added, that you australians still have to ask english approval to have your elections:lol:


Incredible, isn't it? But not really funny, either, though I can see why you'd find it amusing, Col Man. Sad, I'd say ... Bring on the republic!!!!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:30 am
Col Man wrote:
ok Smile... it looks like its going to be a decisive year for the planet Smile


Yes, please! And hopefully change is in the wind in the UK. We all need a break from this horror movie! <sigh>
0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:39 am
i agree with you msolga
i pray for change
it would be nice to have a liberal government here and i mean real liberals not conservatives masquerading as liberals Wink Very Happy

i recall, do i not? that a few years back you all had a national referendum about this english thing and you decided to stay with queenie and england??
i never understood why you all did that..

personally id be happy if england was a republic too
i feel the monarchy are a little outdated
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:48 am
Col Man wrote:
... i recall, do i not? that a few years back you all had a national referendum about this english thing and you decided to stay with queenie and england??
i never understood why you all did that..


Ah, The Referendum! <sighing again> How shall I put it? the waters became muddied by the "model" we should adopt! Whether the people should elect our head of state, or the government should choose them. I gave out how to vote cards at my local voting booth & people just seemed confused about the issues. A shame. A lost opportunity. Sad
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 04:24 am
Australia's politicians were opposed to the idea of a popularly elected president. Mainly due to the fact that they aware that none of the current crop could ever win such a popular vote. Basically they were protecting their own positions of power.

It should also be noted that while the conservative party was opposed to the republic idea totally, most of the support in the poll came from conservative electorates. Howard's own electorate voted for the republic. The Labor party was for the republic while most of it's electorates were against the idea. Of course the conservatives based most of their campaign on fear. About the only weapon those f**kwits have.
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 04:24 am
The 'English thing' was about adopting a republican model and electing/choosing our own figurehead (President). As it is now the government chooses someone and the Palace just rubberstamps it - merely protocol. We'd still have a queen/king (if we wanted) and could hold up our heads in the Commonwealth. Since the 80's the constitutional separation of Australia from the UK has been a fact - there is now no higher court than the High Court that can adjudicate and interpret Australian law.
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 04:43 am
Ah, October 9. All I need is a game-plan..... Drunk
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 04:54 am
Yeppers.

Damn - sense from Pondy!
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:04 am
dlowan wrote:
Yeppers.

Damn - sense from Pondy!



Well kinda. It's usually Plan A for any situation (frequently Plan B too).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:16 am
OK, Mr. Ponquility, you have an independent judiciary--do you still have a Governor General, with powers such as that cur Kerr used when he dismissed Whitlam?
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:34 am
You'd better explain it to him, Mr S , because he won't bother to read a response from anyone else.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:39 am
That was mean, Miss Olga--i pay attention to what you write, even in that damned cat thread.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:44 am
I wasn't intending to be mean, Setanta ... really .... It's just that you've asked questions today that required no answering if previous posts had been read. That's all ...
0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 05:45 am
think peace and love people Wink

they still have a governor general but i dont know what powers he still has

Quote:
Howard began the formal process of calling the election when he visited Government House earlier on Sunday to seek approval from Governor-General Michael Jeffery, the representative of the Queen, the head of state.

Under electoral rules, Australian governments are elected to three-year terms from the date of the first sitting of parliament but can call fresh elections at any time in that period.

An election could have been held as late as April 16, 2005, but Howard has long said he would go to the polls before the end of 2004.

0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 06:11 am
Well, Miss Olga, i read the other posts about voting on a republic and Mr. Ponquility's remarks about an independent judiciary, but if there was one concerning the Governor General and his powers i missed it. I also asked about elections being required within a certain period of time, because the previous answer was unsatisfactory, and did not address the issue of whether there were any ultimate time limit.
0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 06:14 am
um which is why ive posted my post above your boss....
but i dont know why in the article i read it says aussie election terms are for 3 years and then it says is had to be by april 16 which is 3 ys and 4 or 5 months from the last election...

and no one seems to say anything about the powers of the gov other than oz has its own judicial powers now ...

i hope this helps....
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 06:16 am
Col, geeze, is everybody being dense today? No one had provided the information on what powers the Governor-General does or does not possess. As for a term to elections, the response you posted above was only made after i specifically asked about it.

Is it just me?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 03:28:50