Should Australia become a republic?

[Rorschach]

I have no wish to become a Republic with and El Presidente thanks... we've been a constitutional monarchy for a long time and it works very well.
For all intents and purposes the PM is the real head of Australia the GG position is basically ceremonial.
The only model I'd agree with is the minimalist one that appeared on Palmer's politics during the last big debate. Where the PM was officially recognised as head of state and took on some extra ceremonial duties and shared others with others.

[Chard]

I have no wish to become a Republic with and El Presidente thanks... we've been a constitutional monarchy for a long time and it works very well.

I see no reason why you could not retain the monarchy as a republic. Either way, your government still comes down to a nationalized popularity contest, only with a Republican system you have a direct vote for who the leader of your country is. At the very least you should amend your constitution to make the office of Prime Minister constitutionally recognized with defined limits of powers granted to the office instead of the office being a political custom.

[Rorschach]

Hmmm for all intents and purposes the PM is the leader of the country.
We indirectly vote them in, the leader of the party with the most seats is PM.
We know who they are b4 the election.
Much prefer our system to yours, thanks anyway.

[Chard]

Hmmm for all intents and purposes the PM is the leader of the country.

Yes, but by political convention only. The position has no actual legitimate basis in your constitution and worse, it's a position you have no actual say in who fills the role.

We indirectly vote them in, the leader of the party with the most seats is PM.

An indirect vote is no vote at all. Your first and second highest executive positions are both chosen for you with no say on your part.

We know who they are b4 the election.

Yes, you're aware of who might end up leading your country with not so much as a "by your leave" from the very citizens they supposedly serve.

Much prefer our system to yours, thanks anyway.

That's because you don't know any different. Maybe you like the idea of your country's leadership essentially being chosen by fiat, but the idea that my country is being lead by someone I had no say in approving or disapproving of is completely alien to me.

[mellie]

Chard, this topic has been done to death. Is redundant, and not on our current governments to do list.
Go have a cuppa with Quentin Bryce and her pro republican Ausflag pannelist hubbie Michael.

[mantra]

That's because you don't know any different. Maybe you like the idea of your country's leadership essentially being chosen by fiat, but the idea that my country is being lead by someone I had no say in approving or disapproving of is completely alien to me.

One advantage to being a monarchy is that we can call on our governor general - the Queen's representative, to sack a corrupt prime minister. As far as other benefits go - it's hard to tell what being a republic could do to Australia. I can imagine some extreme capitalist becoming leader and turning the country into a dictatorship.

[mellie]

Ladies, Gentlemen, and IQ, I give you Mellie, a woman so daft she thinks the Queen of England, one of the most conservative women in the world, is a Leftist.

Stay classy, Mellie.

The fact that you think she's conservative rather than progressive only serves to demonstrate your ignorance.

[Neferti]

I have no wish to become a Republic with and El Presidente thanks... we've been a constitutional monarchy for a long time and it works very well.

I see no reason why you could not retain the monarchy as a republic. Either way, your government still comes down to a nationalized popularity contest, only with a Republican system you have a direct vote for who the leader of your country is. At the very least you should amend your constitution to make the office of Prime Minister constitutionally recognized with defined limits of powers granted to the office instead of the office being a political custom.

Chard,

Have you read our Constitution? Read it Here It won't take long.

[Rorschach]

Hmmm for all intents and purposes the PM is the leader of the country.

Yes, but by political convention only. The position has no actual legitimate basis in your constitution and worse, it's a position you have no actual say in who fills the role. But we do get to vote for policies and parties which in turn means we are voting for the PM... you put way too much weight on a single individual, the El Presidente... we don't.

We indirectly vote them in, the leader of the party with the most seats is PM.

An indirect vote is no vote at all. yes it is... Your first and second highest executive positions are both chosen for you with no say on your part. Works fine doesn't it.

We know who they are b4 the election.

Yes, you're aware of who might end up leading your country with not so much as a "by your leave" from the very citizens they supposedly serve. Works fine doesn't it.

Much prefer our system to yours, thanks anyway.

That's because you don't know any different. You do? Maybe you like the idea of your country's leadership essentially being chosen by fiat, but the idea that my country is being lead by someone I had no say in approving or disapproving of is completely alien to me. Yet like us you must accept the winner in the end even if you opposed him, his policies etc... You need to understand we are not Americans... we have a thing called the tall poppy syndrome, we don't have what are substantially presidential elections, even though Labor have been pushing that way since Whitlam. We do not idolise individuals like Americans do. A big headed bragard here would not do well.

[IQS.RLOW]

Yes, but by political convention only. The position has no actual legitimate basis in your constitution and worse, it's a position you have no actual say in who fills the role.

Actually, the last govt managed to set back a republic by many many years simply because they decided to change leaders halfway through their first term - proving that when a govt is voted in, if you change from the leader that went to that election you are gonna get pummelled. So essentially we have a similar system that changing it would only invoke cost.

Leave well enough alone I say. No reason to give a government another reason to spend money on wasteful shit such as more offices , more beauracracy, paper, more headers, special stamps blah blah fucking blah that really won't make a sod of difference.

The head of state under an australian republic will only ever be a figurehead.

Fuck the pollies.