Average IQ of Australians

[Nicole]

Australia is doing what the UN tells it to do in regards to immigration.

Thats why.

The most shocking thing I think is that the Queen of England still rules over Australia. Insane. And Canada... And New Zealand. I think only South Africa is independent now, but it's pretty obvious even anglo-saxons don't need negers.

its neither shocking or insane.

Australia is run independently of any interference from the "Queen".

We have a system that works and thats the way most "sane" Australians like it.

If we go to a republic our constitution will get rewritten.

How do you think that will do?

Our rights will get signed away with a stroke of a pen.

"Rights"? What rights, Serial? There are no rights enunciated in the Australian Constitution. None. Zilch. When you find some, you put them here.

If we become a Republic, little need change in our Constitution. All we need do is eliminate the mention of the monarchy and change the GG's title to President.

And that means you are happy that the Government of the day appoints the President. I am still undecided on that but I do tend towards it.

Good to know. I’ve been wondering all day.

[FLEKTARN]

Brian is dead in the brain once again.

The Queen holds the ability to fire the entire Australian government.

In 1975, for example, the Queen's representative in Aus at the time, Gov. Gen. Sir John Kerr, fired the prime minister in response to a government shutdown.

Kerr appointed a replacement, who immediately passed the spending bill to fund the government. Three hours later, Kerr dismissed the rest of Parliament. Then Australia held elections to restart from scratch. And they haven't had another shutdown since.

[FLEKTARN]

And Brain 9, you punk, I'll write that one more time, so this gets in your dumb kopf.

The Queen can dismiss the government and refuse to rubber stamp legislation, by way of her proxy, the Governor-General.

Technically, she's an almighty powerful dictator. Her correspondence between her and her Governor-General is still kept a secret.

[brian ross]

Brian is dead in the brain once again.

The Queen holds the ability to fire the entire Australian government.

In 1975, for example, the Queen's representative in Aus at the time, Gov. Gen. Sir John Kerr, fired the prime minister in response to a government shutdown.

Kerr appointed a replacement, who immediately passed the spending bill to fund the government. Three hours later, Kerr dismissed the rest of Parliament. Then Australia held elections to restart from scratch. And they haven't had another shutdown since.

Those are called the "reserve powers" and have only been exercised once, in as you note, 1975. That caused a Constitutional Crisis of epic proportions. That was the first and only time they have been used. Since then, every GG has stated that they would not use them except in an emergency.

The "Government shut down" as you describe it was a little bit more than that. It was the Senate (the upper house) exercising it's authority which prevented the passing of the Budget. The House of Lords lost that power in 1913 IIRC. The US congress has it (it is the lower house in the US) but their Senate does not. The Australian Senate did not reject the Budget bill, it delayed it. This caused the Government to effectively "run on empty".

The GG was meant to act in concert with the Council of State - which is appointed and controlled by the Prime Minister. However, the GG conferred illegally with the Leader of the Opposition, Malcolm Fraser who suggested that the GG dismiss the PM and put him in charge. The GG agreed on condition that Fraser pass the Budget. Of course he agreed. However, before Parliament was dismissed the now ex-PM held a vote of no confidence in the new government which should have meant he was dismissed immediately as PM and a new vote was held in the House of Representatives to replace him. That was conveniently ignored at the time and we faced a new election.

What the GG, Sir John Kerr did was overturn 75 years of tradition on how the Government of Australia was operated. Government is drawn from support in the House of Representatives, not the Senate. Gough Whitlam still had the confidence of the House. Kerr utilised powers which were vague and some believed didn't actually exist in the Constitution. He had alternatives which he did not exercise before dismissing the Government, which might have solved the problem of the Opposition blocking Supply. He basically reached for the bottom drawer to solve a problem which the Opposition had created and rewarded the Opposition.

And the Queen didn't do it. It was all Kerr's idea (with help from the Leader of the Opposition). Indeed, if the PM hadn't paused for a meal of steak and chips at Parliament house, he would have beaten Fraser to Government House and dismissed the GG first. However, that is what fate often hangs on.

[Neferti]

Whitlam LOST in December 1975, despite you lot of leftards maintaining "the rage". I made sure I was on the Roll so that I could VOTE Coalition, as did a lot of other people!

On election night, 13 December, the Coalition won the largest majority government in Australian history, winning 91 seats to Labor's 36. Labor suffered a 6.5 percent swing against it and its caucus was cut almost in half, suffering a 30-seat swing. Labor was left with five fewer seats than it had when Whitlam took the leadership. The Coalition also won a 37–25 majority in the Senate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whi ... %80%931978

[cods]

the Aust govt to apply to the Queen and the Crown refused to get involved they said it was for Australia to decide..

which they did with an ELECTION...

the left needs to suck it up... the voters of the day are given a choice


and they make it..


just as they did on the 18/5/2019

[cods]

Whitlam LOST in December 1975, despite you lot of leftards maintaining "the rage". I made sure I was on the Roll so that I could VOTE Coalition, as did a lot of other people!

On election night, 13 December, the Coalition won the largest majority government in Australian history, winning 91 seats to Labor's 36. Labor suffered a 6.5 percent swing against it and its caucus was cut almost in half, suffering a 30-seat swing. Labor was left with five fewer seats than it had when Whitlam took the leadership. The Coalition also won a 37–25 majority in the Senate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whi ... %80%931978

in ya nef.... dont you like the way the left pretend that election never happened it was always Kerr who got rid of them..

they have to have a scapegoat dont they?

[brian ross]

I note that none of you have disputed what I said. How interesting. Even more interesting, did I say one word against the people deciding? Nope. In fact, that was one of the alternatives that Kerr should have considered before dismissing Whitlam. However, he did not. He simply replaced him with a minority government under Fraser. Funny that, hey? A lot of conjecture has been claimed about Kerr's "discussions" with Fraser before the dismissal. Discussions which he was not legally empowered to make and which went expressly against the directions of Whitlam. It seems you're quite willing to accept dirty tricks when they go your way...

I note that Cods has concurred with my point - the Queen wasn't involved in the dismissal. It was all Kerr's doing.

[Wally Raffles]

The most shocking thing I think is that the Queen of England still rules over Australia. Insane. And Canada... And New Zealand. I think only South Africa is independent now, but it's pretty obvious even anglo-saxons don't need negers.

its neither shocking or insane.

Australia is run independently of any interference from the "Queen".

We have a system that works and thats the way most "sane" Australians like it.

If we go to a republic our constitution will get rewritten.

How do you think that will do?

Our rights will get signed away with a stroke of a pen.

"Rights"? What rights, Serial? There are no rights enunciated in the Australian Constitution. None. Zilch. When you find some, you put them here.

If we become a Republic, little need change in our Constitution. All we need do is eliminate the mention of the monarchy and change the GG's title to President.

And that means you are happy that the Government of the day appoints the President. I am still undecided on that but I do tend towards it.

Good to know. I’ve been wondering all day.

I can't imagine why?

[Nicole]

Well exactly Oz. Clearly my sarcasm was lost on you.