"Australian Monarchists to fight republic plan of Labour Prime Minister Rudd"

Smidgey · 10-04-2008, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

The people of Australia had the chance to remove the Monarchy in the 1999 referendum and they wisely chose to remain a Royalist state. The republican campaign which started in the 1960's in Australia failed to win that referendum in 1999 as majorities in all states of Australia backed the Crown.

And we shall see what Australians really think if and when a proper yes/no question is asked.

Until then, we can only speculate, me denying the 1999 results due to bad questions, you denying recent polls and polls before the 1999 result because of the 1999 result.

Britannist · 10-04-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

Sorry Britannist, my mistake. However, you need to do so too, considering Australia has six states, not four. There are also technically three mainland territories, although one of them is 'controlled' by the Capital Territory.

My mistake was minor compared to yours on this, Smidgey. At least I know what is and is not a state.

There are two territories of The Commonwealth of Australia - the Northern Territory and Canberra (the Australian Capital Territory).

Canberra has a population of 332, 798 people - so a pro-republic vote there is much smaller than a pro-Monarchy vote in states with millions of people such as Victoria and New South Wales (NSW).

Britannist · 10-04-2008, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

And we shall see what Australians really think if and when a proper yes/no question is asked.

People in Australia still had the chance to remove the Monarchy in 1999 and chose not to do so. The 30 year campaign of republicans to get and win a referendum on this subject was rejected by voters in 1999.

As I wrote earlier, the republicans in Australia won a majority on the Constitutional Convention (a vote for which preceded the referendum on the Monarchy in 1999) - but after the electorate listened to the arguments of both sides they wisely voted to keep the Queen of Australia.

Smidgey · 10-04-2008, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

My mistake was minor compared to yours on this, Smidgey. At least I know what is and is not a state.

In your subjective opinion. The Australian territories function almost identically to the states, apart from that the commonwealth parliament can overrule their parliaments if it chooses to do so - hardly that big a difference compared to missing out millions of people... Personally I don't think these semantic arguments matter much. I do, however, think you need to stop being so aggressive.

Quote:

There are two territories of The Commonwealth of Australia - the Northern Territory and Canberra (the Australian Capital Territory).

Indeed.

Quote:

Canberra has a population of 332, 798 people - so a pro-republic vote there is much smaller than a pro-Monarchy votes in states with millions of people such as Victoria and New South Wales (NSW).

Which I never disputed.

Smidgey · 10-04-2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

People in Australia still had the chance to remove the Monarchy in 1999 and chose not to do so. The 30 year campaign of republicans to get and win a referendum on this subject was rejected by voters in 1999.

As I wrote earlier, the republicans in Australia won a majority on the Constitutional Convention (a vote for which preceded the referendum on the Monarchy in 1999) - but after the electorate listened to the arguments of both sides they wisely voted to keep the Queen of Australia.

And as I quite rightly pointed out, and will continue to do so, we will only know what Australia truly believes when a fair yes/no question is asked.

Britannist · 10-04-2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

The Australian territories function almost identically to the states.....

You wrote that Canberra is a state - it is not.

Britannist · 10-04-2008, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

I do, however, think you need to stop being so aggressive.

..................?

Smidgey · 10-04-2008, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

You wrote that Canberra is a state - it is not.

You wrote that there are four states, this is also false.

Where is this getting us Britannist?

Britannist · 10-04-2008, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

And as I quite rightly pointed out, and will continue to do so, we will only know what Australia truly believes when a fair yes/no question is asked.

......and as I quite rightly pointed out, and will continue to do so - Australians had the chance to remove the Monarchy in 1999 and very wisely chose not to do so.

Smidgey · 10-04-2008, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

..................?

One of your posts seemed to me to be more aggressive than they usually are.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode