Britannist

Is this a fair question to ask, Smidgey? It is most unlikely that such a question covering two different subjects would be put as a single question in a referendum.

I do however know one UKIP member who would Yes to the above question.

Smidgey

Indeed, but I think if one were to be held, it would be a few years from now.

It is also sad that Australia has compulsory voting.

Indeed, and I myself have more respect for the Queen than I do for her office. However, the Telegraph article you linked did mention that Prince Charles is a lot less popular.

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

Britannist

Thank you for your reply Northumbrian.

I think you might find many people who live in republics who would like nothing more than for their President to go off and live in another country. And not come back.

Smidgey

Of course not, but I was giving an extreme example to make a point.

Lots of republicans (myself included) want separation of powers, not, as was proposed in the Australian referendum, a president appointed by parliament. I would have voted no in such a referendum.

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

Britannist

I agree that compulsory voting is not good.

Some years ago I read that in Belgium (where apparently there is compulsory voting) at least 10% of the people just put a blank ballot paper in the ballot box. Those who do not turn up to vote apparently have their names put on a list on the local town hall notice board.

Smidgey

It would be nice if ballot papers in those countries (and even in our own) had a 'none of the above' option.

It would be interesting to see how many people would vote for that rather than have their ballot just counted as spoiled.

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

Britannist

If the people of Australia voted to have a directly-elected Presidency (and, as a Royalist, I would hope that they did not opt for any kind of republican system) there are many who think that such a decision could undermine the office of the Australian Prime Minister (who, unlike the President would not be elected directly by the people and who might be seen by some to have less political legitimacy than the directly-elected President).

It would be like in France whereby the Prime Minister has less power than the President. Indeed, as you will know, Smidgey, the French President can dismiss the Prime Minister (and many have done so before now).

On the other hand, there is the example of Germany which has a President who is not chosen in a direct vote by the people of that country. The result is that hardly anyone has heard of the German President.

My view is that rather than have a directly-elected political President whose office could undermine the office of the Prime Minister (like in France) and rather than having a low-profile political President not chosen by the people (as they have in Germany) - I suggest the non-political Royalist system we have here in the UK.

I can't see many people turning up in the Mall to cheer a President Kinnock or a President Heseltine as his carriage went by.

Britannist

This has been proposed before hasn't it - I am sure I read somewhere that someone tried to stand as the "none of the above" candidate and was told he could not do so by the Electoral Commission.

Northumbrian

But isn't the real issue that Australia is an independent country - so why have a Head of State who is not an Australian citizen?

Westcountryman

True, but interesting as it is, what would you do then, "Ah, the majority of the public hate us - they voted 'none of the above', but since we're the second most popular group at 20% of the vote, we'll govern"?

Or do you just continue on with no government until the next election?

__________________
Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietam - "This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty."