Queen Camilla (1 Viewer)

[Jonathan A]

Then I suggest you start campaigning for a republic.

If people actually kept up to date with the developments at the Reserve Bank, the Queen no longer is on our $5 notes, it's Sir Henry Parkes.

 

[chepas]

There is no such thing as 'Queen's Consort'.
The husband of a Queen is the Prince Consort.
Camilla was going to be Princess Consort, however by law the wife of a King automatically becomes Queen.

yeh, the only reason that philip is a prince and not a king is cos king is higher than queen, and lizzi was heir.
i cant believe they sed she would b queen i would like a lil bit of proof thanks speedo.
thats jst rediculous.

So THAT is why Philip isn't a King along side the Queen, because a "King" is higher than a "Queen"? There's gender equality for you...

 

[MoNNiE]

Actually, your reference to Sir. Henry Parkes fully replacing the queen on the $5 was only for the year 2001 to comemmorate of course, the Centenary of federation~

it has now gone back to the queen..(you must of at least noticed that with the $5 change u might get back with purchases)

though you can still get the old henry parkes note, but since they arn't printing any more off they'll slowly disappear

http://www.rba.gov.au/CurrencyNotes/NotesInCirculation/current_notes_in_circulation.html

 

[Scanorama]

The British royals (especially Charles and his company) are in a mess, full of scandals etc etc. The Danish and Swedish royals are relatively scandals free. Charles should seriously consider abdication to let his son to succeed the throne.

As for our $5 notes, yes the Queen Liz is back, all newish $5 notes are now have her face on it, Henry Parks note was released for a while during 2001 and its now back to the queen.

 

[Jonathan A]

The British royals (especially Charles and his company) are in a mess, full of scandals etc etc. The Danish and Swedish royals are relatively scandals free. Charles should seriously consider abdication to let his son to succeed the throne.

As for our $5 notes, yes the Queen Liz is back, all newish $5 notes are now have her face on it, Henry Parks note was released for a while during 2001 and its now back to the queen.

On your first pointL the Danes and the British Royal Family are related, so they can't be scandal free if you view it that way.

And for your second point, thank your for the clarification. Good to see Her Majesty back on the $5 note.

 

[Iron]

Folded in a certain manner, just showing her face below the lip and rotated 180 degrees, one may see a rather crude image if one's imagination is one tracked.

 

[katie_tully]

I thought only John Howard and old people were staunch monarchists.

 

[Monkey Butler]

Folded in a certain manner, just showing her face below the lip and rotated 180 degrees, one may see a rather crude image if one's imagination is one tracked.

LOL, I remember being shown that in about year 9. It was pretty classic at the time.

 

[fashionista]

I thought only John Howard and old people were staunch monarchists.

im a monarchist..only if the monarchy actually has some reasonable, worthwhile input into the democratics of a country....and if the monarchy are hot.

conclusion...i dont want charles as king

 

[malkin86]

What if the monarchy are hot, but turn out to be raving loonies who insist on the divine right of kings and also insist on running the country to pander to their whims?

 

[Jonathan A]

I thought only John Howard and old people were staunch monarchists.

Bad news, 72% of electorates were against the Republic last referendum. There is also a Young Monarchist movement. I am a member of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy - and our branches only get larger.

 

[Jonathan A]

What if the monarchy are hot, but turn out to be raving loonies who insist on the divine right of kings and also insist on running the country to pander to their whims?

Good luck to them as our constitution would provide them with some difficulties as would the constitutional developments of England.

 

[katie_tully]

Bad news, 72% of electorates were against the Republic last referendum. There is also a Young Monarchist movement. I am a member of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy - and our branches only get larger.

Bad news, 72% of electorates were against the Republic last referendum, because the majority of them were against what John Howard was proposing, not because 72% if electorates agree with having a monarchy.

Have you a decent argument as to why we need to have a monarchy, apart from not wanting to cut the apron strings?

 

[Jonathan A]

Bad news, 72% of electorates were against the Republic last referendum, because the majority of them were against what John Howard was proposing, not because 72% if electorates agree with having a monarchy.

Have you a decent argument as to why we need to have a monarchy, apart from not wanting to cut the apron strings?

I have a lot of arguments FOR monarchy. I was merely making a point in response to the above issue.

The referendum posed two reforms, one to the preamble (John Howard's idea) and then the republic question. BOTH were refused.

Additionally more and more Australians are opposed to the republic, parties who bring up the issue in election campaigns, usually never do well, e.g. the Democrats, The ALP at the federal election.

Australia by nature is quite conservative, in order for the ALP to succeed they have had to resort to paying off the electorate or in state's situation take a right wing social approach. My point here is that out ofo 40 or so referendums, only 8 have been agreed on, many have had to be put before the populace numerous times, e.g. our federation.

My beliefs for staying under the Monarchy are based on traditions and legal stability. There is no benefit in us moving away from England, niether legally nor socially. We are Australia!

 

[malkin86]

The republic question was phrased in such a way that the people would have about as much say in the Head of State under the specific system that was proposed as they do now... And doesn't the Queen do effectively nothing here, unless she decides to come on holidays? She doesn't overrule the GG. She's a figurehead.

 

[Iron]

Off with her (as) head (of state)!

 

[Jonathan A]

The republic question was phrased in such a way that the people would have about as much say in the Head of State under the specific system that was proposed as they do now... And doesn't the Queen do effectively nothing here, unless she decides to come on holidays? She doesn't overrule the GG. She's a figurehead.

I will be honest. The Queen has the authority to overrule any bit of legislation passed by the parliament within a year. This power is never used, and it has advantages. It means if our Seperation of Powers fail, there is another safeguard.

I will point out if people want to understand the constitutional monarchy in Australia, they ought to also refer to our conventions, the unwritten aspects of the constitutional structure, such as the Governor General and Queen following the advice of the parliament.

 

[Jonathan A]

Off with her (as) head (of state)!

Head of state is a term used in international law generally.

 

[Iron]

You cant deminish my stolen gag

 

[Jonathan A]

You cant deminish my stolen gag

Nor do I intend to.