I actually sort of disagree, Trudy; that is, I'm still thinking it through.
A bill of rights, although it enshrines certain rights as inalienable, also
puts the power to decide any given case within the legal system, that is, by
a group of unelected judges. In other words, it takes such questions out of
the political system where at least the politicians are elected by people
and gives it to unelected judges. So while I'd like to see a document of
rights, I'd prefer (I think) to see its jurisdiction remain within the
parliament, perhaps under the control of a Senate committee.
As to this PM and a republic - well, a PM with his own agenda has the power
now to appoint whoever he wants - no holds barred. Howard could install a
mate and is probably inclined and sneaky enough to do it. At least under
the system proposed in the referendum, he would be constrained by needing a
two-thirds majority of the parliament, so it's an improvement in that sense.
If the President was popularly elected, I don't really see how it wouldn't
just turn it into a political office, with the parties running candidates
and thus opening the way for a President with his/her own agenda. A John
Howard, it seems to me, is more likely to elected to President than be
appointed by two-thirds of the parliament. And a John Howard is more of a
threat under the current system.
Personally, I'd rather the office of President stay non-political, because I
think they are of more use in encouraging the institutions of civil society
than they are in being involved in the political process. So although
people make fun of the GG as office for a fete-opener, I think opening
fetes, making speeches at funerals, encouraging community projects etc is a
good and useful role for a President to play, especially if he/she is doing
it independent of the political parties.
I have to admit too, that I would really just like to see the nexus with the
British monarchy broken, which is the main reason I'll vote Yes. And I
don't see that a No vote will guarantee a second referendum anytime soon -
and you can imagine the scare campaign that will come from all quarters
against a direct election model. So I worry about the prospect of anything
ever changing and of living and dying in colonial times. But I don't see a
Yes vote as the end of the matter and I'm certainly open to further
constitutional change, including to direct election.
Trudy wrote:
>And it illustrates very clearly why we need a Bill of Rights. If the
republic gets up there will be no
>'convention' to put a brake on a PM with his own agenda. I find it very
scary to even contemplate a republic
>under Howard.
>
>Trudy
>
>tdunlop wrote:
>
>> I couldn't put my hands on it last night, but the full quote from the
>> Kingston book is as follows:
>>
>> "When the stakes are high the politicians get heavy, and John Howard
>> personally lobbied my editor-in-chief and editor, alleging pro-black bias
by
>> myself in particular and the paper in general. Some Liberals called the
>> Herald the 'Aboriginal Morning Herald', in protest at the number of black
>> faces and stories in the paper. I argued that the Wik debate was similar
to
>> the movement for black civil rights in the United States and that our
>> coverage must be factual but uncompromising when blatant injustice was
>> perpetrated on a minority with no clout but the justice of their cause."
>>
>> For a guy who apparently beleives in the monarchy and parliamentary
>> democracy, Howard is the most presidential of politicians. He has
>> personally blocked drug trials in the ACT, labelling of GMOs, has had a
>> remarkable influence on appointments to various govt and quasi-govt
bodies,
>> and guides debates in a deliberate, though often invisible way, such as
the
>> Republic and, obviously, Indigenous matters. That it extends to
pressuring
>> editors shouldn't be a surprise, though it is a surprise to hear that it
>> works so effictively. He was also rumoured to have rung Lachlan Murdoch
>> about what he felt was pro-Republic bias in The Australian. Anyone who
>> thinks that the office of PM isn't powerful should probably think again.
So
>> much of the tone of social/political debate is set by politicians that if
>> the most powerful of them gets it into his head to put a finger in the
>> various pies, then it is going to have a big influence. The most obvious
>> example is his tacit endorsment of hansonism. As Keating said in his
last
>> speech before the 1996 election: "When the government changes, so does
the
>> country." Ain't it the truth.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived
at http://www.mail-archive.com/
>> To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in
the body
>> of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
>> This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
permission from the
>> copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
research under the "fair
>> use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be
distributed further without
>> permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>>
>> RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
>To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the
body
>of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
>This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
permission from the
>copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
research under the "fair
>use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed
further without
>permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>
>RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
-------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
