Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The British government monarchy
The British government monarchy
Monarchy government
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Without change, there will be no way of telling if anything works. For years upon end, Australia has kept its monarchy system, and as a nation, it’s time to begin our own story. Although we may be becoming a republic and severing a few ties, that doesn’t mean we have to sever all of them entirely. Besides, wouldn’t an Australian work better as a representative for state rather than an English person? With the current rules, there is a lot of discrimination within the royal family. A republic doesn’t stand for a family. It stands for a nation.
If Australia becomes a republic, we will finally be united as a nation. We’ll finally have our own Australian head of state, not a monarch who was lucky to be born into it. The queen is a power that
…show more content…
has too much control over our government, with the ability to absolutely obliterate it at an instant; we’re in constant danger of having a corrupt ruler. It doesn’t help that the Queen has power over the military, she doesn’t even live here, why should she have all of these rights if she doesn’t even understand what’s going on? There have been a lot of problems with England’s rulers over the years.
Take Richard III for example, who had usurped the throne and imprisoned his competitors in order to gain power. He succeeded in doing this, which put England in a terrible state. Suppose that were to happen to us, our nation would be destroyed. However, Australia should not sever all ties with England, as they are a powerful ally and …show more content…
friend. If Australia becomes a republic, this does not mean that it has to sever all ties with Britain, in fact it would be better if we didn’t. We have strong cultural ties, and we can still have a relationship, as equals and allies. Although our past hasn’t been the most peaceful, removing the monarchy would not remove those bloody ties. When England took over, there was a lot of death and events that we are not exactly proud of. Forgetting this is not the answer, and severing our ties with England may help us remember. More political movements will be the key into restoring equality. At the moment, our head of state is an English person, why is it not an Australian representing our country? Suppose we were to have an Australian governor general, wouldn’t you trust someone who was voted for by millions rather than someone who was born into it?
An Australian governor-general could be voted in and represent our nation. The only reason people haven’t voted for a republic is fear of change, because last time change occurred, the original custodians of this land were denied their rights and killed. It’s time to step up and solve this issue, by closing the gap between the Anglo-Saxons and the Aboriginal societies respectively. All Australians should be equal with their own rights respectively. Who all deserve their own rights to vote for our head of state. What is worse is that the monarch only allows one bloodline and religion to lead.
The heir to the throne must visit the Church of Rome before they are eligible to take up their position on the throne. So if the prince/princess were to become a king or queen, they must be a certain religion, which is mighty discriminatory for a nation that claims to be equal. Although it is illegal to sabotage the incoming heir, if the current queen does not approve, there will always be preference over any other religion. On that note, it is said that males are held above females in terms of becoming the
king/queen. If we become a republic, we can demolish the inequalities, as we will have removed the royal family’s dominance. There will be no more preferences, no more discrimination against those of a different religion. Sure, this may be a bit costly, but it's going to a cause that could make our nation entirely independent and more proactive. We could still be allies with England, but then our military would be under our control and not a higher authority’s. This way, our representatives will represent us, not the queen. In conclusion, Australia should become a Republic. The unacceptable inequalities and injustices will not go unheard, and switching to a Republic nation will restore justice, and fix our system. This monarchy goes against our democratic society, by removing the equality and leaving it up to another nation. It doesn’t help that the queen has control over our military, and she doesn’t even live here. When we become a republic, our nation will be united. A republic doesn’t stand for a family. It stands for a nation.
This paper concludes with that Rowe is an important case for Australia representative democracy because it underlines the implied right to vote supported under sections 7 and 24 of the Constitution along with the previous case, Roach. It also defines the importance of the equal electorate to maintain the representative democracy as well.
They have juggled power between them and Australia has emerged a powerful and intelligent nation under their leadership.
Australia is a monarchy of the United Kingdom. It always has been, and yet this does not seem to have significantly and adversely affected our development and growth towards our country. Thus, there seems no legitimate purpose to change this; since a republican Australia displays a lack of conclusive benefits towards our economy and ‘way of life.’ An Australian republic would cost billions to undertake and is simply unnecessary as there are more important issues facing Australia; and if the Australian citizens are not calling for a referendum, then any serious discussions from politicians or other related public figures are irrelevant and meaningless.
A Constitution is a set of rules put in place to govern a country, by which the parliament, executive and judiciary must abide by in law making and administering justice. In many countries, these laws are easily changed, while in Australia, a referendum process must take place to alter the wording of the Constitution (Commonwealth of Australia, date unknown, South Australian Schools Constitutional Convention Committee 2001). Since the introduction of the Australian Constitution in January 1901, there have been sufficient proposals to alter and insert sections within the body to reflect the societal values of the day, ensuring the Constitution remains relevant to the Australian people. Although Constitutional reform can be made on a arrangement of matters, the latest protests on Indigenous recognition and racial references within the body of the Constitution has called into question the validity of racial inclusion, and whether amendments should be made to allow for recognition. This essay will focus on the necessity of these amendments and evaluate the likelihood of change through the process of referenda.
Destiny of the Republic by Candice Millard is a non fiction book on the killing of James
I believe that Australia should not become a republic. I think that there would be no point in becoming a republic, because we live without the intervention of the Queen at the moment, so becoming a republic would achieve nothing. If we were to become a republic, we would lose the support of England in times of war, famine or other disaster. I think that becoming a republic would achieve nothing, lose our links with England and waste the parliament's time when they should be concerned with more important issues.If we were to become a republic, the governor general would be replaced by a president who would have the same powers and responsibilities as our Governor General, so only the name and the person holding the position would change, wasting important parliament time and achieving absolutely nothing.
When Australia’s 21st Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, was swept into power in December 1972 there was huge anticipation for dramatic and swift change. Australia had been under the control of a conservative liberal government for 23 consecutive years, and Whitlam’s promises if social change were eagerly anticipated. Whitlam, despite his failings as a negotiator, managed to implement a huge array of reforms and changes, many of which shaped Australia into the country it is today. However is that enough to say he succeeded? Even Whitlam today admits that he regrets doing “too much too soon”, and perhaps Whitlam’s government was a government that was too socially progressive for its time, which could perchance have been a foreshadowing of things to come for the most recent labor government of Julia Gillard which has been labeled by some as the most incompetent government since Whitlam. Gough Whitlam has had the most books written and published about him than any other Australian Prime Minister to Date. This essay will argue that Whitlam was a successful leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), who had the ability and charisma to lead Australia in an era of prosperity; he did however succumbed to a few grave errors of judgment that ultimately led to his downfall, however his ultimate goal was to transform Australia which he achieved. Whitlam’s’ errors were seen as being due to his inability take advice from senior figures on how to turn his amateur government into a competent one and his inflexible approach to dealing with the hostile senate that the Australian public gave him, and often led to his government being labeled the worst in Australian history and as a failure.
The issue for all Australians is that if there is a Bill of Rights, it will take some time getting use to new constitutional arrangements. However, by enacting a Bill of Rights, it will be a starting point of something great; providing basic constitutional principles, independence of judiciary, fundamental protection of human rights and the independence of judiciary.
Aboriginals have lived various types of lives and in attempt to improve the lives of Canada’s Aboriginal people formed the Aboriginal self-government. Developing self-government for aboriginal peoples living in urban areas was not easy. The form of self-government varied across the country depending on the factors in each area or region. Some cities had existing aboriginal organizations providing a good basis upon which to build which made the self-government an easier thing to make. Despite the many challenges, self-government for aboriginal peoples living in urban areas is a concept that can be realized and can contribute to meeting the needs and aspirations of Canada’s Aboriginal peoples. Since the formation, the self-government has accomplished
Today, there is a major issue about Parliament related to Senate. The Senate usually examine bills to make sure that they are the most benefitting choice. They are also in charge of protecting the rights and interests of Canadians. As a result, Senate can be referred as a "sober second thought." However, a large number of Canadians disagree this and think that Senate should be abolished. Certainly, Senate is the useless system which rather affects society in a negative way. This is because the Senate costs lots of money, it is unfair system and the Senators do not perform any significant actions.
“They must have the right sort of intelligence and ability; and also they must look upon the commonwealth as their special concern – the sort of concern that is felt for something so closely bound up with oneself that its interests and fortunes, for good or ill, are held to be identical with one’s own” (The Republic of Plato ...
With an understanding of the theoretical links between economic structures, relations of production, and political systems that protect economic structures in society this case study examines media as a contributor to democracy in Australia as well as a business with economic objectives. This section will provide a short explanation of Fairfax media history and position in 2012 prior to explaining Gina Rinehart’s role in the company. The print sector in Australia has historically exhibited relatively high levels of concentration, dominated by News Corp Australia, Fairfax and APN. The Australian print news media have experienced a long-term trend of a decrease in titles and owners. According to Geoffrey Craig, ‘in 1923 there were as many as
The monarchy symbolizes unity and traditions, which is unique and treasured to the nation. The monarch universally known as head of the Commonwealth, she is voluntarily recognised as the Head of State to 54 independent countries (The British Monarchy, 2013) The Queen to modern Britain, is an icon, who cannot simply be swapped for an elected politician. The British monarchy has played huge importance in British history, which is integral to our national identity. The Queen reined for 61 years and she provides an existing connection between the past, present and future. This is exactly what a politician could not offer to the public; for instance, Tony Blair, prior to 1997 was unknown on a state level, as he had done nothing significant for the British public. The monarchy’s traditions are famous not only in the United Kingdom but throughout the world. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is the ruler of sixteen other countries including Britain. Whilst the queen receives many privileges as head of state, it does come at a personal cost. Her privacy is limited as she is consistently scrutinized from t...
The king or queen will not just be a pretty face that is in office to look good and give the people a countenance for the government like they are in the UK. For example, Queen Elizabeth II dresses in elegant and elaborate costumes and looks stern, and waves to her people, but she does not have any true power as the queen at this time. In this colony, the king or queen will be able to write, veto, remove, or pass all laws for the colony. The king or queen will have to work alongside the colony’s parliament to ensure that there is no “God complex” for the king or queen elected. The king or queen elected would also be required to interact with the general public of the colony; just like the president of the US and Queen Elizabeth II and they will also be the presenters of awards earned by the citizens.
It is well known that the British political system is one of the oldest political systems in the world. Obviously, it was formed within the time. The United Kingdom of the Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the constitutional monarchy, providing stability, continuity and national focus. The monarch is the head of state, but only Parliament has the right to create and undertake the legislation. The basis of the United Kingdom’s political system is a parliamentary democracy. Therefore, people think the role of the Queen as worthless and mainly unnecessarily demanding for funding, but is it like that?