So the current English Queen is off to Ireland for her first, and possibly her last visit.

So will Australian get down on their knees and grovel to the next English Queen, Queen Camilla, Queen of the Stables?




Queen's Ireland visit gains momentum


The Queen's first visit to the Republic of Ireland has moved a step closer, after the man most likely to lead the country voiced his support for the idea.

Fine Gael party leader Enda Kenny says a royal trip is long overdue, and there is speculation the trip could take place within the next three months.

The last serving British monarch to visit Dublin was King George V in 1911, before the republic gained independence from Britain.

The Queen is a regular visitor to Northern Ireland, but has never stepped across the border.

Mr Kenny says the Queen would be warmly received by the majority of Irish people and says a visit would symbolise the "growing up" of both countries.

But Sinn Fein's party president, Gerry Adams, is opposed to the visit, saying it is premature.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134924.htm?section=world

---

Labor blueprint to survive the Greens

■ Prime Minister Julia Gillard has reiterated her belief that Australia should become a republic.

''I'm certainly in favour of a republic,'' she said during a radio interview in New Zealand, adding it was important that the debate in Australia continued.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/labor-blueprint-to-survive-the-greens-20110216-1awt0.html



Good that Labor support Greens Policy for a republic too.

Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things.

There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want.

You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want.

Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway.

Verge wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 9:02am:

Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things. There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want. You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want. Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway.

This is how the Howard Government railroaded the issue. Greens desire a simple referendum.

How about a straight forward vote on a question like.

Do you desire Australia to become a Republic : Yes/No/Neutral

If the majority say yes, then we next start discussions on what type of model and vote on it down the track.

Putting the model first is silly since the majority may reject the idea of becoming a Republic, making the model debate obsolete.

____ wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:15am:

Verge wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 9:02am: Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things. There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want. You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want. Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway. This is how the Howard Government railroaded the issue. Greens desire a simple referendum. How about a straight forward vote on a question like. Do you desire Australia to become a Republic : Yes/No/Neutral If the majority say yes, then we next start discussions on what type of model and vote on it down the track. Putting the model first is silly since the majority may reject the idea of becoming a Republic, making the model debate obsolete.

I beg to differ, because there is many out there who would rather stay a monarchy than have a republic model they dont like.

verge this is woodys attempt to take our eyes off the ball.. regarding boobys involvement with BIG HUGE NEW TAX..

woody couldnt careless about Ireland and even less about the Queen..as is seen by his untruthfull heading.. what a creep... as Richo said he couldnt lie straight in bed..only he was talking about someone else on the hardleft.

the Queen I bet will be a great big HIT in the Republic of Ireland..she is worth her weight in gold when it comes to diplomacy..

something you wouldnt understand sledgehammer..lol

____ wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:15am:

Verge wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 9:02am: Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things. There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want. You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want. Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway. This is how the Howard Government railroaded the issue. Greens desire a simple referendum. How about a straight forward vote on a question like. Do you desire Australia to become a Republic : Yes/No/Neutral If the majority say yes, then we next start discussions on what type of model and vote on it down the track. Putting the model first is silly since the majority may reject the idea of becoming a Republic, making the model debate obsolete.

This is the only way to do this. Mr Howard shamelessly manipulated the referendum with his loaded question, thus ensuring its defeat.  With republicans in senior positions on both sides of parliament we should be able to hold a properly worded referendum that would reflect the real wishes of the people.

Belgarion wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:40am:

____ wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 10:15am: Verge wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 9:02am: Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things. There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want. You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want. Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway. This is how the Howard Government railroaded the issue. Greens desire a simple referendum. How about a straight forward vote on a question like. Do you desire Australia to become a Republic : Yes/No/Neutral If the majority say yes, then we next start discussions on what type of model and vote on it down the track. Putting the model first is silly since the majority may reject the idea of becoming a Republic, making the model debate obsolete. This is the only way to do this. Mr Howard shamelessly manipulated the referendum with his loaded question, thus ensuring its defeat.  With republicans in senior positions on both sides of parliament we should be able to hold a properly worded referendum that would reflect the real wishes of the people.

did you get a list of the 64 amendments the Republicans wanted to change in the constitution?.. bel... nope neither did I..

ands that very wrong.

it was the Republicans that lost the vote.. they didnt want us peasants to have any say in anything.. especially who the president would be..

arent we just a little bit sick of being told whats good for us.. and to suck it up.. well I am.

Verge wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:27am:

____ wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 10:15am: Verge wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 9:02am: Saying you want a republic, and getting the nation to agree on how it should be so are two very different things. There will be people who want a republic and will vote against it if the model is not what they want. You wont be getting your republic for some time to come simply because people wont be able to agree on what model they want. Also, what is exactly wrong with our systems now, our government system is about as stable as you can get, we all know the queen is merely a figurehead and we do want we want anyway. This is how the Howard Government railroaded the issue. Greens desire a simple referendum. How about a straight forward vote on a question like. Do you desire Australia to become a Republic : Yes/No/Neutral If the majority say yes, then we next start discussions on what type of model and vote on it down the track. Putting the model first is silly since the majority may reject the idea of becoming a Republic, making the model debate obsolete. I beg to differ, because there is many out there who would rather stay a monarchy than have a republic model they dont like.

Then lets put it to a vote at the next federal election. If the majority vote for a monarchy, then I will respect the outcome. If the majority choose a Republic, will you?

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:39am:

verge this is woodys attempt to take our eyes off the ball.. regarding boobys involvement with BIG HUGE NEW TAX.. woody couldnt careless about Ireland and even less about the Queen..as is seen by his untruthfull heading.. what a creep... as Richo said he couldnt lie straight in bed..only he was talking about someone else on the hardleft. the Queen I bet will be a great big HIT in the Republic of Ireland..she is worth her weight in gold when it comes to diplomacy.. something you wouldnt understand sledgehammer..lol

It is not about the current Queen, it is about the following Queen and King.

Do Australian desire to start the shift towards a Republic now so we can shift at the end of Liz's reign.