skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 9:36am:


We have had a referendum on the republic issue, in 1999, it was defeated..

And as for the new flag...

"A 2010 Morgan Poll that asked: "Do you think Australia should have a new design for our National Flag?" was supported by 29% of respondents and opposed by 66%, with 5% uncommitted"

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:19am:



Howard had nothing to do with the model selection.

This was typical Turnbull making his decision and trying to railroad it through.

He did succeed in bullying his option past the convention but left half of the republicans in opposition to his model.

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:49am:



Quote:


Do you understand what you are saying here.

If Howard had provided the first step of do you want a republic the result you say is that you vote yes.

The second step is to put the same models up that you voted against only this time you do not have the luxury of being able to say no thanks.?



Unbelievable:

You voted against their model but support a system to rort the result and leave you with no option but to accept the model which you already voted against when they give you the second choice and find that it is the best option on the table although clearly deficient compared to the current system.

This strategy is a dishonest method of ensuring that the current system is not tested against the best alternate model on offer.

.

Verge wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 11:28am:

No I dont.
I didn't want the model that was put up in 99,that is why I along with many republicans voted against it.

The problem with the 99 model was that the great majority of people who wanted a republic did not want the politicians to tell us what model it would be, that is the main reason it lost, many republicans, like myself ,voted against it.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:12pm:

NO.It doesn't mean that.
We need a plebiscite to determine what the people want, not a referendum, the referendum can come when we know if the republic is wanted by the majority.
Ofcourse monachists do not want a plebiscite on this question, they know the answer.
Once we determine if the majority want a republic we can then decide what model the public want. It is obvious from last time that the majority do not want the politicians to decide what model is best, it is also obvious that the public wish to elect the president themselves,as that was the main reason the last model was not successful, I voted against it, not because I dont want a republic, because I didn't want Howard to dictate the style of that republic.
You see, no matter who is in power Labor or Liberal, the PM of the day does not want a popular elected head of state.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:33pm:

Its similar, but the difference is a referendum is held to change something, IE the republic, a plebiscite is held to gauge opinion,it is not binding like a referendum.
I'd have though someone that follows politics would be aware of that.

some areas of NSW held a plebiscite at the last council elections to gauge the opinion on local govs being recognised in the constitution, even if it had got 100% support nothing would have happened as it was not a referendum. It in fact got 80% support, but guess what? local govs are still not recognised in the constitution.

A plebiscite is Quote:

A referendum is Quote:


See the difference?

One is opinion, the other a definite accept or reject.