Since the Queen's passing, do you think Australia should become a republic?

  • Yes

    Votes: 35 18.1%
  • No

    Votes: 139 72.0%
  • I'm not sure - I want to wait and see how King Charles does

    Votes: 13 6.7%
  • I'm not fussed either way

    Votes: 6 3.1%

  • Total voters
    193
NO would anyone want a system like America. All people who want change should put up a better option for this country rather than just change for the sake of change.
 
I hope not as we will need our connection with the English once China really starts setting theirs sights on Australia. Hope it will never be inevitable, Mr Albanese. I hope we all have more sense than being pushed into something we don't really want
 
Poll: Do you think Australia should become a republic?

I know we're only a couple of weeks into the reign of King Charles, but with the Queen's passing, do you think Australia should stay in the Commonwealth or become a Republic?
Australia is now a country in our right no longer a colony.
With due respect to Queen Elizabeth 11 the time has come for a united Australia to become a Republic no longer with the British Monarchy as our head of State, particularly in view of its developed dysfunction.
 
Royal family antics are nothing new. We hear more about it these days because the international news and entertainment media feed off scandal. Australia has been a self-governing Commonwealth since federation on 1 January 1901. The royal figurehead is irrelevant to Australia's autonomy. Right now, the important issue for Australia is to maintain political and defence ties with countries more powerful than us who will come to our aid should we be threatened. The increasing presence of China on the Pacific stage makes those ties more important than ever. Keeping our close ties with Britain is a vital part of our national defence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrivingGirl
yes we should we can still be part of the commonwealth but without the direct tie to Britian, we dont need any laws to be passed to be approved by the governor general on behalf of the monarch
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrivingGirl
Royal family antics are nothing new. We hear more about it these days because the international news and entertainment media feed off scandal. Australia has been a self-governing Commonwealth since federation on 1 January 1901. The royal figurehead is irrelevant to Australia's autonomy. Right now, the important issue for Australia is to maintain political and defence ties with countries more powerful than us who will come to our aid should we be threatened. The increasing presence of China on the Pacific stage makes those ties more important than ever. Keeping our close ties with Britain is a vital part of our national defence.
The royal figurehead is definitely irrelevant to Australia's economy and legal or political processes.It is also agreed the media is having a field day with the current sequence of scandals involving several of the royal family, which from the general detrimental reaction of a vast number Bristish subjects, may well reflect on the future of the monarchy. Time will tell.
Meanwhile, it is quite clear it is essential we retain close ties with the US, Britian and France for the sake of their political and security as well as ours. Australia as a republic would be a demonstration of our independant support.
 
AustralIa will eventually become a Republic but it is who chooses our Head of State & changes to the Constitution which need to be determined by ALL. I am perfectly sure that there is already a short list for our first “President” . The ARM is looking just for the YES mandate. Then they & their politician buddies & rich donators will DECIDE everything else! I, personally could not say YES to that level of control…
All we need to do is substitute the title of President for Head of State and continue as we are as imperfect as it may be.
 
yes we should we can still be part of the commonwealth but without the direct tie to Britian, we dont need any laws to be passed to be approved by the governor general on behalf of the monarch
Its time has come for Australia to demonstrate we are an independant nation respectful of our heritage but able to stand alone.
 
where is the Aussie spirit of "give him a go"? To republicans please name me one person who can fill the shoes of our late Queen. Guess what, I know it is the monarchy. Who the hell wants another PM, Gov. General or any titled Aussie? Unbiased is not in the nature of people. Least of all the drip with the funny tea towel (Bandana) on his head or one that lives in a pink house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vinylted
Are we so immature that we cannot appoint our own Head of State? If the Brits want Charles, fine. But why should we have this person imposed on us? What a joke that Parliamentarians swear allegiance to the King of England! They should be swearing allegiance to the people of Australia. You know. The people who send them to the seats of government and who pay their wages and other perks.
And now want to create two classes of citizens with their dreadful Woke referendum. I would not trust these people to hire a new night soil collector, s
should one still exist!
 
I still belong to the "If it ain't broke don't fix it school" I simply cannot imagine the carnage that will be unleashed upon us with "Presidental" elections. Money will win every time as it does in America!
 
I still belong to the "If it ain't broke don't fix it school" I simply cannot imagine the carnage that will be unleashed upon us with "Presidental" elections. Money will win every time as it does in America!
All we need do to become a republic is to substitute our allegiance to the British monarchy with the Australian people. Things will then go on for us with united pride as an independent nation without any great change.
 
All we need do to become a republic is to substitute our allegiance to the British monarchy with the Australian people. Things will then go on for us with united pride as an independent nation without any great change.
If only that were the case. As you put it the prime minister of the time would be the defacto head of state call him/her what you will. But sorrowfully huge egos would never let that happen! The cry would rise we must have President! that's when the skullduggery starts! :cool: :(
 
If only that were the case. As you put it the prime minister of the time would be the defacto head of state call him/her what you will. But sorrowfully huge egos would never let that happen! The cry would rise we must have President! that's when the skullduggery starts! :cool: :(
The proposed Republican Constitution would contain the same constraints as those now applying to our present Prime Minister. In no way would we want to adopt something similar to the American Constitution- just a revamp of our present self-governing Commonwealth System.
 
The proposed Republican Constitution would contain the same constraints as those now applying to our present Prime Minister. In no way would we want to adopt something similar to the American Constitution- just a revamp of our present self-governing Commonwealth System.
I admire your trust in our political system/parties... dispiriTed
 

Join the conversation

News, deals, games, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.
  • We believe that retirement should be a time to relax and enjoy life, not worry about money. That's why we're here to help our members make the most of their retirement years. If you're over 60 and looking for ways to save money, connect with others, and have a laugh, we’d love to have you aboard.
  • Advertise with us

User Menu

Enjoyed Reading our Story?

  • Share this forum to your loved ones.
Change Weather Postcode×
Change Petrol Postcode×