South Pacific Poms

Lejon says:

08:50am | 31/08/10

Sorry - what’s the job - doing nothing ?

Richard says:

02:18pm | 31/08/10

Exactly Lejon. Don’t denigrate it~ it would be hard to possess ultimate sovereign power and yet not excercise it, merely keeping it safe and passing it on to the next monarch for the continuity of our system. Do you think President Turnbull (or whoever) would be able to be entrusted with ultimate sovereign power yet refrain from using it to interfere in our political and legislative process?

Peter Evans says:

02:27pm | 31/08/10

That just shows how bad the preparation is. You will find a monarch in England. Have a nice trip.

David Donovan says:

08:05am | 31/08/10

@Eric Pravda was merely an example, and I noticed you haven’t mentioned the other arguments. Let’s face it, the current situation is confusing, even for Australians.

In addition, as Noel Pearson says, by becoming a republic that celebrates our British and also acknowledges or immigrant and indigenous heritage, which are also important strands in our national identity that are not currently acknowledged, we can turn over a new leaf and be a “affirmational” republic that every Australian can truly feel a part of.

Lejon says:

08:58am | 31/08/10

No you’ve missed the point - many Australians have no idea what their Nationality is as demonstrated in the article by ’ Joshua ’ and that confusion is not unusal . It even extends to the National level evidenced by the flying of a flag that is a British Dominion Ensign !

TimB says:

09:55am | 31/08/10

The situation isn’t confusing at all. 16 nations, all equal, all independent, who happen to share a common head of state.

If the likes of Canada and New Zealand can get their heads around it, so can we. Are you seriously telling me that those other countries are suffering some sort of cultural identiy crisis? Please.

Arguing that we should change because there’s a group of people to stupid and ignorant to understand the system is weak. We should not pander to the views of idiots.

Show me a distinct material advantage for going to all the effort of converting to a republic and you might sway me. In the meantime, making things easier for the uninformed and swapping one powerless figurehead for another figurehead isn’t worth the effort.

We have more important issues to worry about.

Gregg says:

10:59am | 31/08/10

Well David, Pravda may be one example and Joshua is well lets just say a Joshua
But look mate the best reason of all is still Why!
Why at all change?
You say the the current situation is confusing, even for Australians!
Oh yeah! and how
My ancestory goes back to a Greek jumping ship about 1842 on one side of the family and Duke of Wellington in his Irish context on the other and a bit of German and English thrown in along the way but I’m not confused.
We’re Australians first and foremost, we compete at the Olympics as Australians and we play all sports internationally as Australians, we would even have accepted a Welsh born lass as an Australian PM if her party had won an election and our military and other services personnel serve overseas as Australians.
Though, we’ll even have ring ins from time to time like Jo Bjelkie, Russel, MelG, Kosta Zu and a few more, that’s OK when it’s OK as in they’ve done something they can be proud of and we’ll be proud of them just as we’re still mighty proud of our Aussie born and bred and can feel disappointment when all of them have not done so good but a true blue Aussie will not disown any of them.
I can remember last referendum and in the gabfest leading up to it, might have been somebody like Malcom Turnbull who said something like we have an Identity crisis!
He at least has the right name for a turn of bull!

It would seem the biggest problem for some may be that GSTQ gets played because of diplomatic protocol and I imagine that could be very easily fixed by a joint letter from our PM and the Queen to all countries to indicate that whilst Australia remains a member of the British Commonwealth [ like a few other countries ] , the British government, Crown and Australians recognise that Australia is a separate sovereign entity and yet many Australians still acknowledge some ties to Britain from a historical perspective.
That being so it is the wishes of us all that The National Anthem of Australia to be played on all official and unofficial occassions is Tie Moi Kangeroo Down Sport!
Signed
Lizzie
PS. This is particularly touching for me as Rolf did such a great portrait of me.

As for acknowledging immigrant and indigenous heritage, that is done regularly and if some different words being put into the constitution are felt necessary, I’m sure there’ll be many Australians who will not object but does it need a change to being a Republic?
Well does it?

Huddo says:

03:17pm | 31/08/10

Anyone who is unhappy with Australia as it is, is welcome to move to the Republic of India or the Republic of Greece.  Seriously David, couldn’t you at least have picked some better options to inspire us?  Both are beautiful countries with great people, but the culture in each is heavy with corruption, both at the individual and the government level.  No reason there for us to change.

Pete ( the republican) from Sydney says:

09:29am | 31/08/10

Right Barry and a monkey might fly out of my bum ....

it’s hard to fathom that we’re still having this discussion…no one denies the British heritage, we’re a long way and a long time from the notion that we are still tied to the apron strings of the mother country, this should have been put to bed ages ago…time to grow up Australia

Greg says:

11:11pm | 31/08/10

Pete we have grown up. Pity you are so insecure you think this republic drive is growth. Handing more power to politicians? open your eyes and thank this country and its institutions that dullards like yourself have a voice.
Lets get rid of an institution and person who in her reign has seen JFK come and go,communism come and go, seen the wall built and torn down, seen Menzies,Gough,Fraser,Hawk and others come and go, leaders all over the world have come and gone, but our monarchy has remained. you would have us as another short lived may fly. Think about the wisdom our monarch has as she has watched the world succeed and fail over 60 odd years. No lets give a politicians more power. Time for you to grow up and realise we have the best of both worlds. Independent but stable thanks to our monarch who is the pressure valve of our constitution.

Gregg says:

11:16am | 31/08/10

No David,
Barry says he can live with that if need be and would it not just be a reference to the title of your article.
There may well be some way of excising the Queen from our system, be it a formal declaration of independence, constitutional ammendment or whatever, but again Why?
You do not seem to have prosecuted your case too well Barry and if the status quo is to be changed, should not the onus be on those seeking change to show clear benefit in making it?

Richard says:

01:40pm | 31/08/10

You know it took 10 long years of studying Taoism full me to grasp the inherent virtue of someone having the capacity to do “nothing - nothing at all”. This truly is a remarkable ability. The Queen has ultimate sovereign power invested in her, and yet allows it all to be devolved in constitutionally proscribed ways! This is a vital role (that evolved naturally over time into a workable system instead of just being instituted top-down like Republicans would try and do) that I would not wish to entrust anyone else with. It has nothing to do with Anglophile-ism or a lack of cultural identity. Its just that the elegant mechanics of the system would be destroyed by removing the Queen.

Gregg says:

11:32am | 31/08/10

You’ve read it wrong lejon for
” when Australian diplomats are received at official functions overseas, the anthem that is played is ‘God Save the Queen’ and the Queen is toasted at the end as head of state.  “
means overseas and not in Australia where it’s Advance Australia Fair or Oi Oi Oi!
The reasoning behind the diplomats using it is that diplomats are up somewhere else more so than most politicians I suspect and so formally whilst Lizzie is still our head of state, then it all being so so formal with the diplomats, it’ll be GSTQ - no big deal in that.
The GG represents Lizzie because she is still formally if not practically head of state, it being part of our constitution as of federation of the colonies.
We have not always had an Australian as GG btw and no reason why we could not depart from that again.
And again you misread Barry as he did not say he thinks he is a SPP but I can excuse that for even David has attempted the inference.

Personally, I feel this article is nothing but pantomine, now that Labor are all but confirmed as gone and David and the likes of yourself just need to Suck it Up laddies.

AJ says:

10:46am | 31/08/10

Your knowledge of the Queen’s genealogy is breathtaking, and to me is quite a strong argument for Australia becoming a republic given the negligible German proportion of our population.

TheRealDave says:

11:31am | 31/08/10

Just a small tid bit - Australian ‘troops’ never fought on the Western Front during WW2. WW1 - yes, WW2 - no. North Africa, Greece and Crete was as close as we got.

Gregg says:

11:50am | 31/08/10

That all may be so Roy but there’s also an old saying that you cannot choose your parents.
Could it be that the Queen may feel some horror at thoughts of Nazis and their warmongering attrocities just like yourself and many other people about the planet and even a greater horror because of her own descendancy.
Her mother and herself would along with Dianna have to be as popular a royal as there has been and has she not under adverse circumstances maintained a certain dignity that would seem befitting of a royal family whether you accept royalty or not.
Like, many Australians are quite happy to think of our ordinary Tasmanian Mary as Princess Mary, rah rah rah for the Danes!
The descendants on from Lizzie would appear to be taking partners of their own choosing and so perhaps you’ll be happy with the dilution of the Nazi connection.

Ronk says:

09:31am | 03/09/10

Try not to confuse “German” with “Nazi”. Doing that makes you just as racist as the Nazis.  No German was ever charged with war crimes simply for joining the German armed forces or because some of the bombs he dropped landed on civilian residential buildings. And it’s no secret that QE2 always hated her uncle Edward VIII (because his lust for Wallis forced her father onto the throne and stressed him to an early death). So it’s a bit rich to blame her for Edward’s pro-Nazi activities in the mid-1930s. Btw just about every politician in the mid 1930s, including leaders of republics, were falling over themselves to hail Hitler as the saviour of Germany and a great statesman.

Ronk says:

10:51am | 03/09/10

And your claim that the former Edward VIII “advocated the carpet bombing of Britain to crush the British into submission when he would return to the throne with Queen Wallis at his side” is total and absoulte nonsense without any foundation whatsoever.

And even if it were true, it would be if anything an argument FOR, not against, our current constitutional system, if a man who hated his own country was forced to abdicate (a decision which was made unanimously by all of the democratically elected Prime Ministers in the Commonwealth including our Joe Lyons).

phil says:

10:47am | 31/08/10

There is part of the problem, this country and those who live here don’t have any class.
This country has no history, no class and is looked at by the rest of the world as a vast space full of red-necks, much like Texas but with an accent that is much more offensive.

Becoming a republic is such a waste of time and money as it will only let the idiots think they are in control and its all ok when they should really be focusing the same time and money that would be spend on becoming a republic on stopping the slow slide in to becoming a third world country with education, health, public transport etc, you know important things that keeps the world going around as i sure as hell know that if we were a republic tomorrow that nothing would still be done about the more important things.

I think its Australia that has its own identity crisis with its self and how it wants to be seen.

Gregg says:

12:02pm | 31/08/10

I would have thought any country has history Phil and what you may mean to say is that we have a much shorter history in terms of European settlement than Europe itself.

Perhaps you would rather consider yourself as a European and lets not forget that our indigenous people were here in Australia well before even Romans were paving some roads in Europe.

Now you may well know the rest of the world quite intimately but I’d not take their views to heart too much and whilst I agree with you that spending anything on a republic is a waste of money, if you feel we’re on a slippery dip, what are you prepared to do about it?

Gregg says:

12:13pm | 31/08/10

PS,
I think it is thinking like yours that has people doing such thinking having the identity crisis.
Like considering courts being subservient rather than just having seen that there was right of appeal that went so far is one indication of your inferiority complex.
That it has the right of appeal extent has been changed is fine and makes legal situations less cumbersome and that is even greater than fine but to go delving into the past so might just be further example of your own identity crisis.
I’ve got no problem with us selecting our own head of state or even abolishing it altogether if there can be something written into the constitution that means a clear definition is possible for resolving political conflict and though that may be more difficult to establish, it could still be looked at and all the better if it does not mean a Republic is necessary.

Ross Garrad says:

04:45pm | 31/08/10

Spot on, Phil Shaw. You’re absolutely right about the subservience bit; by definition an appeal is to a superior court, whatever Gregg may say in his somewhat confused reply. Unfortunately this subservience is still embedded in section 74 of our constitution, which still contemplates appeals to the Privy Council in particular hypothetical situations. We need to do more than just cut the apron strings to the monarchy - we also need to get all the colonial crap out of our constitution and make it a document worthy of an independent sovereign nation.

Phil says:

11:24am | 31/08/10

There are bigger problems to solve that impact more people in day to day life than if we are or arent a republic.
The order of what is important is not right, so much wasted time and money on things that arent needed or arent thought out very well.
The sudden “need” to become a republic is one of those, even thought it comes up every couple of years.

It wont matter what Australia is if its not somewhere that people want to live!
Its a good tool used to distract people from the real problems we face isnt it.

Peter Evans says:

03:09pm | 31/08/10

Of course people have other problems but that is not reason to sideline the republic. We can solve both. Nor is the republic a distraction; it surfaces again and again precisely because Australians want it but have to constantly fight the monarchist saboteurs.

David Donovan says:

10:40am | 01/09/10

Hi David, it certainly is not the only, or even the strongest, argument for a republic, just one of the very many reasons Australia should become a republic ASAP. Thanks for fleshing out some other excellent reasons.

Anyone wanting to become more involved in bringing about an Australian Republic, go to http://www.republic.org.au or Like the ARM on Faecbook at http://www.facebook/AusRepublic or follow @AusRepublic on Twitter.

David Donovan says:

01:46pm | 31/08/10

Let’s make our own interesting history and look to our own historical figures. Also, we WOULD still be in the Commonwealth Games. Only 15 of 44 nations in the Commonwealth are NOT republics.

Gregg says:

02:52pm | 31/08/10

But David,
We do have our own interesting history:
. Indigenous history
And the parts of it we can conveniently brush under the rug, the massacres, Tasmanian genocide and the problems of more modern times.
. Convicts/first fleet/Rum Corps
. Exploration of a harsh land and settlement
There’s a tremendous story of a family back in late nineteenth century it may have been where a family [ husband may have died along the way if my memory is correct ] travelled with cattle etc. all the way from east coast over to the Kimberley region to initially settle that region.
. Murray and Darling rivers paddlesteamer transport.
. Goldfields and Bushrangers
. Development of one of the best sporting games from paddock football, the AFL and we probably have some Irish to thank for that.
. Federation
. Two Up
. Gallipoli and Light Horsemen
. Kokoda and Rats of Tobruk
. Post WW2 from Sheeps back to industry via Snowy and Power Stations with large numbers of immigrants
. The Ghan and its name from Afghanistan Camel train drivers being the first form of regular transport to the centre.
. The opening up of extensive resource industries in diverse areas
One thing that marks Australia as being significantly different to many other countries is that whilst we now have the population of a lower middle sized country you could say, our population density is always going to be extremely low without great development of natural water sources.
I think most city people have just absolutely zero idea of the inland vastness and whilst they will forever whinge about slow or crowded trains and buses or other aspects of city life, they will likewise be amazed that you can drive along inland highways and not only not see another vehicle for perhaps an hour or more but find in some sections they can see the curvature of the planet.
It amuses me when I see some travel journo comment on that from time to time as though it is new.
But sure, we have less people, less time since European settlement but to say we need to create our own history, WTH do you think has been happening David?
Google just about any topic you can think of on Australian history and you’ll find that http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/ more than often pops up and a great site it is too.
If you want to go and do a historical tour, you could be less well armed than with http://www.gdaypubs.com.au/
And then what other country has seen fit to tell you where you can have a good bog!
http://www.toiletmap.gov.au/
And of course there’s the Big Dunny that didn’t quite make it
http://www.abc.net.au/nsw/stories/s647044.htm
Maybe many Australians just need to get out past the city limits a bit more to see some more history.

iansand says:

03:12pm | 31/08/10

There are more republics in the Commonwealth than there are constitutional monarchies.

Eric says:

04:23pm | 31/08/10

Brilliant comment, Gregg! More power to you.

PG says:

12:52pm | 31/08/10

Whats even more ridiculous Roy is I dont think “Her Maj” and her tribe are very keen on us either I seem to recall a certain prince whooping and hollering when their rugby side was doing us at twickernam a couple of years back—lets face it monachist have severe personality problems—- very low self esteem—the poor dears dont think they are as good as a the sophisticated people who have just started recently being able to cook something not smothered in cow fat or shout in very large voices the very witty ” Bollocks “.

Why would we want to be associated with a people who rightly see Europe as their future and sneer at our wine and food and our “lack of sophistication”

phil says:

01:20pm | 31/08/10

Sorry Roy but you are miles off with that one.

Im not Australian, so i cant hate being Australian.
I hate the accent sure, so do a lot of people as its quite harsh and lacking refinement and if its not a loud American tourist you find around the world its a loud Australian tourist.
I don’t speak or try to speak BBC English either.
I will look in to “This England” magazine now that you mention it thanks! (sarcasm)
No to the monarchist meetings, Tony Abbott and Liberals.

You speak of being blind and that for Australia is on the mark, Australia thinks its such a big important country when really it isnt. There are so many bigger issues that need addressing that will and do affect the day to day lives of Australians which need to be addressed by someone other than corrupt, greedy and lazy governments who clearly do not represent what is best for the country. - To me this is a much larger issue and problem than being a republic would you not agree?

No one would take notice if Australia did become a republic it means very little to anyone else in the world apart from some of the Australian population who have their priorities wrong, they’d love to die in their republic Australia that has nothing to do with the Queen or any other country at the cost of many more important things.
Why cant they take the same action and passion to the government about real problems? Maybe because they are blinded by wanting to be a republic so bad they cant see how things are going in your own backyard. 

Being a colony of Brittan will not provide any more stability then if Australia was to become a republic, so saying that’s what monarchists think its foolish its also not grounds for an argument to become a republic.

Take it as “Anti-Australian” if you wish but to anyone who has their eyes open knows that Australia is a very backward, slow, uncivilised country compared to many European countries but it seems that Australians don’t want or like progress so that doesn’t seem to be a problem, sadly it will just leave you all even further behind once you realise what’s going on! 

But as long as the world doesn’t see us as Americans I guess its still a win right?

David Donovan says:

01:55pm | 31/08/10

@Phil You say you aren’t Australian, mock Australia, denigrate it, and in the last sentence you say"as long as the world doesn’t refer to US as Americans”.  At the same time as you mock Australians as being trash, it seems like you have a bit of an identty crisis going on yourself mate. Maybe you should just not comment, ‘eh?

TheRealDave says:

02:00pm | 31/08/10

@phil - given the state of a lot of these so called ‘sophisticated’ European countries with their appalling living standards, race riots, failing economies etc I’d far rather be seen as ‘unsophisticated’ by them thanks

phil says:

02:33pm | 31/08/10

@David Donovan

Opps my bad, sometimes you refer to people in the country you are living in as “us” dont worry nothing personal.

Identity crisis averted.

But very Australian of you to suggest I’m better off not to comment, Australians don’t seem to like anyone else’s views unless they match their own.

:-p

David Donovan says:

06:02pm | 31/08/10

@Phil Your aren’t Phil Windsor by any chance, are you. You seem to have that sort of attitude towards diplomacy.

Now, it’s not that foreigners attitudes are unimportant generally, or should be ignored, except that most definitely should be when they relate to Australian sovereignty, national identity and our future constitutional arrangements. Then, people like you should just pull your head in and leave what is something that is for Australians to decide, up to Australians to work out.

And frankly I found a lot of your attitudes towards this country way off the mark and rather objectionable. Though I am sure you are the sort of person who makes them just to get a reaction.

Ronk says:

02:08pm | 01/09/10

“being the blind who will not see, they refuse to acknowledge the civil war that has raged in the U.K. for the past 40 years where more than 3,700 of Her Majesty’s subjects have been slaughtered and at the very heart of which is a monarchy based on sectarian bigotry and anti-female gender prejudice. “
WTF?

iansand says:

03:15pm | 31/08/10

On the contrary, it is the strongest argument.  We should present ourselves to the world, without possibility of equivocation or self-inflicted confusion, as an independent, sovereign state.

The current arrangements render confusion possible, if not inevitable.

Gregg says:

03:53pm | 31/08/10

I dunno Ian
Like OK, kevin said something like ” Hi, my names K and I’m from Queensland and here to help ” and admittedly, depending on when he said it, there may have been a few raised eyebrows if not the hand of one Mark Latham wanting to ask questions but how is it going to confuse someone if you can say ” I’m from Australia, downunder, where breakfast is a vegemite sandwich and women make thunder “

We have heaps of warm and sunny weather to make using the planets best beaches a great recreational or bikini clad bird watching activity and you can travel all over and still speak our version of english.
We laugh at ourselves easily enough and more so Collingwood with their collywobbles reputation and even have birds called Kookaburras who like to laugh as well.

What else do you want to know?

iansand says:

04:03pm | 31/08/10

Gregg - A point would be good…

Gregg says:

04:00pm | 31/08/10

And what exactly is that value Peter?
A first generation Australian and so you reckon you know how everyone thinks do you and their affiliations.

Ronk says:

05:37pm | 31/08/10

Peter, you forget that 11 years ago we had a democratic vote which voted a resounding “no” to changing our Constiution to become a republic. If anybody should “go now!” it should be people who refuse to accept the democratic decision of the Australian people and try to dictate to them that Australia “will be” a republic against the wishes of the people. Btw opinion polls show that support for a republic is now even lower than it was when the vote was taken.

Roja says:

10:59pm | 31/08/10

@Ronk - no we didn’t.  We had a referendum to “alter the Constitution to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament.”

It should have asked “do you want to change our Constiution to become a republic?” - for if it had your argument would hold true.  I suspect the answer may even have been yes, although much closer than the 55/45 split it received.  However Howard wanted to divide and conquer the enemy so specifying a model so distasteful to the average Australian (You want politicians to select who should lead???) tainted the result.

The question I ask, particularly in light of our current political situation is this - is what would you prefer?  The ceremonial position of GG that is so impotent she actually has no conflict of interest even when her son in law is involved (because she has no real power) or an elected head of state that could step in and provide leadership and direction to the current shambles we find ourselves in?

I’d like option two thanks and personally I don’t think the royals would really mind at all.

Temerarious says:

10:50am | 01/09/10

Wow, yet another person having a go at Howard for the wording of the referendum question. Hey Roja, do you realise that the republican camp actually agreed to the wording? No, of course not….it’s much easier to blame someone else when things go horribly wrong.

You can almost taste the desperation of republicans when they trot out this same old tired argument. However, it’s nowhere near the desperation of the writer of this article who feels the need to defend his argument six times in the comments section.

Ronk says:

12:15pm | 01/09/10

Roja, FYI I voted FOR the referendum. If the question had been worded as per your “option two” with an open ended question I would have voted NO as would no doubt a big majority of Australians. a. because we are certainly not going to write a blank cheque to anyone to change our basic system of government, and b. because we didn’t want to risk the introduction of the worst possible type of republic, the USA style bitterly divisive winner takes all election of a president who is little short of an elected dictator.

Roja says:

02:34pm | 01/09/10

@Temetarious - I wasn’t having a go at Howard, I was just pointing out his strategy rather than judging it.  I actually meant to say the answer would still have been “No” rather than “Yes” to the question of wanting a republic, but with a closer result (enough states were strongly against it for it to fail).  Howards way ensured the result then, but left that result tarnished when he probably didn’t need to.

All I was saying is that we were not asked if we wanted a republic, we were asked if we wanted a specific type of republic.  The initial question remains unanswered, unlike what Ronk claimed.

Also I do realise that the republic side agreed to the wording, albeit grudgingly, but that doesn’t mean that it represented the wishes of all Australians.
 
@Ronk - I see you are prone to blanket statements that you “know” what would happen in alternate realities - good for you.  I don’t have such powers, and since we have never been asked the question as I stated your claim of a democratic vote 11 years ago is neither conclusive nor final.

Ronk says:

02:57pm | 01/09/10

Roja, I nowhere claimed to “know” what would happen in any alternate reality. Nor did I claim that the ‘99 referendum was conclusive and final. If you want to agitate for another referendum, worded in the way of your choosing, go right ahead and more power to you. I was merely responding to Peter Evans’ dictatorial decree that the results of the referendum must be discarded because he didn’t like what the people said, and that we “will be” a republic in spite of the result, and his further decree that the majority of Australian citizens who disagree with him must be deported. Surely you’ll agree this is a pretty bizarre line of “argument” to take from somebody supposedly promoting rule by the people as preferable to rule by a random individual.

Sean Williams says:

04:07am | 01/09/10

would it mean Australian backpackers lose THEIR favourite hang-out too? I know plenty of Londoners who would be delighted to see the back of these graceless, rude, badly-dressed, boorish blowhards who swarm around Earl’s Court, Shepherd’s Bush and Fulham Broadway to loudly lambast the country they are guests in and whine how much better things are back in Oz. Funny how they never seem to leave though, they must find all that bar work so rewarding. And where would all your talented people go to feel that they are actually making an impact on the world rather than being big fish in a very small backwater? Most British people are desperate for Australia to become a republic and get their own bloody flag. Frankly it’s becoming increasingly embarrassing to be associated with you

Ronk says:

12:24pm | 01/09/10

Totally irrelevant nonsense. British citizens have no special status or privileges in Australia superior to the status or priveleges of citizens of any other foreign country. As far as Australian law is concerned, all foreigners are equal, except NZers who have a lot of special rights that others don’t have.  Everybody except NZers who wants to live permanently in Australia has to become an Australian citizen or get permanent resident status, which is very difficult to get if you are retired, no matter where you come from. Same with backpackers, Australia treats them all exactly the same no matter where they come from (except NZ).

Billy B says:

12:26pm | 01/09/10

Shane from Melbourne - There IS such a thing as dual citizenship.  You can have Australian Citizenship and British Citizenship.

Keely says:

05:18pm | 01/09/10

@Sean, You are so full of judgement of Australians.

” graceless, rude, badly-dressed, boorish blowhards who swarm around Earl’s Court, Shepherd’s Bush and Fulham Broadway to loudly lambast the country they are guests in and whine how much better things are back in Oz.”

The same could be said for your disrespectful attitude. Most people I know have wanted to visit England and the UK all thier lives. They save up for years to see your country and meet fellow “cousins”, wanting to swap stories and have a good time. Then you come on here sprouting hate and predjudice towards them. You get the bad, the loud and the idiots in any country, doesn’t mean the whole country is like that. You must have been hanging around the contiki tour building too much. Its a good thing I don’t judge England and the UK on you or any other that speaks like you do. It takes intelligent minds to know how countries really are. God Bless the Queen!

Gregg says:

01:02am | 01/09/10

Well Robbo, just how are we so behoven?
But if that’s the way you feel, don’t die too soon and isn’t there more important stuff anyway to tick before kick off?

David Donovan says:

04:21pm | 01/09/10

The greatest impact on the MODERN world that has EVER existed. Sean Williams, you win the prize for the sentence that makes absolutely no sense. Anyway, if you are talking about the country that has had the greatest impact on the modern workld, well that probably America, until it gets superseded by China.

I love Great Britain in equal measure to the way you dislike and haughtily look down upon Australia. My grandmother was English and I lived in England for 6 years. Britain has many things to recommend it. One of the things it doesn’t have is potential. It’s history has more or less played out and it will increasingly become a peripheral figure in world events. Britain is slowly declining and has been for some time.

In the meantime, Australia has all the potential in the world and has the future at its feet. Australia is a big wonderful, young country. We don’t look up to England and, frankly, it makes little difference to us that we were once a dominion of England or a penal colony. But thanks anyway for making a very good argument—albeit a belligerent and belittling one—for why Australia should definitely break this umbilical link to Britain.

Sean Williams says:

01:27am | 02/09/10

Ah the old “Britain is finished” line. You Aussies love that, in fact you need to believe it in the hope one day you can emerge from the mother country’s shadow. People have been writing Britain off for decades but do so at their peril. You’re right, our days as a great military power and empire are long gone. You’d be amazed how comfortable British people are with this. However, Britain remains a vibrant cultural powerhouse and there is no reason why its young people cannot look to the future with just as much optimism as young Aussies. One thing’s for sure, Britain will continue to remain a far more significant country in the world than Australia for many, many years to come.

You’re right it, was a clumsy way I put it. What I meant to say is that the modern world was effectively built by Britain. The United States is obviously the most powerful nation, but its language, much of its culture, political and legal systems come with a big “Made in Britain” stamp. Surely Britons are entitled to take pride and ispiration from the huge impact our small island has had on the world in the same way that Aussies take such pride and inspiration when, I don’t know, they win a few Olympic swimming golds : - )

I actually love Australia. It is a fabulous country with a great future, no doubt about that. I just get annoyed by the constant digs at Britain, why do you have to be so bitter and rude to a country that, in the main, wishes you nothing but well? Aussies always say “oh we don’t think about Britain anymore, the place means nothing to us” but this is patently untrue. Scan the Aussie media on any given day and the nastiness is everywhere.

I also feel the need to expose one of the ugliest characteristics of the modern Aussie - the way they absolutely relish dishing out the banter but can’t handle it when a few home truths are thrown back at them. It really isn’t a good look and I think you all need to harden up if you really want to grow as a nation.