Please excuse the "subject" - it is never used in your paper anyway.
RE Tamala at Status Quo.
So 'lobbyist' lobbies the former Joondalup commissioner to vote for Sam Salpietro as chairman of Tamala park Rregional council.
People voted for Sam, but not for the ex commissioner.
Although councillors are not always good, at least the electorate can reject them at elections.
But unelected commissioners we can't.
In this case the electorate had no input and that is obviously undemocratic.
If Federal or State governments are dismissed, the people chose the successors. Why not so with councils?
18 November 2003
The West Australian
Ref. Paul Murray's diatribe against the monarchy in Saturday's West.
Not that long ago he would have been put in the Tower of London (for sedition?).
His sole arguments against Charles are based on information from Diana during her divorce. The rest is scuttlebutt and opinion.
Prince William seems to be a nice lad. The succession is assured.
It is not new for royals to play up. Richard III was queer, most kings have had mistresses, Henry VIII had 6 wives and so on.
Britain has one of the most stable and democratic governments in the world, thanks to the monarchy. So why replace it? And why do we need to elect a president? Do we want to be like America with its hoopla every 4 years? Or perhaps Iraq.
We do not elect the prime minister, the premier or the governor. We do elect the mayor in Joondalup and look at the problems there.
So I hope your paper gives the right of reply to not only monarchists but to republicans wanting the minimum change to the constitution.
The West Australian (25 February 2002)
The Governor General is not a politician and should be left to do his job in peace. He is reputed to have made errors many years ago, but those errors in a minister would not lead to a resignation.
If the Governor General is wrong it is because he is speaking out. He should follow the example of John Kerr, and say nothing.
I suspect a deeper agenda to politicise the position to ensure any future republic would have an elected president. This is idea is doomed anyway due to the complexity in changing the Constitution.
21 September 1999
The Editor, The Wanneroo Times
I agree with Janet Holmes a Court's letter (WT 14 sept. 99) that the referendum to come is NOT about who may vote or other related issues. But I do believe that those who live here as residents should have the vote. They pay taxes and are affected by political decisions. Who said "no taxation without representation"? I don't think other countries set a good example in this regard.
But I strongly disagree that the referendum is about an Australian head of state (full stop). It is about a change in the constitution. Actually a package of changes. If any of these changes are unsatisfactory to me I will vote no, even though I support an Australian head of state.
2 August, 1999 The Editor, The West Australian
As a British subject, but a resident of Australia for 28 years, I will vote in the coming referendum, but am unable to stand for parliament. I favour a republic, but can continue to live happily with the Queen as head of state.
I can not understand why we need to argue for an elected president. We have lived for nearly 100 years with the Governor General being appointed by the Prime Minister, and the proposed model is an improvement on the current system.
I will vote against the republic if this proposal looks like being adopted. I also predict that the referendum for a republic will be rejected.
I suggest we hold a referendum to decide on the method of appointing the Governor General BEFORE the republic referendum, to clear up the issue in advance.
I also think the need for a preamble should be decided in a separate referendum. John Howard only suggested it as a diversion anyway.
To the "West Australian" 17/3/1999
Re the debate over popular elections for a president for the possible
republic of Australia, and the enforced election of mayors for Joondalup and
Wanneroo, we should remember that some of the politicians elected by the people ended up in jail.
To the "West Australian" 16/11/98
If we are to have a preamble to the Australian constitution, and have a clause to mention God, then He should be consulted, and , of course, sign the preamble.
E-mail: Jack Moore