>From the reports here in Sweden it appears that the real question appeared to be the 
>question of who would elect a president. The people or the parliment and because the 
>purposal declined the former many "republicans" elected to keep the old hag.

Much talk about the deep mistrust of politicans and politics in general.

Warm regards
Bob Malecki
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bullimore / Kim Maree (COM) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 08, 1999 2:40 AM
Subject: M-TH: Republic (and preamble) defeated...

> Although the final count is not in - due to postal votes etc, the republic
> was defeated in the November 6 referendum.  With 77.8% of the vote
> counted....
> 45.3% Yes for Republic        39.5% Yes to add preamble to constitution
> 54.7% No for Republic         60.5% No to preamble.
> To win the republic vote had to achieve a double majority.  That is
> to achieve constitutional change, the  majority of Australian voters and a
> majority of voters in a majority of the states (that is a majority must be
> won in at least 4 states) must agree to the changes.
> The preamble was resoundingly defeated by 60% of the vote.  This was a
> major slap in the face for the PM John Howard and Aden Ridgeway who
> drafted the preamble.  The preamble which was full of nationalistic
> jingoism, which our PM seems to love so much.  
> It read (try not to throw up as you read it!!!): 
> With hope in God, the Commonwealth of Australia is constituted as a
> democracy with a federal system of government to serve the common good.
> We the Australian people commit ourselves to this constitution: Proud that
> our national unity has been forged by Australians of many ancestries;
> Never forgetting the sacrifices of all who defended our country and our
> liberty in time of war; upholding freedom, tolerance, individual dignity
> and the rule of law; Honouring Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, the
> nation's first people, for their deep kinship with their lands and for
> their ancient and continuing cultues which enrich the life of our countryl
> Recognising the nation building contribution of generatins of immigrants;
> mindful of our responsibliltly to protec our unique environmentl;
> supportive of achievement as well as equality of opportunity for all; and
> valuing independence as dearly as the national spirit which binds us
> together in both adversity and success.
> The preamble was drafted without consultation (other than with the
> Democrats and Aden Ridgeway) to the people.  Originally it included the
> PM's favourite word "mateship" which offended a large number of people,
> especially women - mateship is a very male term which has its origins in
> the national identity myth of the bush battler and diggers at WW1.
> Eventually this was dropped reluctantly.  
> The other main area of contention was with the wording in regard to
> Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander people.  The favoured word by many
> Aboriginal people and leaders was "custodianship", which gives a more
> accurate reading of the relationship that Indigenous Australians have with
> their traditional lands.  Howard refused to use custodianship, because it
> could also imply ownership (and there for would be at odds with his view
> of the history of Australia - you know the Europeans really didn't steal
> the land from the Aboriginals or murder them or steal their children).
> The word "kinship" was suggested by the only Aboriginal in parliament Aden
> Ridgeway who is a member of the Democrats and is conservative.
> Ridgeway has lost a lot of standing with the grass roots membership of the
> Aboriginal community because of this.  He is seen by many as a "token"
> black.  The intersting thing is that Labor Aboriginal spokesperson, Daryl
> Melham has accussed him of just this today - something they have backed
> away from prior to this.
> comradely,
> Kim B
>      --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

     --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Reply via email to