BBC Blog Network

User Profile

wollemi

Listed below are comments made by wollemi between Sunday, 25th October 2009 and Tuesday, 24th November 2009.

«Newer
Older»

An apology, an architect and an 'audience with Parky' 05:17am on 24 Nov 2009 #31

..'It is only since the last war that a distinct Australian patriotism has arisen...'

No it arose pre Federation and was formalised in 1871 with the Australian Natives' Association

[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

The 'Currency lads and lasses' (locally born) had seen themselves as different - and been seen as different - from the 'Sterling ' (British migrants) from the early 1800s, but a national Australian identity and patriotism developed in the run up to Federation
An apology, an architect and an 'audience with Parky' 10:03am on 23 Nov 2009 Just another word on the Opera House - like Nick, I'm also rather obsessed by it, from the time when I saw it being constructed

Joern Utzon was in part inspired by Mayan Temples - which is better seen in the landward view, looking up the steps from the forecourt. There's a walk down through the Botanic Gardens, catching glimpses of the building, before walking around Farm Cove which I think every visitor wishing to appreciate the Opera House might enjoy
I also think son Jan's involvement is a promising continuation of Sydney's relationship with the Utzons
An apology, an architect and an 'audience with Parky' 09:41am on 23 Nov 2009 #23

There's a somewhat different version of WW2 in this neck of the woods, busby2 - and not just in Australia. I think you'll find it throughout Britain's old Asia Pacific Empire

Firstly I would reconsider quoting Savage - NZ was the only country in the region in 1942 to support the Europe First strategy and that remains controversial.
It was the British Empire which contributed forces against Nazi Germany in 1939, not just Britain. Yet the country which invaded the British Empire was not Nazi Germany..it was Japan. It was Japan which caused most civilian deaths in the British Empire and most atrocities against civilians and troops

That says it all really. After 1941 there was not a common effort at all, for much of the British Empire it was defeating Japan which dominated, while Britain pursued Europe First

The consequence for Britain was that if you don't defend an empire - particularly one which had contributed to the defence of Britain for 2 years - then you lose it. You also lose a lot of the goodwill
An apology, an architect and an 'audience with Parky' 11:12pm on 20 Nov 2009 #5

Yes but..

This wasn't the 1840s, or even the 1920s, Busby2, it was occurring as late as the 1960s. Nor were the child migrants 15 and 14, average age was 8 and some were as young as 3

These were mainly slum children from broken families and often illegitimate and placed into care. Some people may have felt it was giving the children a chance at a better life, but it was also getting rid of a social problem in postwar Britain, a country still riven by class issues

Moreover...Australia's role was not to deal with Britain's social problems. Not by the 1960s! Canada had already dispensed with that role of taking child migrants and it appears the other dominions then filled the gap. The Australian Government of the era should not have been a party to it and yes, owe the children an apology.

Nick

You..'walked through the bowels of the building'
Utzon's flight of imagination, his maddeningly flawed masterpiece, this architectural wonder has..bowels? Maybe a basement, a sandy bottom even, but...
The Republican Referendum: Ten Years On 00:46am on 10 Nov 2009 #65
smartlondon

In Australia we attack the subject, not abuse the person
If you are incapable of doing the same in future, I'll be placing you in my 'ignore' category

OldHermit
Just one more thing.....Bennett was the subject of both an Army Inquiry and Royal Commission here for his actions at Singapore. Not to mention the court of public opinion
No one - repeat noone - in the British chain of command suffered similar for the bigger debacle that Singapore represents That there was never an inquiry was because it would have gone too high in the British High Command and the War Cabinet
The Republican Referendum: Ten Years On 10:53pm on 09 Nov 2009 #57

I think an intrinsic issue in how these wars are documented, OldHermit, is that the Japanese in 1941 were underestimated in both London and Washington, unlike by Curtin - and Menzies by 1941 - and the US Navy which had long expected to fight a war against Japan in the Pacific. Japan had already been at war in China which is where WW2 began

Churchill undermined the Pacific War, to focus on Europe. He did so at a time when the defences of Australia were depleted in service of the defence of Britain, contrary to the 'Britain stood alone' mantra
He then detoured the returning 7th Division to Burma, against Curtin's orders, to defend India
Australia's links with Britain actually undermined its capacity for self defence.

Hence Curtin's plea to FDR in December 1941. The US had no obligation to Australia, nor Australians, they simply required a base
It's the US which was Australia's ally in WW2
The Republican Referendum: Ten Years On 05:21am on 08 Nov 2009 Even if the Australian Head of State was just symbolic I think it should be changed, but the position is not symbolic. The Australian Head of State carries significant Constitutional powers as mentioned in #32, even if the GG is the one to carry them out and the GG these days is Australian

I can remember the Vietnam War when our Head of State lived 18,000km away in a country uninvolved in that war, a highly inappropriate arrangement while Australia was at war. That only worked when both Britain and Australia were part of an Empire at war

The republic referendum failed but it was not a complete failure in that it publicised a number of models, too many to list here. However they fell into 3 categories..

#minimalist
This means just keeping the current arrangement of the PM appointing the GG (president) and removing links to the monarch. A variant is the McGarvie model where a panel of 3 'worthies' recommend to the PM who should be appointed president (and also deal with removing a dysfunctional president).
This has the advantage of being in keeping with the Constitution but fails the test of democracy in involving the electorate

#bipartisan appointment
There are various forms but the one presented at referendum was that candidates be nominated by the public to a nominations committee. then the PM and Leader of Opposition agree on a candidate, then combined Houses of Parliament ratify the appointment by a 2/3 majority.
This was intended to reduce the risk of a political appointee but again it reduces the involvement of the electorate

#direct election
Again there are various models, but they involve a vote by the electorate. One tricky aspect is avoiding a popular rival to the PM, if for example Rudd gets 53% of the vote to become PM as he did in 2007 but an incoming candidate gets 90% of the vote of the electorate to become president
The Republican Referendum: Ten Years On 9:26pm on 06 Nov 2009 Somewhat paradoxically, it's because of Australia's English origins that Australian republicanism has flourished

Current Australian republicanism is not derived from Irish republicanism as is sometimes stated, it's a derivative of English republicanism. of the 'rights of common man' variety and came attached to 19th Century chartism brought by British immigrants.
There were other forms of republicanism, including some earlier, in colonial Australia - Irish, American, European and John Dunmore Lang had a kind of religious republicanism - but the dominant form was English
Republicanism was boosted pre Federation, which is when most of my family became republicans

So, republicanism in Australia is deceptively strong, even when there is little media attention as it has been around for long philosophical discussion rather than the tumbrels and bloody revolution type

Australia has a constitutional problem, in that the Constitution was written in 1901 for a country intended to remain part of an Empire with a distant royal Head of State preoccupied with other matters.
In recent decades as Australia and the UK have forged separate futures the GG in Australia has become the functional Head of State, the Queen has become irrelevant. It's the GGs position - particularly the reserve powers - which hobbled the previous referendum, and might do so again
The Australian GG has powers, including the power to sack a government which have not been seen in Britain since 1834

The current status of the GG is extraordinary in a democracy - unelected, not answerable to the public, operating on issues beyond the law and with the power to sack a government.

So any republican model needs to resolve the nature of the reserve powers and mechanism for removing an inmcompetent government
Big Australia 03:56am on 26 Oct 2009 #44

Not for long! Tassie is one part of southern Australia which is becoming drier. If you look at the link in #39 and the map marked 'trends in rainfall' Tasmania is pink, ie rainfall is decreasing

It's a more complex situation than absolute numbers or burgeoning population - parts of the Australian continent are becoming wetter, parts drier
Big Australia 12:06pm on 25 Oct 2009 The BOM agrees with the CSIRO. (see first graph in link below) Australia's annual rainfall has increased over the last 50 years

The link #36 is for southern Australia which is becoming drier.
However increased rain in certain sections, particularly the north west, outweighs this, so overall the continent had had an increase in rainfall

http://www.environment.gov.au/soe/2006/publications/drs/indicator/5/index.html

I suppose we could move Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide to north west Australia

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

wollemi