This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Should the G-G be above criticism?

Jump to new

Calliope

Joined
2 July 2008
Posts
7,102
Reactions
6
Many people hold the view that the Queen's representative in Canberra should be above reproach. Others, myself included, think that when the job, which is the biggest sinecure in the land is handed on a platter to someone who is;
. an old friend of the Rudd family and
. holds the same political views as her appointer
. actively pursues the PM's political agenda,
Then doubts will be raised,and pursued

The Rudd/Bryce relationship is a cosy little set up. No sooner had the Rudds settled into the Lodge than they they decided to install Ms Reine's old friend Ms Bryce in Government House and to give her a hefty pay rise.

They kicked out the long serving vice-regal official secretary and replaced him with Mr Stephen Brady a long time friend of Mr Rudd and whose partner Peter Stephens is personal adviser to Ms Reine.

A treasured friend of the Bryce's and frequent visitor to Govt. House is Bill Shorten the former union heavy who gained fame by grandstanding at Beaconsfield. He has dumped his wife, to whom he is indebted for his rise to party heights, to take up with Bryce's daughter Chloe, who left her husband.

I could go on. But for anyone who is interested it is all there in lurid detail on the NewsCom web site. Just enter "quentin bryce" 'in Search and you will be rewarded.

Of course these are News Ltd. versions, and they have a habit of telling it like it is. The Fairfax press may treat her more kindly. After all she is a leftie from way back.
 
Re: Should the G-G be above criticism.

Calliope said:
Then doubts will be raised,and pursued
Click to expand...

Nothing new, the Cabinet has always chosen the GG, and has always (tried) to chose an ally for obvious reasons, its his constitutional right.

Of course these are News Ltd. versions, and they have a habit of telling it like it is.
Click to expand...

Yeah, news is a great source for crap.
 
LOL! and do you contend Howard didn't do exactly the same things???? How short memories are.....

And no, of course the G-G should not be above criticism. Criticise away!

Beej
 
And of course, Whitlam appointed John Kerr, who by the way was a member of the ALP in his earlier days. I think Whitlam thought he was appointing his own man. That was a joke that backfired a bit. Ha! Ha! Ha!

(Nearly) everyone criticised Kerr. So why not have a go at Bryce. No problem. They're all fair game I say, even the courts, who have a fair percentage of absolute twits. By the way if the courts don't like criticism, then lets elect them - hire and fire!
 
Re: Should the G-G be above criticism.

shaunQ said:
Nothing new, the Cabinet has always chosen the GG, and has always (tried) to chose an ally for obvious reasons, its his constitutional right
Click to expand...

Rudd's motives for selecting a political ally in what is supposed to be non-political position, in my opinion go deeper. As a Republican he despises the vice-regal office. What better way to demean the office than to put a political activist into it. I may be wrong.

As for News. I admit I prefer their views to the Fairfax positions. In other words I am biased, in the same way as you are biased towards The Age. There is nothing wrong with this. All contributors to ASF chat pages are biased.

Fortunately we are not all biased the one way . That would make for a dull old forum.
 

Buddy, that reminds me of a Keating appointment that backfired. In 1994 Keating, who had no love for the RSL and loved a joke appointed Concetto Antonio "Con" Sciacca as Minister for Veteran's Affairs. Sciacca was a Sicilian who, if he had been born a few years earlier, would have been an enemy alien.

As it turned out he settled into the job very nicely and became a popular advocate for ex-servicemen.
 
Re: Should the G-G be above criticism.


You may be right - I don't know enough about her history. I think they probably just thought they either needed an Aboriginal or a woman. I guess it would also be interesting to know who else was a good contender - and why they weren't selected.

Calliope said:
As for News.
Click to expand...

I just get irritated with many of their posters as they always seem so one sided. But it is funny how everyone reads what they want to see and the media happily obliges - otherwise Andrew Bolt and (some lefty guy) wouldn't exist.

Calliope said:
Fortunately we are not all biased the one way. That would make for a dull old forum.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, there will always be silly, stubborn people that just don't understand I'm always right.
 
Beej said:
LOL! and do you contend Howard didn't do exactly the same things???? How short memories are.....
Click to expand...

No Beej. The difference is that Howard was trying to prop up the VR office, Rudd is trying to pull it down. Similar things...different motives.
 
I bet a majority of the population doesnt even jknow who the GG is, or what they do?

Personally it seems a bit of a pointless role to me
 
Calliope said:
No Beej. The difference is that Howard was trying to prop up the VR office, Rudd is trying to pull it down. Similar things...different motives.
Click to expand...

Well I think it should go anyway - bring on the republic!

Cheers,

Beej
 
Bring on the Republic!

Dont you find it strange that people with unusual names (not bogan with weird spelling) usually end up in high places? How many Judges etc do you know who are called John, Brian, etc. Nope, they are Fergus, Quentin, Sebastian and the like.
 
prawn_86 said:
I bet a majority of the population doesnt even jknow who the GG is, or what they do?

Personally it seems a bit of a pointless role to me
Click to expand...

Pointless and very COSTLY.
We have the Federal GG, and 6 state GG's, not mention all the retired GG's before them on very generous wages.
Hollingworth for example, who was in for a short, contraversial time gets $180,000 a year for the rest of his sponging life. Not to mention other perks.
Terminate them all, and get our own President, that the world will know, for ALOT less.
 

In England they are all Nigels. At least we have been spared that.:22_yikes:
 
Agree completely. Just the GG is bad enough but to have State governors as well is even more of a waste of money.

Re a republic, do you have to have a President? Would that person take over the function of the GG if e.g. a Whitlam-like eventuality happened?
What other role does a President fulfil, when we have the PM, all the State Premiers etc?
 
Julia said:
..
Re a republic, do you have to have a President? Would that person take over the function of the GG if e.g. a Whitlam-like eventuality happened?
What other role does a President fulfil, when we have the PM, all the State Premiers etc?
Click to expand...


Just chop it and put down to recession, Australian citizens will understand.

Put the rest of them on ordinary pension, savings guaranteed!
 
Having a President would just be a continuation of same. If elected he (or she) would be a part of the political system. If selected by parliament i.e. the Government, it would still be a political appointment. And what would they do for their massive salary? :dunno: 0pen Parliament? Back to square one.

The only solution is to abolish all figureheads.:behead:
 
Our Governor-General seems to be turning into quite the political hack.
She is about to engage on a tour of Africa, in an attempt to garner votes for Australia's United Nations bid.
 
Julia said:
Our Governor-General seems to be turning into quite the political hack.
She is about to engage on a tour of Africa, in an attempt to garner votes for Australia's United Nations bid.
Click to expand...
And she isn't answering questions on the matter either.
 
Has anyone stopped to think about the cost of becoming a republic? Ever noticed how many things have a crown on them, how many organisations have Royal in their name, coats of arms, currency, common law, the list goes on ...

Other than some symbolic independence, what's really to be gained?

Notwithstanding the above, I'm not really sure what the point of state governors is, nor am I particularly fond of the current GG
 

Hehehe...that's why I won't let anyone call my son (Patrick) Paddy 'cos they're wino's, jailbirds, barflies and wharfies. Perhaps he should have been named Preston. Kevin kinda puts the myth to the test though.


Apologies to all Paddy's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
2K
Investoradam
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...