h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Firstly.......WOW!!!

Absolutely awesome entry. While I think I knew most of it, you've put it all together in a concise, but extremely informative piece that brings the Australian political scene into perspective.

However, given the contentious state of the political landscape at the moment, I'm sure you won't take it amiss if I make a few minor points:

You mentioned the Republic referendum of 1999, which 'asked whether Australia should be a republic, and the 'No' vote prevailed.'

Actually, the question asked was whether we wanted to be 'a particular type of republic' and we said no. If they'd asked solely about the concept of being a republic first, and then got down to the nitty gritty of what type of republic later on, the result may have been quite different.

You also mentioned compulsory voting. Let me be the first of the pedants to point out that 'voting' is not compulsory. Turning up at a polling station and having your name checked off is what is compulsory. As I understand it, you could then take the ballot paper and put it directly in the bin in front of their eyes if you wanted to.

I couldn't help but admire the way you so neutrally described the various political parties. And then we got to One Nation....

'The intelligentsia were offended, but did not consider her a threat. However, she mined a deep vein of frustration among the disaffected, unemployed and under-educated.'

I've never been unemployed and, having achieved a university degree in Economics, I don't consider myself uneducated. I'm not even sure I can categorise myself as disaffected as, in the main, I'm pretty happy with our country the way it is. I don't agree with the majority of Pauline & Co's policies, but she has raised issues that have to be discussed and addressed. Pushing them under the carpet and labelling anyone who raises questions as small-minded, bigoted and racist (as the media in Australia generally does) isn't going to make these issues go away. It's the lack of discussion about the issues, rather than the issues themselves, in a lot of instances that are driving voters to One Nation and similar right wing fringe political parties.

okay, rant over.

Like I said at the beginning, overall it's a great piece.

Well you and the previous person who wrote such a lot, just about have it all sewn up. One thing you forgot was the pension system We are paying previous members of Parliament who retired young many years ago and they will receive this pension until they die. One man has recently applied for relief having spent so much. Thankfully it is now being debated and I hope they bring it into line with other people who work, who have to wait until they are 65 to get their pensions. If I had known how lucrative politics were, I would have joined many yesrs ago. Marj

First, thanks both for being interested enough to post a comment. I spent a while honing this article down, and the sub-editors spent a little while pulling little bits together as well, so the finished product is the result of a lot of consideration.

Jezery: on the republic: of course, you are spot on, and I accept that I could have gone into that much detail in the entry - and I'm in agreement with your opinion that a question couched in more general terms would've gotten up. On compulsory voting: again, you are correct, but the beef is with the way I've described it. To have split that particular hair would have clouded the issue, and I think I did cover some of the technical aspects of how it is possible to circumvent the 'compulsory' nature of voting. On One Nation: I may have generalised about One Nation supporters, but did not exclude the possibility that there are many worthy and level-headed folk about who subscribe to the thrust of the non-mainstream political movement in Australia. More importantly, though, I set out to write a factual piece, not opinion - which is why (as you've observed) my description of political parties is (in the main) pretty neutral.

Researcher Marj: while a pretty contentious issue, politicians' superannuation wasn't what I'd regard as a 'hot' issue at the time I wrote this (November 2001) - it's becoming more high profile now. I could just as easily have included issues such as heroin injecting rooms, the Stolen Generation, gambling, to name a few. But I wanted to keep the article down to a length such that I stood a chance of readers getting to the end and not giving up. One issue I'm particularly fond of (but left out) is the fact that Australian residents drawing pensions from the UK government do not have their pensions indexed to keep pace with inflation. The UK government refuses to listen to the case of these people, despite several approaches on their behalf by the Australian Minister for Family and Community Services. Interestingly this policy is applied to UK pensioners residing only in ex-Dominions (Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Australia) - UK pensioners in UK territories do benefit from indexation.

I could go on, but I won't (and I might add, no vested interest here - just interested!)

Thanks again for the interest!

Guran

I must be a raving political junkie, because I find this every bit as fascinating as the edited entries on the UK government.

What house does a state Premier (in those states with two houses) come from?

The Executive Council looks and smells like the Privy Council of Britain. Are there any (unelected) lords spiritual or judicial who are members? Could the Governer-General (potentially) insist that the Archbishop of Canberra have a seat here?

What's a portfolio, and why would any particular minister have one?

In the US of A, if you want to vote, you must have a place you can say you are living at, in practical terms, an address. Thus, our homeless cannot vote, whether they will it or not. How far does compulsory voting go, for those who are down on their luck (or just ornery or footloose)? Can you just march into any particular primary school, without proof of address, and say; "I am here, I assert I am Aussie, and therefore I have franchise. Because I'm obligated to vote, and would never so much as break the smallest law-please give me a ballot"?

Do you have a national ID, and would this result in a free ride back to wherever this homeless person registered last; what if he lost his, is he now a foreigner?

I started this got myself wiped off. All States have a Parliament run by a Premier the Lower House. The Upper house is the Senate, usually the less popular parties get these seats and the independents. Which is a good idea, as it keeps the others slightly honest. A Portfolio is part of a department like Education, or Health and innumerable things like that. They are the front bench, both sides have them, the ones in and the opposition. Our Governer General is supposed to be the Head of State but is told what to do. His dept. is in contact with the Queen but she doesn't interefere, she is mainly just a figure head. Incidentally what happened to the "Lords" I heard they were being disbanded is there then only one lower house in England now.Regards Marj

Sea Change. Interesting set of questions, which Marj seems to have addressed in a happily haphazard fashion. I'll attempt to address them in turn.

On the Premiers – Marj has this covered.

On the Privy Council – yes, the Executive Council does emulate the role of the Privy Council in the UK, but is restricted to a rather narrower set of duties, mainly to do with giving "Royal Assent" to matters (legislation, appointments, military commisions) which have, for all intents and purposes, been decided at lower levels of government. I would note that, prior to the "Australia Act 1986" (a piece of Australian legislation which tidied up and severed a few of the remaining legal links between Australia and the UK) all Australian Prime Ministers were automatically members of the UK Privy Council, and could use the title "Right Honourable". Prime Minister Bob Hawke was the last Australian PM to have that title. Subsequent PM's have been simply "The Honourable", which denotes their status as members of the Executive Council. One further point. Again, prior to the "Australia Act 1986", the Privy Council was the ultimate forum for legal appeals in Australian law – decisions of the High Court could be appealed and heard in the Privy Council. This is no longer the case.

On members of the Executive Council – section 62 of the Australian Constitution establishes that " … members shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure." Technically speaking, there is nothing to prevent the Governor-General appointing who he (or she) pleases to the Executive Council, as you suggest. However, the Executive Council is made up only of Ministers of the government, by convention. To do otherwise would be to invite dismissal by the Prime Minister.

On "portfolios" – Marj has provided an answer on this, but it's not correct. Rather than portfolios being part of a department, it's the other way around. A portfolio is a broad term covering the subject matter administered by a given Minister (e.g. "Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs"). A portfolio can include a range of bodies such as departments, agencies, statutory authorities, councils, and so on (bodies in the portfolio mentioned by example include the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, a plethora of immigration review committees, and so on). In the case of the defence portfolio, there are two departments: the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Why would a Minister want one? Without one he (or she) would not be a Minister!

On voting eligibility – being enrolled to vote in Australia is, as you may have gathered, a bit of a woolly issue. The requirement is that you enrol to vote by giving a name, date of birth and place of residence, but no proof for any of this is required. (This has led to suspected electoral fraud in a number of elections.) Technically, someone of no fixed abode could enrol to vote by giving a bogus address. The procedure when you present at a polling booth on election day is to have your name checked off the electoral roll by an electoral official before you are given a ballot. Electoral officials conduct a post-poll check to ensure that people don't go to two different polling booths and vote more than once. There are penalties for doing so.

On a national id – there is no official national identity system, but there are a number of ways for the Australian government to keep tabs on its citizens. The Medicare system (universal medical care, funded by a tax surcharge to all people earning an income above a certain threshhold) requires that you have a Medicare card which you present when claiming benefits – a single record is kept per family unit, though duplicate cards can be held by members of that unit. That's one way. The electoral roll is another, as it is available to the public, though not available electronically. However, since enrolling is on a voluntary basis, it's not that reliable. Finally, the social security system holds loads of information about Australia's citizens. All these records are subject to stringent privacy restraints on the agencies holding the information – release of information between agencies is subject to very narrow circumstances, usually involving criminal investigations. In the 1980's the Labor government briefly floated the idea of a national identity card to consolidate record keeping for social security, Medicare, and so on, but it was quickly dropped once the civil liberties lobby mounted a counter-campaign. No political party has been game enough to touch the idea since then.

And finally, Marj, the House of Lords is still there!

Cheers,

Guran

Yes I knew all that but couldn't be bothered to write it all out. I didn't think 'sea change' was really that interested. Incidentally they do not let you vote unless you become an Australian citizen. I am English and have never been naturalised, not while we still have a Queen of Australia and they haven't deposed her yet. I used to vote when I first came here 38 years ago but when they brought this new ruling in, you had to say where you last voted to get on the list As I had been travelling all around Oz and Europe I couldn't remember. Still I prefer not to vote, I don't like either party. I remember seeing something about the Lords perhaps it was that only certain ones could enter it. There was definitely some change. Guran are you an Aussie Poly. Cheers Marj

Is it right to say that Lizzie is Queen of Australia? Not just Queen of England? So it would also be true to say she's Queen of Canada, NZ etc??



Actually, now that I think about it, the Scout promise mentions "...the Queen of Australia..." - and when did the Scout Association lie?! Don't answer that one...please...

Marj: no, I'm not a politician (heaven forbid!). See my personal space for more about me.

cafram: one of the Queen Elizabeth II's official titles is, in fact, "Queen of Australia".

go figure!

Guran

Yes, Marj I am interested. I find your point of view to be very interesting, too; so I am glad you posted.

I suppose it is a defining point of character that with so many BBSs out there, I have chosen one so strongly British to waste my time reading and posting on. The other one I visit often is a comic book one. (I love the superhero team Southron Squadron, of which only 8 issues have been reprinted here, they are a blast).

While half of me is a mix from the various celtic parts of the British isles, I am half German so I get a kick out of all the detail, too. Thank you, Guran.

Yes Guran my reply was haphazard, mainly because I am not interested in Politics. My main love is writing. I must admit that since getting on the web I don't write so much but I have a large tin box holding all the magazines I have appeared in. I also write poetry, well I call it that, not so sure the purist would. I am interested in a certain site, I am not allowed to mention and this takes up most of my on air time as it were, I do sneak a look in here but no one seems to answewr much of what I have written and I like the other County web pages of the BBC, don't know whether I am allowed to say that but presume it is legal. I am not a lover of Australia, although I have lived here 38 years with 2 breaks. They just have to win and I don't like that Being old fashioned, I say "play the game" and "Well done old Chap" when you lose. Cheers Marj