Australian Cries

You could expect another republican push for Australia Day. After all, republicans – Australian republicans in particular – are so predictable. They use our public holidays to raise their voices. 2009 is no exception.

But sometimes they overdo their propaganda. Take for example Australian Republic Movement chairman Michael Keating who claimed in The Canberra Times “the country was ’crying out for leadership’ on the subject, and urged Mr. Rudd to commit to a process and timetable to pursue the issue.”

I don’t know, where Michael Keating lives, but in my home, people cry out for a reliable train service, they want a public transport worth that name and that does not hand over the profit to private contractors and leaves the patrons stranded on platforms; they cry for a better water management and they cry out against the desalination plant and the North-South pipeline through the Victorian countryside, but that seem to be secondary topics for the Greens. They cry for action against climate change and against the ridiculously low and inadequate 5% target, Kevin Rudd wants to achieve by 2020. But what is the threat to mankind caused by the climate change to the desire to have a politicians republic?

There are many political topics in Australia that need more attention, however Green Senator Bob Brown puts his emphasis on “a” republic: "Australia Day long weekend is the perfect opportunity for the Prime Minister to commit to building cross-party support for a vote on a plebiscite," Senator Brown said yesterday according to The Canberra Times.

I cry that our politicians cannot set their priorities straight.

A popular King
An opinion poll shows The Prince of Wales would now make a more popular King than Prince William.



Prince Charles's 60th birthday presents
Choosing a 60th birthday present for a man who has everything is always difficult but in the case of the Prince of Wales the answer is simple: buy him a shrub. Read more here.

Plants, shrubs, and trees for his garden at Highgrove will be the most gratefully received gift for the Prince who yesterday received a cake in the shape of a bus pass. After his 60th birthday yesterday the Prince is entitled to travel free on off-peak local bus services anywhere in England. His face was embossed on the pass.

The Prince and Duchess of Cornwall spent most of yesterday visiting projects linked to his charity the Prince's Trust which has helped hundreds of thousands of young people into work over the last 30 years.

He attended the launch of the trust's first Youth Week to highlight the good that young people can do in society. He smiled when Naiyer Qureshi, a life coach, broke protocol, stepped forward and planted a kiss on his right cheek during his tour of two trust projects in Beckton, east London.

As part of his campaign, 50 MPs across the UK will be shadowed during their constituency visits by young volunteers whose life has been turned around by the Trust. David Cameron, the Conservative leader, is supporting the project. The Trust has forged an alliance with 14 other national youth organisations, including the NSPCC and Barnardo's, to counter negative stereotypes of young people. Premiership football stars, including Rio Ferdinand, will visit Trust projects.

The Prince posed for pictures in front of dozens of photographers who called out to him. The Prince barely raised a smile and then made a barbed joke at the press, saying: "Sixty years of trying my patience," which made them laugh.

Brown, Republican
As a republican Senator Bob Brown knows how to use symbols. He launched his latest initiative to enforce a vote on whether Australia should be a Constitutional Monarchy or “a” republic on 11th November, hence on the 33rd anniversary of Governor-General Sir John Kerr’s dismissal of the Whitlam government. Republicans love to see the 11th November 1975 as their starting point. But their marathon run is far from close to the finish.

“Greens Senator Bob Brown will today introduce legislation to enable a vote at the next federal election on whether Australia should become a republic", reported the ABC from the nation’s second chamber. "’This is a bill to have a plebiscite with the next election in 2010 to ask people whether they want a republic - yes or no,’ he said” according to the ABC. Neither Senator Brown nor the ABC said that the so-called plebiscite has no meaning at all. The only way to change the Australian Constitution is a referendum with a majority of the popular vote as well as the majority of the states approving the change.

Bob Brown certainly has merits and on other topics I agree with him, but I would appreciate if he and the Greens would concentrate on more important issues, like the climate change, a better use of water, a functioning public transport system worth this name, the avoidance and re-use of waste etc. Aren’t these fields not wide and challenging enough? If these issues are dear to you, wouldn't you look for like-minded allies?

"This is a thing about values and how we value our nation,” Brown said. Has he spared a moment about the values of the Constitutional Monarchy? Has he thought about the good examples members of the Australian Royal Family set? I am sure, he and Prince Charles have many things in common and they could enjoy long discussions on all subjects that are dear to the green soul. The whole nature of Monarchy is about endurance and sustainability. The Monarchy leads back many generations and encourages to think in generations to come, and not only to the next election day.

I am not afraid of the peope’s vote, I am angry that once again money should be spent on “a” republic, while the money could be spent for far better projects, especially in environmental hot spots. The republic discussion diverts the attention from these important issues.

I would very much like to know, what the Aussie republicans will do, when the Australian people will once again say NO! to their plans. Will they give in or will they push for more votes until their aim is achieved?

It is a pity the republicans force the tax payer to finance their ambitions, but after all, that’s exactly, what politicians always do: Spend our money. The Queen of Australia doesn’t cost the Australian taxpayer a cent. The next NO! to the politicians republic should settle the matter.

Let’s come back to the symbol of 11th November. It was also Armistice Day in 1918 and marked the defeat of Germany and her allies. Could be a symbol you aren’t after, Bob.

Does dropping "Royal" make a Hospital more efficient?



Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital has axed its reference to the Queen shortly before Christmas. It will now be known as The Women's after advice from consultants that its traditional name was "ineffective". The hospital opened in 1856 and was known as The Women's Hospital from 1884 until Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia, conferred the title upon it in 1954, the year after her coronation during a two-month tour of Australia.

Greens MP Greg Barber welcomed the change and encouraged others to follow. "It must be sad for the monarchists," Mr Barber said. "RSPCA, Royal Women's, Royal Lifesaving, I support their cause, it's got nothing to do with them being connected to royalty."

We know, we live in a time, when “spin” rules politics. Now hospitals discovered spin as well. How else could we interpret Mandy Frostick’s defense for dropping the “Royal” of the Women’s Hospital? "We were advised by a professional wayfinding signage company who developed the signage package." And what the hell is "a professional wayfinding signage company"?How much does the hospital spend on new signage instead of investing it into their work? Who is being helped by insulting our Australian Queen?

And concerning Greg Barber’s statement, I am surprised that he dedicates so much of his precious time into discussing Royal attributes, when after being contacted by me concerning hazardous waste he himself wrote to me this year: “Unfortunately we are unable to handle every issue that comes before us and particularly issues of a Federal nature.”

Green issues don’t seem to count, all is spin. Welcome to the virtual world, “Women’s” and Greens.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/royal-womens-dumps-royal/2007/12/25/1198344986052.html

PS.
The same day that the Melburnian media reported the dropping of the "Royal" attribute it caused such a storm that a couple of hours later The Royal Women's Hospital was forced to go public and back down:

Women's hospital staying 'royal'
December 25, 2007 - 12:33PM
Australia's oldest public hospital for women, the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne, has today vehemently denied reports that it is about to discard its 53-year-old royal warrant.
It was today reported that the hospital had been advised to discard its royal warrant.
But Royal Women's Hospital spokeswoman Mandy Frostick said the hospital had not changed its name and had no intention of changing it, despite a large illuminated sign on Friday appearing high up on the side of the hospital's new $250 million building in Parkville.
Due to open in June, it will be situated immediately beside the Royal Melbourne Hospital.
"Of course we are proud to be The Royal Women's Hospital, but people also know us as just The Women's and that was a consideration in pointing people to our building as opposed to the Royal Melbourne Hospital next door," Ms Frostick said.
However, she said the hospital would continue to display its full name at street level, on its flag and throughout its premises.
"The most important function of the illuminated signs is to ensure people can quickly and easily identify The Women's - and can clearly distinguish our entrance from the adjacent Royal Melbourne Hospital entrance - particularly at night and during an emergency," Ms Frostick said.
"Signage experts strongly advised against using our full name on the illuminated signs at the top of the building as this would require a significant reduction in the size and consequent impact, rendering it ineffective from a visibility and identification perspective. "
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/womens-hospital-staying-royal/ 2007/12/25/1198344994971.html


PPS.
Nothing of the kerfuffle of The Royal Women's Hospital made it into the printed version of The Age. Its edition of 26th December did not contain a single sentence about what had made internet headlines on the 25th. I bet with you it would have been on page one, had The Royal Women's Hospital dropped the "Royal" attribute. To misquote The Age: "If it doesn't matter to us, it has not to matter to you."