She was 52 when the king died , married 29 yearsQueen Mother ?.
Her hubby passed on 50 years before her.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
She was 52 when the king died , married 29 yearsQueen Mother ?.
Her hubby passed on 50 years before her.
I'll criticise the royal family for plenty of things but needing a buzz to get you through the day is not one of them.
Queen Mother ?.
Her hubby passed on 50 years before her.
I can see Lizzie lasting til about 110.
I didn't know she drank enough to make her drunk by lunchtime. Can you quote a source?She's pissed by lunch time too.
dry gin martini at 1pm, her third cocktail of the day
How would that make things better here?I can't wait for the older generation dropping off the Perch so we can finally become a Republic
I can't wait for the older generation dropping off the Perch so we can finally become a Republic
oh for * sale, I don't get the obsession they do nothing like obsession with the KardashinsWhy would we necessarily become a republic when the older generation drops 'off the perch'?
Why are we still obsessed with the royal family?
Prince Philip’s death has prompted Australians to face their long-held guilty pleasure: an undying fascination with the royal family, and what it says about them.www.theage.com.au
get rid of the bloody governor General such a wasted positionHow would that make things better here?
Why would we necessarily become a republic when the older generation drops 'off the perch'?
Why are we still obsessed with the royal family?
Prince Philip’s death has prompted Australians to face their long-held guilty pleasure: an undying fascination with the royal family, and what it says about them.www.theage.com.au
So a combined all powerful head of state / head of government style presidency? No thanks, not for me.get rid of the bloody governor General such a wasted position
A lot of people are ambivalent about the republic issue. QE2 has shown a lot of wisdom so that her role has remained uncontroversial, and it could be said that she is loved by many of her subjects. But it's unlikely that Charles would attract such devotion. And he has shown he is more likely to bring his strong personal views into the role, which may not be well received.
Then we have the other personalities. Camilla is not popular.
Prince Andrew is embroiled in the Epstein sexual abuse allegations. Harry and Meghan are on the outer after implying the Royal Family is racist.
Sentiment about a republic could change dramatically after the Queen dies.
you two are correct no matter how you perceive it...I was praising her highness
What an amazing contribution she was making.She's pissed by lunch time too.
dry gin martini at 1pm, her third cocktail of the day
I can't wait for the older generation dropping off the Perch so we can finally become a Republic
How would that ministry be appointed?Its not the Monarchies fault we're not a Republic. They'd let us leave whenever we wanted to.
It's the fact we cant come up with a model that everyone agrees to with respect to the new Executive arm. How much power the President should have, whether it's a direct elected president or appointed by the PM (or some other method) etc.
My personal preference is for the Ministry to be comprised of the heads of each Government department (to stop MP's also being members of the Executive) and for them to appoint a President, with limited Executive powers.
Basically a stronger separation of the powers than what we have at present where the Legislative branch is also the Executive.
Why would we necessarily become a republic when the older generation drops 'off the perch'?
Why are we still obsessed with the royal family?
Prince Philip’s death has prompted Australians to face their long-held guilty pleasure: an undying fascination with the royal family, and what it says about them.www.theage.com.au
How would that ministry be appointed?
I can't wait for the older generation dropping off the Perch so we can finally become a Republic
The heads of each government department. The Department of Defence (for example) appoints the senior Public Servant from within the Department as the Minister.
All the Minister does is exercise powers delegated to them by the Legislature under Legislation. As is the case currently. They would work hand in hand with (but independent from) an appointee from the Government (a MP).
In our current system, we have MP's (i.e. the Legislative branch) appointing themselves as Ministers (i.e. as members of the Executive). So effectively the guys writing the laws (the Legislature) are writing laws for themselves to Execute (as Ministers). Accordingly we get 'privative clauses' and other 'protection from Judicial oversight' laws slapped into every bit of Legislation (seeking to shield the Executive from Judicial review).
A separation of the powers requires an independent Executive, Judiciary and Legislative branch. One of the weaknesses of the Westminster system is the lack of an independent Executive. The head of the Executive (the Monarch or her representative) doesn't actually do anything or wield any powers other than reserve powers, and the next level down (the Ministry) are all members of the Legislative branch as well as being the Executive.
Effectively in a Westminster system the Legislative branch are in charge of the Military, all decision making under legislation (that they themselves write), appointing Judges and every other aspect of government.
I'd like to see a greater separation of those two arms of government between the Executive and the Legislature.
In this situation, how does the mandate of elections get implemented as through the current change of ministers?The heads of each government department. The Department of Defence (for example) appoints the senior Public Servant from within the Department as the Minister.
All the Minister does is exercise powers delegated to them by the Legislature under Legislation. As is the case currently. They would work hand in hand with (but independent from) an appointee from the Government (a MP).
In our current system, we have MP's (i.e. the Legislative branch) appointing themselves as Ministers (i.e. as members of the Executive). So effectively the guys writing the laws (the Legislature) are writing laws for themselves to Execute (as Ministers). Accordingly we get 'privative clauses' and other 'protection from Judicial oversight' laws slapped into every bit of Legislation (seeking to shield the Executive from Judicial review).
A separation of the powers requires an independent Executive, Judiciary and Legislative branch. One of the weaknesses of the Westminster system is the lack of an independent Executive. The head of the Executive (the Monarch or her representative) doesn't actually do anything or wield any powers other than reserve powers, and the next level down (the Ministry) are all members of the Legislative branch as well as being the Executive.
Effectively in a Westminster system the Legislative branch are in charge of the Military, all decision making under legislation (that they themselves write), appointing Judges and every other aspect of government.
I'd like to see a greater separation of those two arms of government between the Executive and the Legislature.