TOPIC:

Swan42: With the agreement of the Commonwealth government. You have to apeal to their democratic instincts over a period of time.

How did Slovakia and the Czech Republic part company?
Montenegro and Serbia?
Iceland from Denmark
Norway from Denmark?
the precedent of the Scottish refrendum?

equally, it was the same way that Martin Luther King achieved civil rights for the blacks in America. That is he appealled to the liberal democratic values of the whites particulalrly in the north.

Also, there have been secession referenda in Australia at state level. The only reason New England did not become a state is because the government in Sydney, cunningly, included the city of Newcastle in the vote.

of course, the Commonwealth could do something novel and fix the GST question. The problem has been going on for twenty years.

ArkRoyal wrote: Swan42: With the agreement of the Commonwealth government. You have to apeal to their democratic instincts over a period of time.

How did Slovakia and the Czech Republic part company?
Montenegro and Serbia?
Iceland from Denmark
Norway from Denmark?
the precedent of the Scottish refrendum?

equally, it was the same way that Martin Luther King achieved civil rights for the blacks in America. That is he appealled to the liberal democratic values of the whites particulalrly in the north.

Also, there have been secession referenda in Australia at state level. The only reason New England did not become a state is because the government in Sydney, cunningly, included the city of Newcastle in the vote.

of course, the Commonwealth could do something novel and fix the GST question. The problem has been going on for twenty years.

If WA kicks out the likes of Porter, Wyatt, Irons, Hastie et al then it may be resolved. At the moment the Liberals just assume that WA will return an overwhelming number of Liba and Nats.

yep, agree Swan 42.

Love the thought of it, but who becomes the president of WA? King Col, Marky Whatshisnameagain??? Bit scary methinks.

I wonder what the reaction would have been on this forum if a similarly scatterbrained motion had been proposed at the recent WA ALP State Conference.

jack ....this issue transcends politics but also think it's a nonsense and will never happen mainly because there's no legislative or constitutional trigger to let it happen. for mine it's a thought bubble from the Libs in WA trying to stay relevant.

You nailed it BC.

Hence see my post above. Scotland has no constitutional right to secede from the UK, yet the British government was prepared to allow it.

The UK doesn't have a written constitution, AR - hence the interpretation is a bit fluid.

Australia does, and it seem pretty clear cut (subject to the High Court) that there is no avenue to "secede".

ps in the 30's referendum, the leave vote was 68%, not 98%. For those in doubt, look it up.

jack -- that is true mate; but the UK does have the Act of Union of 1707, which actually specifies that the union will never be broken -- ie. an Act relating directly to Scotland's constitutional status. In other words the whole referendum in Scotland could have been illegal. I am not sure what happened in this regard. It is possible that they may have revised the 1707 Act to make the referendum legal

Yep, I would agree with you 100 per cent on our Aussie Constitution. I guess Norman Morre could argue that it does not actually prohibit secession?