Your all videos are very informative and helpful for my college exams, as I have subject of GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS IN AUSTRALIA. It's more eaiser to watch you than putting head in textbooks👍Great job💪💪
I'm so glad you're back! This video (and both of your other ones) are incredibly helpful, easy to follow, and accurate (and they all have CCs, which is fantastic for me). thank you so much for all your hard work on this
@@AuspolExplained I understand that the Prime Minister can sack the GG and the GG can sack the Prime Minister and all other Ministers as Kerr didn't just Sack the Prime Minister but sack the Labor Government
U comment was 2 years ago , but know will the other way round, for Albanese if hi try to go for “”Republic”” Don’t confusing the two words , Republic = leftist and Republican =right wings :::::::
@@jecos1966 Only Her Majesty The Queen of Australia has the power to sack the Prime Minister. EDIT CORRECTION: I meant that only Her Majesty The Queen of Australia has the power to remove the Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of the Commonwealth of Australia from office. As for the sacking of the Prime Minister goes, only the Governor General has that power pursuant to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, Chapter II --- The Executive Government, Section 64 which prescribes that the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth serve at the Governor General's pleasure.
Queen Elizabeth the Second of the Uk was head of state of the Commonwealth of Australia about 16 months after being Crowned in the Abbey of Westminster she became Queen Elizabeth the Second of the Commonwealth of Australia , queen f the Dominion of Canada and lot more titles. She needed to be officially recognised (anointed, swears oaths, crowned and a lot more) to become queen of the commonwealth of Australia.
Her Majesty was elected by the people to be Sovereign (Monarch - Misis Kwin) of Png. My mum's country wanted a Monarch, not just any monarch. Her Majesty was invited to be Misis Kwin (Queen/Monarch) of Papua New Guinea
British monarch: You make sure my kid's power is keeped in check and help them govern themselves.😃 Australia's governor general: Yes, monarch.🫡 Australian government: so I have to work together with this person.🤨 British monarch: Yes, and play nice both of you and remember make sure that i don't need butt in have fun bye.🥰
Well governor general of Australia is similar to the ceremonial presidents of many parliamentary republics and monarchs of other constitutional monarchies
Hi there, could you please explain me the difference between governer General and governer ? Please reply back. I know about governer General but don’t know about governers.
Hey! Good question. A Governor does a similar role to the Governor General but on a state level (so gives royal assent to bills passed by state parliament, issues writs for elections, appoints judges, etc). The scope of a Governor's powers is limited compared to a Governor-General because states can't create armies (unless granted by the federal government, which they haven't done) so a Governor isn't the commander in chief of any armed forces. They otherwise are pretty similar in their roles and powers, just are specific to their state. So each one has their own governor.
Who was the first Indigenous Governor General? And, for one to be Governor General is it the people's choice or the Prime Minister. If Sir John Guise can be the first GG of PNG (Indigenous) then why has there not been an Australian Indigenous Governor General of Australia?
Unfortunately there has not been an Indigenous Australian Governor General. The Governor General is also not an elected position but "chosen" by the Prime Minister and then officially appointed by The Queen (which I'm pretty sure I said in the video?). There's no reason preventing an Indigenous person from being chosen for the position so it's quite likely structural racism limiting many Indigenous people from reaching the kind of positions that are considered for the role, or personal bias in the individual Prime Minister choosing. I can't comment on any of the individual decisions of the various PMs though so can't explicitly say "this decision was racist" just that acknowledge that Australia has an issue with racism, and therefore as this permeates society it likely has influenced this process as it does influence many others. I would love to see an Indigenous person fill the role of head of state.
@@AuspolExplained there hasn't been an Indigenous G-G not because of racism, because it's against the laws of the indigenous people. They already had their own laws in place before white man came here, their god 'law' states that they don't buy and sell, the Queen's God 'law' states that they buy and sell, they came as a corporation as it says in the king James Bible, So when the queen came, she had no right to take the land from the Aboriginal people. So the aboriginal people have never joined the Constitution, until the Constitution comes to some sort of formal agreement.
@@TalkThroughFood I do understand to what you are saying, as my great grandma comes from Laura. But, in PNG she (QE2) was invited by the people to be Head Chief
Governor General is federal, Andrews is state so it'd be the state Governor's role to give assent to bills passed in states. As I said in the video the Governor/General acts on the advice of the Prime Minister (in this case Premier) and cabinet. Andrews isn't trying to defy the constitution so there's no reason for the Governor to disallow anything Andrews does. They're not there to impose their political will on what does/doesn't happen
I have no strong opinion on who is the next monarch, as the position is meant to be as neutral as possible and serves only a formal function of approval of recommendations for Governor-General/Governor by the PM and Premieres. So it really matters who gets elected in Australia far far more than whoever is King/Queen.
@@williambacon4550 Correct. I don't have any hostility or ill will. A wedding and a baby is great! That makes people happy and if people are super invested in those things then I don't want to discourage them. But it's just not something that holds interest to me in particular.
They're both heads of state however they act differently. The governor general doesn't put forward a policy agenda like a president does. I have a video called "what's the difference between a prime minister and a President" as well as one called "what's the role of the governor general" that will likely answer any question you have about the governor general and how it differs from a president
@@AuspolExplained that depends on the type of President. The Governor general is quite similar to the Ceremonial Presidents of parliamentary republics like India . However the post Of GG is quite different from executive President of presidential countries like US .
The Governor General isn’t the representative of the monarch of England. Firstly there hasn't been a king of queen of England since Queen Anne & anyway the Governor General represents the monarch of Australia, not of The United Kingdom. So there! Otherwise fascinating
We had a referendum in 1999 to become a Republic but it didn't pass. It requires a referendum to change the constitution and replace the Queen/Governor General with a President
@@dspoliticalgyan there was disagreement on what model of republic and how we'd elect the President, so some people who wanted a republic didn't vote yes because they wanted a different one. I will eventually make a video when I learn more.
@@dspoliticalgyan Australians generally agree that we could be a republic, but can’t agree on what form it should take. There are also zero issues which arise from us being a constitutional monarchy, so it’d mainly be an ideological change rather than a practical one. Our current system works very well with a Governor General which fills the ceremonial roles but has very little actual power (because the convention is that they do everything on the advise of the Prime Minister). Is Britain tried imposing more of their wishes on Australia, or the Governor General exercised more power, then we might want to change it more
Having studied the subject for many years myself I find your videos informative BUT a little bit of research is required on your part with respec - ‘England’ has NOT been a sovereign state for over 300 years- hence, there is no such thing as the Queen of England, she is the Queen of the UK and in respect to Australia, the seperate legal entity of the Queen of Australia (I’m an ARDENT Republican by the way so I’m just making a point……. I’d sooner there be a President but right now, let’s get the terminology right so we can accurately overthrow it!!!!!!!
I've gotten this comment a few times all recently and I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to point it out. I will endeavour to correct this in future videos!
@@AuspolExplained all good, your videos are enjoyable and the error isn’t unusual, just thought I’d let you know from a ‘continuous improvement’ angle :-)
Actually there is no legal entity called the 'Queen Of Australia' that is just one of many different 'royal styles or titles' the Queen uses in her different dominions. Neither the British nor Australian Royal Styles and Titles Acts change or amend any of the Queen powers or functions in the UK or Oz. They are merely laws that say how the Queen's name should be written on official documents & will need updating when her successor takes the throne. No Australian Act of Parliament can amend or alter the Queen's constitutional powers. The Queen of Australia is the Head of State in Oz by virtue of British law. The origin of sovereignty in the Australian Constitution (which is a British Act of Parliament) is British dominion over the seven states and territories. Whatever your PofV it is amazing to think that, but for the 1986 (British) Australia Act which didn't change that much, Australia has the same constitutional relationship with the British Empire today as it had when Queen Victoria was on the throne!
@@hhorsley6264 no, that’s incorrect. The Australia Acts severed the link so that the only way to change the Australian constitution now is via s128 as the UK has no power to legislate over Australia. The High Court has determined in judgement after judgement that the UK is a foreign power in the context of s44. If a referendum is held and is successful, Australia WILL become a republic and it won’t just alter the role or power of the Queen, it will rREMOVE her. By the way, if you’d actually read the constitution you’d no her only power is to appoint and remove the GG, once appointed he/she has all the power and the Queen has none, she even has to ask permission to act as signatory to bills as head of state when she’s in Australia. It’s a ludicrous situation as the Australian constitution anchors the head of state to the “sovereignty of the United Kingdom” which, if Scotland goes, ceases to exist, effectively cutting us constitutionally adrift potentially, meaning no GG or Governors could be appointed because the legal entity of the United Kingdom would no longer exist. The Queen is simply a legal entity in the context of Australia with even the expression “the Crown” effectively meaning “the State” these days but you’re correct in that the Royal style and title could be “the Queen of down under” but it would let change her constitutional status. You can’t read the constitution literally without historical context. The US constitution on which Australia’s is heavily based textually values an African American at 3/5ths of a person but because if later constitutional and legal evolution that is not the case.
I WISH the GG would earn his salary and dissolve the B parliament. $400,000 A year salary?? Useless ..and NO..hope I am dead when Australia becomes Republic.
Your all videos are very informative and helpful for my college exams, as I have subject of GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS IN AUSTRALIA.
It's more eaiser to watch you than putting head in textbooks👍Great job💪💪
I'm so glad you're back! This video (and both of your other ones) are incredibly helpful, easy to follow, and accurate (and they all have CCs, which is fantastic for me). thank you so much for all your hard work on this
Yay you’re back
I'm very happy about this!
You're back! Excellent!
the only reason i knew of the governor general before this video was bc midnight oil mentioned it in one of their songs
great to see you're back!!!
so basically if i become governor general i can remove scott morrison.
so now i have a life plan.
Technically yes but ScoMo would have to last in the position a very long time. You could become GG and remove a different PM of your choosing.
@@AuspolExplained I understand that the Prime Minister can sack the GG and the GG can sack the Prime Minister and all other Ministers as Kerr didn't just Sack the Prime Minister but sack the Labor Government
U comment was 2 years ago , but know will the other way round, for Albanese if hi try to go for “”Republic””
Don’t confusing the two words , Republic = leftist and Republican =right wings :::::::
@@jecos1966
Only Her Majesty The Queen of Australia has the power to sack the Prime Minister.
EDIT CORRECTION:
I meant that only Her Majesty The Queen of Australia has the power to remove the Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of the Commonwealth of Australia from office.
As for the sacking of the Prime Minister goes, only the Governor General has that power pursuant to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, Chapter II --- The Executive Government, Section 64 which prescribes that the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth serve at the Governor General's pleasure.
@@ronaldmccallum2111 In 1975 John Kerr sacked the Prime Minister not The Queen she only told him that he has the power to do so
Welcome back :D
Interesting video, again, thank you very much!
Queen Elizabeth the Second of the Uk was head of state of the Commonwealth of Australia about 16 months after being Crowned in the Abbey of Westminster she became Queen Elizabeth the Second of the Commonwealth of Australia , queen f the Dominion of Canada and lot more titles.
She needed to be officially recognised (anointed, swears oaths, crowned and a lot more) to become queen of the commonwealth of Australia.
Her Majesty was elected by the people to be Sovereign (Monarch - Misis Kwin) of Png. My mum's country wanted a Monarch, not just any monarch. Her Majesty was invited to be Misis Kwin (Queen/Monarch) of Papua New Guinea
British monarch: You make sure my kid's power is keeped in check and help them govern themselves.😃
Australia's governor general: Yes, monarch.🫡
Australian government: so I have to work together with this person.🤨
British monarch: Yes, and play nice both of you and remember make sure that i don't need butt in have fun bye.🥰
Love from India brother ❤️
Still learning more on this channel than VCE politics
I never took VCE politics. Is that meant to be a high school thing?
Auspol Explained VCE aka Victorian Certificate of Education ie what they give you when you finish year 12, over here in the state of Victoria.
Aaah! Right. I'm from WA so it's called WACE. I don't remember politics as a subject ever being offered to me though.
Well governor general of Australia is similar to the ceremonial presidents of many parliamentary republics and monarchs of other constitutional monarchies
Hi there, could you please explain me the difference between governer General and governer ? Please reply back. I know about governer General but don’t know about governers.
Hey! Good question. A Governor does a similar role to the Governor General but on a state level (so gives royal assent to bills passed by state parliament, issues writs for elections, appoints judges, etc). The scope of a Governor's powers is limited compared to a Governor-General because states can't create armies (unless granted by the federal government, which they haven't done) so a Governor isn't the commander in chief of any armed forces. They otherwise are pretty similar in their roles and powers, just are specific to their state. So each one has their own governor.
@@AuspolExplained Thank You heaps. I’m preparing for my Citizinship exam, that’s why asked you that question. 🙏
@@smriti798 Best of luck!
Can you say to me what is the captain general too?
A captain general is a military title used when describing the ceremonial head of the royal Australian artillery. I don't know much about it sorry.
i have so confused about vice royal patrono? can you say to me what is that?
I have no idea what that is sorry
@@AuspolExplained its okay thank you
I think you mean Vice Royal Patronage.
🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾
Who was the first Indigenous Governor General? And, for one to be Governor General is it the people's choice or the Prime Minister.
If Sir John Guise can be the first GG of PNG (Indigenous) then why has there not been an Australian Indigenous Governor General of Australia?
Unfortunately there has not been an Indigenous Australian Governor General. The Governor General is also not an elected position but "chosen" by the Prime Minister and then officially appointed by The Queen (which I'm pretty sure I said in the video?). There's no reason preventing an Indigenous person from being chosen for the position so it's quite likely structural racism limiting many Indigenous people from reaching the kind of positions that are considered for the role, or personal bias in the individual Prime Minister choosing. I can't comment on any of the individual decisions of the various PMs though so can't explicitly say "this decision was racist" just that acknowledge that Australia has an issue with racism, and therefore as this permeates society it likely has influenced this process as it does influence many others. I would love to see an Indigenous person fill the role of head of state.
@@AuspolExplained Thanks, you have helped me to understand
@@AuspolExplained
there hasn't been an Indigenous G-G not because of racism, because it's against the laws of the indigenous people. They already had their own laws in place before white man came here, their god 'law' states that they don't buy and sell, the Queen's God 'law' states that they buy and sell, they came as a corporation as it says in the king James Bible,
So when the queen came, she had no right to take the land from the Aboriginal people. So the aboriginal people have never joined the Constitution, until the Constitution comes to some sort of formal agreement.
@@AuspolExplained
ua-cam.com/video/16N0jtsPI40/v-deo.html
@@TalkThroughFood I do understand to what you are saying, as my great grandma comes from Laura. But, in PNG she (QE2) was invited by the people to be Head Chief
I understand my people and I'm gonna change man in christ
Functions of Governor General of Australia and president of Republic of India are same.
That's pretty neat
@@AuspolExplained your videos are very useful for my subject government and politics in Australia (graduation) from india
Why is the Governor General not intercepting Dan Andrew’s
Governor General is federal, Andrews is state so it'd be the state Governor's role to give assent to bills passed in states. As I said in the video the Governor/General acts on the advice of the Prime Minister (in this case Premier) and cabinet. Andrews isn't trying to defy the constitution so there's no reason for the Governor to disallow anything Andrews does. They're not there to impose their political will on what does/doesn't happen
The last monarchy of England was in 1706.
1707
Hey auspol, how do you feel about having Charlie and Camilla as the next king and queen of Australia.
I have no strong opinion on who is the next monarch, as the position is meant to be as neutral as possible and serves only a formal function of approval of recommendations for Governor-General/Governor by the PM and Premieres. So it really matters who gets elected in Australia far far more than whoever is King/Queen.
@@AuspolExplained So you are not interested when they is a royal wedding or a royal baby is born.
@@williambacon4550 Correct. I don't have any hostility or ill will. A wedding and a baby is great! That makes people happy and if people are super invested in those things then I don't want to discourage them. But it's just not something that holds interest to me in particular.
Is governor general is like a president?
They're both heads of state however they act differently. The governor general doesn't put forward a policy agenda like a president does. I have a video called "what's the difference between a prime minister and a President" as well as one called "what's the role of the governor general" that will likely answer any question you have about the governor general and how it differs from a president
@@AuspolExplained that depends on the type of President.
The Governor general is quite similar to the Ceremonial Presidents of parliamentary republics like India .
However the post Of GG is quite different from executive President of presidential countries like US .
Yes we can see the position is quite similar to the position of president in a parliamentary system.
Governor General has most of same power as President of India 🙄
Why the Queen don't make me a governor general i understand the people needs and wants
I can see you reading! 😝🤣
The Governor General isn’t the representative of the monarch of England. Firstly there hasn't been a king of queen of England since Queen Anne & anyway the Governor General represents the monarch of Australia, not of The United Kingdom. So there! Otherwise fascinating
Apolgies for the error. I do mean the monarch of the UK of course
I still think it's about time we gave old Liz the chop and become fully independent. We need to have an Australian citizen as its Head of State.
Why Australia are not republic
We had a referendum in 1999 to become a Republic but it didn't pass. It requires a referendum to change the constitution and replace the Queen/Governor General with a President
Why it not passed,please make a video on this
@@dspoliticalgyan there was disagreement on what model of republic and how we'd elect the President, so some people who wanted a republic didn't vote yes because they wanted a different one. I will eventually make a video when I learn more.
I'll wait for your video brother,please make it as soon as possible
@@dspoliticalgyan Australians generally agree that we could be a republic, but can’t agree on what form it should take. There are also zero issues which arise from us being a constitutional monarchy, so it’d mainly be an ideological change rather than a practical one. Our current system works very well with a Governor General which fills the ceremonial roles but has very little actual power (because the convention is that they do everything on the advise of the Prime Minister). Is Britain tried imposing more of their wishes on Australia, or the Governor General exercised more power, then we might want to change it more
Having studied the subject for many years myself I find your videos informative BUT a little bit of research is required on your part with respec - ‘England’ has NOT been a sovereign state for over 300 years- hence, there is no such thing as the Queen of England, she is the Queen of the UK and in respect to Australia, the seperate legal entity of the Queen of Australia (I’m an ARDENT Republican by the way so I’m just making a point……. I’d sooner there be a President but right now, let’s get the terminology right so we can accurately overthrow it!!!!!!!
I've gotten this comment a few times all recently and I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to point it out. I will endeavour to correct this in future videos!
@@AuspolExplained all good, your videos are enjoyable and the error isn’t unusual, just thought I’d let you know from a ‘continuous improvement’ angle :-)
Actually there is no legal entity called the 'Queen Of Australia' that is just one of many different 'royal styles or titles' the Queen uses in her different dominions. Neither the British nor Australian Royal Styles and Titles Acts change or amend any of the Queen powers or functions in the UK or Oz. They are merely laws that say how the Queen's name should be written on official documents & will need updating when her successor takes the throne. No Australian Act of Parliament can amend or alter the Queen's constitutional powers. The Queen of Australia is the Head of State in Oz by virtue of British law. The origin of sovereignty in the Australian Constitution (which is a British Act of Parliament) is British dominion over the seven states and territories. Whatever your PofV it is amazing to think that, but for the 1986 (British) Australia Act which didn't change that much, Australia has the same constitutional relationship with the British Empire today as it had when Queen Victoria was on the throne!
@@hhorsley6264 no, that’s incorrect. The Australia Acts severed the link so that the only way to change the Australian constitution now is via s128 as the UK has no power to legislate over Australia. The High Court has determined in judgement after judgement that the UK is a foreign power in the context of s44. If a referendum is held and is successful, Australia WILL become a republic and it won’t just alter the role or power of the Queen, it will rREMOVE her.
By the way, if you’d actually read the constitution you’d no her only power is to appoint and remove the GG, once appointed he/she has all the power and the Queen has none, she even has to ask permission to act as signatory to bills as head of state when she’s in Australia.
It’s a ludicrous situation as the Australian constitution anchors the head of state to the “sovereignty of the United Kingdom” which, if Scotland goes, ceases to exist, effectively cutting us constitutionally adrift potentially, meaning no GG or Governors could be appointed because the legal entity of the United Kingdom would no longer exist.
The Queen is simply a legal entity in the context of Australia with even the expression “the Crown” effectively meaning “the State” these days but you’re correct in that the Royal style and title could be “the Queen of down under” but it would let change her constitutional status.
You can’t read the constitution literally without historical context. The US constitution on which Australia’s is heavily based textually values an African American at 3/5ths of a person but because if later constitutional and legal evolution that is not the case.
@@hhorsley6264 Well all I can say is the most benign Imperial relationship anyone could imagine!
I WISH the GG would earn his salary and dissolve the B parliament. $400,000 A year salary?? Useless ..and NO..hope I am dead when Australia becomes Republic.