What strange stuff one finds in an economics journal these days. A friend of mine, who has just enrolled to do an MBA, wrote to say:
I read this in The Economist today – this magazine is now required reading for the next three years. I especially liked the table at the end.
The scanned page he sent me can be downloaded here from Mediafire. [Nb. The views of The Economist’s journalists are not the views of this blog owner.]
I propose that
1) We replace the absentee monarch of Australia (who is also the Monarch of Great Britain) with an elected Australian monarchy.
2) The elected monarch exactly replaces the current monarch in the current constition.
3) The elected monarch has exactly the same powers, duties and responsibilities as those of the current absentee monarch. All the monarch's functions are carried out by his/her personal representatives (as is currently the case): federally by the Governor General, and in the states by the State Governors.
4) The Governor General and the Governors continue to be selected and appointed as they currently are, that is, by the premier with the approval of the monarch.
5) The monarch is elected to sovereignty over Australia for life, but his/her sovereignty is strictly non-hereditary.
6) The elective body is the "college of electors" comprised of the state governors and federal governor general.
7) The election of the monarch must be a unanimous decision on the part of the college of electors.
Yes i had a chuckle at the table at the end. I reckon that the critics who have made the comments such as Charismatics “loopy ” etc are the other tsreams of Anglicanism,all taking pot shots at each other
I’ve always enjoyed The Economists eccentric guides to cultural phenomena from a market perspective…but then I’m an economist by training!
This is very funny!