If you have a look at a site called 'Freedom House' , and then have a look at the country entry for ' Australia ', you will see that there are 3 divisions; 'Free', 'Partly Free', 'Not Free'.

Australia is listed as 'Free' (thanks guys). On this I mostly agree. We are freer than our northern neighbours in SE Asia (Why then would we want to consider ourselves 'part of Asia' Mr Keating?).

I do however feel that we achieve a level of freedom somewhat less than the ideal. Don't get me wrong there, I have worn the uniform of this country, I believe the political institutions of this country work reasonably well, but it could be better.

That site, which looks to reasonably objective, says some good things about Oz;

...Australia is a constitutional democracy with a federal parliamentary form of government. Citizens participate in free and fair multiparty elections to choose representatives to the parliament...

and;

...Australia is regarded as one of the least corrupt societies in the world and was ranked 9 out of 146 countries surveyed in the 2004 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index...

But it also says things that could be problematic in later years;

...The constitution does not provide for freedom of speech and of the press...

...The rights of assembly and association are not codified in law...

What do the likes of me think we should do to fix things?

Firstly, note I support Australia being a Republic. We DO NOT need to be a Republic to enjoy our freedoms. However, the wrong model for a Republic could reduce our freedoms - and I believe the 1999 model was a wrong model - that model would have made the President (or GG) simply a creature of Parliament's choice, not as he/she could be - a final guardian of the people's interests.

Secondly, We need a potent Bill of Rights. Not one that is filtered and vetoed by minority interest groups, but one which entrusts and empowers true citizens in a participatory democracy.

Thirdly, We should adopt the tools of Direct Democracy ; Initiative, Referendum, and Recall, so that we can formulate, or strike down laws by a petitioning and majority vote process (Initiative), and call to account politicians and officials on the public payroll to give account of their actions, and remove them from office by majority vote (Recall). Referendum we already have, but it could be fine-tuned.

We should also demand that we have a 'State of the Nation' report annually (or immediately prior to an election), where the head of government reports on the Nation's balance sheet, civil health (crime, economic indicators) and how they plan to address challenges identified especially in the medium to long term. They should also set out their legislative plans for the next year.

None of these things are revolutionary ideas. They all currently work, and have for some time, in places like Switzerland and the US. They should be part of the debate on this nation's plans for it's future.

(This article is reformmated from my Blog entry ; 24May06).

Robert Dallek has an op-ed in the WaPo which argues for a constitutional amendment to remove an unpopular and failed President - a recall election in other words. The electorate had their opportunity to judge in 2004 and they decided to democratically re-elect President Bush. So I do not buy that argument.

I previously argued that democracy has a morality and that means serving out a democratic term unless there is proven criminal behaviour. This is why Whitlam's dismissal by the Governor-General is seen as illegitimate by many as it broke that morality. As Felix commented, if the US wants to remove Presidents half-way through their terms then they should adopt a Parliamentary system and allow the party to remove an unpopular Prime Minister who has lost the confidence of the party, the parliament and the electorate.

Dallek writes:

It's enough to make people think about a constitutional amendment for removing a president other than by impeachment or because of incapacity, as is now provided for under the 25th Amendment.

Such an amendment would need to set a high bar for removal and include a process that would be the greatest possible expression of the popular will. This could best be achieved through a recall procedure beginning in the House and the Senate, where a 60 percent vote would be required in both chambers to initiate a national referendum that would be open to all citizens eligible to vote in state elections.

The ballot would simply ask voters to say yes or no to removing the president and vice president from office immediately. Should a majority vote to recall both incumbents, the speaker of the House would succeed to the presidency and, under the provisions of the 25th Amendment, would choose a vice president, who would need to be confirmed by majorities in the House and the Senate.

Dallek argues that of the eighteen US states with recall mechanisms they are only used very rarely. Given that the White House managed to get their amended FISA legislation through Congress last night over-riding the Democratic majority in the House I do not see how this recall process is useful. The time to remove the Bush Administration was in 2004 when his case for re-election was put to the electorate.

From a letter on the Office of Defects website, unfortunately it is a PDF that cannot be deep linked; also excuse the caps:

Summary:

GENERAL MOTORS IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005 THROUGH 2007 CORVETTE EQUIPPED WITH A REMOVABLE ROOF AND MODEL YEAR 2006-2007 CORVETTE Z06. THE ADHESIVE BETWEEN THE ROOF PANEL AND THE FRAME MAY SEPARATE. IF THERE IS A PARTIAL SEPARATION, THE DRIVER MAY NOTICE ONE OR MORE SYMPTOMS, SUCH AS A SNAPPING NOISE WHEN DRIVING OVER BUMPS, WIND NOISE, POOR ROOF PANEL FIT, ROOF PANEL MOVEMENT/BOUNCE WHEN A DOOR OR HATCH IS CLOSED, OR A WATER LEAK IN THE HEADLINER.

Consequence:

IF THERE IS A COMPLETE SEPARATION, THE ROOF PANEL MAY DETACH FROM THE VEHICLE. IF THIS WERE TO OCCUR WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING DRIVEN, IT COULD STRIKE A FOLLOWING VEHICLE AND CAUSE INJURY AND/OR PROPERTY DAMAGE.

The internet hates no deep linked, hates pdfs, and hates all caps. Best I can get is this summary from a link. It doesn't appear that the technical service bulletin [TSB] has been posted yet.