Former prime minister Paul Keating speaks with Niki Savva about the dismissal of the Whitlam Labor government and the events that took place at Old Parliamen...
Keating’s ridiculous insistence that the Senate is “unrepresentative swill”, even to this day, is a notable shortcoming of his views here that might get lost in the midst of his even more ridiculous assertion that he would have had the police arrest the governor general, if he were the deposed Prime Minister. Yes, the Senate gives Tasmanians a disproportionate voice compared to New South Welshmen, but by its electoral method, it nevertheless produces a result which is a much more representative of the wishes of the Australian people than the House of Representatives is.
I hold a similiar position without the contempt. To many layers of government with things like States being a concept of a distance past. With modern communication, the need for geographic divisions is unnessary. I have 5 or more members who represent me geographically(council,state lower, state upper, federal lower, federal upper) that is too many.
Also I don’t have high opinion of Keating either, just another neo-liberal who made life harder for the generations after boomers.
Are you from Canberra or the NT? Because if not, you have 13 members who represent you geographically in the federal Parliament alone.
I actually don’t have contempt for Keating as a whole. I shared this video because aside from the two points I mentioned here, I pretty much agree with everything he had to say. The dismissal may not have been unconstitutional, but it certainly was an abhorrent moral failing on the part of Kerr and especially Fraser. And our subsequent PMs have cosied up to the US too much (even if I don’t agree with Keating’s opinion—not mentioned in this interview, but elsewhere—that we should be much friendlier to China and side with their foreign policy interests).
That is why I added the “or more” as I thought there to be more but wasn’t motivated to look it up.
As for the contempt I as referring to Paul not yourself. I prefer less hierarchy not more so I agree with the concept of not having a senate but acknowledge it seems to be working mostly fine at the moment.
I watch that constitution professor from time to time because you posted her channel so time ago, thanks for that.
Keating’s ridiculous insistence that the Senate is “unrepresentative swill”, even to this day, is a notable shortcoming of his views here that might get lost in the midst of his even more ridiculous assertion that he would have had the police arrest the governor general, if he were the deposed Prime Minister. Yes, the Senate gives Tasmanians a disproportionate voice compared to New South Welshmen, but by its electoral method, it nevertheless produces a result which is a much more representative of the wishes of the Australian people than the House of Representatives is.
I hold a similiar position without the contempt. To many layers of government with things like States being a concept of a distance past. With modern communication, the need for geographic divisions is unnessary. I have 5 or more members who represent me geographically(council,state lower, state upper, federal lower, federal upper) that is too many.
Also I don’t have high opinion of Keating either, just another neo-liberal who made life harder for the generations after boomers.
Are you from Canberra or the NT? Because if not, you have 13 members who represent you geographically in the federal Parliament alone.
I actually don’t have contempt for Keating as a whole. I shared this video because aside from the two points I mentioned here, I pretty much agree with everything he had to say. The dismissal may not have been unconstitutional, but it certainly was an abhorrent moral failing on the part of Kerr and especially Fraser. And our subsequent PMs have cosied up to the US too much (even if I don’t agree with Keating’s opinion—not mentioned in this interview, but elsewhere—that we should be much friendlier to China and side with their foreign policy interests).
That is why I added the “or more” as I thought there to be more but wasn’t motivated to look it up.
As for the contempt I as referring to Paul not yourself. I prefer less hierarchy not more so I agree with the concept of not having a senate but acknowledge it seems to be working mostly fine at the moment.
I watch that constitution professor from time to time because you posted her channel so time ago, thanks for that.