This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Thin Arthur (talk | contribs) at 11:49, 19 September 2008 (moved Talk:Australian order of precedence to Talk:Table of Precedence for the Commonwealth of Australia: Move to official gazetted title of the protocol). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:49, 19 September 2008 by Thin Arthur (talk | contribs) (moved Talk:Australian order of precedence to Talk:Table of Precedence for the Commonwealth of Australia: Move to official gazetted title of the protocol)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Australia: Politics Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Chief Minister of the ACT?
Why was the Chif Min of the ACT left off? Is it because he has upset the PM on a few occasions recently? Or should he go somewhere between 17 and 19? -- Adz 08:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- I came here to ask exactly the same question, and found it already here, unanswered. Anybody know where Jon Stanhope belongs?? JackofOz 00:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ditto from me. My only guess is that the order of precedence hasn’t been updated since the ACT gained self-government in 1988? I note the New Zealand order of precedence article contains the comment:
- 13. “Mayors of cities and boroughs and chairmen of counties while in their own districts.” In 1989, boroughs and counties were amalgamated into district councils. District mayors, and the Chatham Islands mayor could expect to be accorded this same precedence.
- so if that’s up-to-date, then obviously these things aren’t updated as often as they perhaps should be... I would guess Jon Stanhope has the same precedence as the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory.
- The date of the source (1982) is before the ACT had self government, so I think we could assume that the Chief Minister of the ACT would have the same precedence as their NT counterpart, but it would be good to see an updated source. If anyone knows of one, please don't hold your silence. -Qsjet
- My other question concerns Mayors and Lord Mayors. Do non-lord Mayors receive no position in this, even in their own city/shire? The article on Lord Mayors also mentions that three other NSW cities have Lord Mayors: Newcastle, Paramatta and Wollongong, and this article says ‘Lord Mayors of Cities in order of city populations’, not ‘capital cities’, but doesn’t list the Lord Mayors of those three cities. Do they have any precedence, within or out of their city?
- —Felix the Cassowary 08:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ditto from me. My only guess is that the order of precedence hasn’t been updated since the ACT gained self-government in 1988? I note the New Zealand order of precedence article contains the comment:
Selective deletion
I am about to delete from the article history those revisions whose content and/or edit summaries libel Xtra, per Misplaced Pages's libel policy. Selective deletion requires full deletion followed by selective restoration. Therefore this article will be deleted for a very brief period of time. Snottygobble 02:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Complete. Snottygobble 02:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Lord Mayors of capital cities in order of population
If this was the basis of their order, then Brisbane, with a population of 800,000 would surely rank first ? All other Lord Mayors preside over relatively small municipalities ? 136.153.2.2 07:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ranked by the greater urban area. Xtra 07:53, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Order of the governors
The order of the governors looks wrong to me — is it really in order of appointment? Ondewelle (talk) 15:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- I believe so. In the early 2000s, Tasmanian Governor Guy Green was stand in as Governor General. He wouldn't have achieved this if it was in order of population or similar. -- Chuq (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Trivia
I didn't think it was appropriate to add this to the actual page, but interesting to note that the highest ranked male in the list is #4. -- Chuq (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Needs correction
It is actually called the Table of Precedence for the Commonwealth of Australia. The most recent version was gazetted in Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. S 206 dated Tuesday, 5 October 1982 (see scan). It is worth noting that each State and Territory has its own Table of Precedence. 203.7.140.3 (talk) 04:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Categories: