Category: Constitution

Rugby backs changing Section 18C

Posted by – 29 March, 2014

At least former Wallabies wing Clyde Rathbone does:

Racial discrimination is conquered by the very freedom we stand to lose if we let governments dictate which speech is truly free. A culture cannot evolve simply by criminalising the expression of bad ideas……Relaxing the laws that bound our speech will invariably lead to offence, which in turn will lead to debate. Open conversation, rather than legal intervention, is our best hope for a lasting solution to racial discrimination.

Wonder where the AFL stands? Remember ‘apegate’?

The freedom haters are going to go nuts!!!!

Posted by – 25 March, 2014

I’m not just talking about repealing Section 18c of the Federal ‘racial discrimination’ Act, but also the restoration of traditional honours. Just watch republicans look to be first in line.

The GG should resign now

Posted by – 22 November, 2013

The public and deliberate intrusion of the GG into matters pertaining to constitutional and legislative policy – on matters that may come before Parliament – is a clear violation of the GG’s role to remain impartial and above politics. She now has only one course of action left to her, and that is to resign.

Governor-General Quentin Bryce has publicly backed both Australia becoming a republic and gay marriage in a landmark speech in Sydney.

I don’t know how she can survive this intrusion into public debate about matters that are clearly with the legislative arm of government – not to mention siding with the Opposition leader (son-in-law) against the PM on those matters. The GG has been criticised previously for actively interfering in public debate. Andrew Bolt from 2009:

Yet her new job seems to have gone to her head, because our Activist-General’s apparent pretensions to be the political leader we neither asked for nor should want have become alarming.

Abbott should move swiftly to deal with the GG, although her term in office is nearly up. Good riddens.

UPDATE

It is unfortunate that there are so many people in the Liberal Party that are Labor Lite.

Some are more solid and consistent than others.

Liberal Senator Dean Smith says Ms Bryce had crossed the line by voicing opinions on two sensitive political issues.

Senator Smith says Ms Bryce is held in high regard by many people and he is disappointed she has decided to involve herself in a political debate.

“Last night’s departure into current political events will come as a slap in the face to many, many Australians, and a significant breach of trust because she would know better than most that that central office is so integral to stay above the day to day political fray,” he said.

“She has stepped across the line in inviting a commentary around two very, very sensitive issues.”

The national convenor of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, David Flint, says the comments are regrettable and a mistake.

“I think it’s a great pity because the constitutional system requires that the Crown be above politics so that when the representative of the Crown – which is the Governor-General or the Governor – speaks, they shouldn’t be talking about politics. It’s just it goes against the position,” he said.

“There are a number of people who are now going to wonder about her. There’s this sense of division that she’s created and the position is not intended to be divisive – it’s intended to unite and be above politics.

“So we’ve got commentators everywhere on these issues, couldn’t she have left them alone until she was out of the office?”

It is a shame that the PM has swung left since he took power.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott says the Governor-General is entitled to express her personal opinion.

On the positive side, the current GG is a perfect example of why people will not vote for a republic.

My idea for constitutional change

Posted by – 13 August, 2013

Currently reading Give Us Back Our Country. It proposes a radical conservative agenda to put power back in the hands of the people via recall elections and other measures. In the same spirit I propose another idea – the super majority. A two thirds majority in the HoR:

  1. To raise the debt ceiling; and
  2. To sign external treaties.

A super majority would have helped to stop the current debt, deficit, tax and spend largesse of the Ruddllard regime.

It would have helped stop the never ending growth of Canberra power over the last 20 years, primarily fueled by the abuse of the external relations power in the Constitution. By signing an external treaty covering domestic issues, like environmental regulation, the Feds have been able to either grab or compete for power with the States. A super majority would help to inhibit this trend.

Snowden – is he a hero?

Posted by – 2 August, 2013

Is the apparent type of indiscriminate surveillance undertaken by the USA (presumably Australia as well) of its own law abiding citizens right? Seems to me that the same arguments made against WikiLeaks could be made against the N – S – A.

In the fanatically puritanical view of WikiLeaks, no one and no organization should have anything to hide. It is scarcely worth arguing against such a childish view of life…….

The dissolution of the distinction between the private and public spheres was one of the great aims of totalitarianism. Opening and reading other people’s e-mails is not different in principle from opening and reading other people’s letters. In effect, WikiLeaks has assumed the role of censor to the world, a role that requires an astonishing moral grandiosity and arrogance to have assumed. Even if some evils are exposed by it, or some necessary truths aired, the end does not justify the means.

Video here for more argument.

Even if you are against Snowden, do you really want a government contractor / official like Snowden going through your private details?

UPDATE

A pattern of cover up

Up to 35 CIA operatives were working in the city during the attack last September on the US consulate that resulted in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, according to CNN.

Apparently they were running guns, or something….

Interesting analysis on Snowden

If you want to understand the difference between the two kinds of ‘conservatives,’ take a look at the debate over Edward Snowden, a contract employee at the US National Security Agency…..Mr Snowden has exposed the kind of secret surveillance on American citizens which the US Constitution forbids. The man is a hero. The ones who ought to be facing prosecution in all this are the members of the administration who are running the illegal surveillance. The one who ought to be facing impeachment is President Obama for sanctioning the snooping, which is in contravention of the fourth amendment to the Constitution which he swore to uphold.

………….The fourth amendment of the ten first amendments known as the Bill of Rights says: ‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.’

What this means is that there is a requirement for search warrants when any public authority wants to search individuals or their houses, or to seize any property in connection with an investigation. No law-makers have the right to over-ride this constitutional protection: the US Senate and House of Representatives are not the House of Commons.

It is not Edward Snowden who……..‘disdains allegiance to the rule of national law.’ It is President Obama and his top security officials.

It’s official: the local council referendum is dead

Posted by – 2 July, 2013

As previously predicted, Tony Abbott has backed away from the referendum on local government:

Mr Abbott said what while there was a case for recognition of local government in the constitution, he had “enormous reservations about the way the government has done this”.

”And I say to the Australian people, if you don’t understand it, don’t vote for it.”

In Adelaide Mr Pyne – who is not the Coalition’s spokesman on the matter – said the government had not laid the groundwork for the referendum to pass.

Mr Pyne said Labor had instead created the referendum as a ”distraction” from its troubles.

”My advice to the Australian Local Government Association is they should ask the Prime Minister to pull the referendum because I believe it will be defeated under the current circumstances and if it is defeated a third time, no government will want to return to it again,” he said.

Mr Pyne added that people were confused about what was happening in Canberra, ”let alone being asked to pass a change on the constitution”.

That’s a clever way of saying ‘vote no’, while putting blame on the ALP.

Abbott does not believe in the local gov’t referendum

Posted by – 27 June, 2013

It seems Abbott voted to allow a question to be put to the electorate, but he seems to be saying that this should not be interpreted as him supporting the ‘yes’ case for the referendum.

TONY ABBOTT: Well, I’m watching this debate unfold and I have to say that the Government has totally mishandled this from the beginning.

It failed to heed the Spiegelman committee recommendation that the referendum not go ahead at this time because the ground hasn’t been prepared for it. It didn’t properly consult and negotiate on the wording of the referendum.

It’s very unfairly funding the thing. It’s giving $10 million to the “yes” case but almost nothing…

SABRA LANE: You’ve given the thumbs up to all of this.

TONY ABBOTT: Well, no. What I’ve said is that it should go forward to the people for a vote. That’s what I’ve said. But the whole thing has been very badly mishandled.

In the end the Constitution of our country belongs to the people and the people should decide it.

What is Abbott doing!?

Posted by – 25 June, 2013

Tony Abbott has waved through the legislation to fund the ‘Yes’ case for the local government referendum. Thirteen Coalition Senators either voted no to the legislation or abstained from the vote. Only two coalition MPs in the HoR voted no. There is basically no funding for the ‘no’ case – possibly $500k compared to $10m for the ‘Yes’ case. Tony Abbott is a disgrace and has once again ignored Liberal Party rank and file members in preference of Canberra. It is further evidence that his leadership should be brought into question.

The Federal opposition front bench: Diet Labor

Posted by – 27 May, 2013

May has been busy. Turnbull has ‘re-launched’ the Republican movement.

Constitutional change to create a republic shouldn’t be ranked against other issues, like the recognition of indigenous Australians, Mr Turnbull added.

But, he said, “I’d rank it slightly ahead of the recognition of local government.”

Gee…the trifecta of constitutional tyranny explained in so few words. Remarkable that anyone on the front bench of the Liberal Party could hold such views.

So far Abbott believes in at least two of the three constitutional issues mentioned by Turnbull: Canberra taking control of local government and the creation of an aboriginal aristocracy. From Abbott today.

“The Aboriginal dimension is as much a part of Australia as our law, our language and our democracy. That is why it must finally be acknowledged in our national Constitution.

“I see acknowledging Aboriginal people in our Constitution not as changing it, but as completing it.

Okay….changing it, but not changing it????

Does anyone seriously think that the rank and file of the Coalition of centre-right parties believe in any of this? Unlikely. Seems Abbott is happy to take his base for granted, like David Cameron in the UK.

If Abbott continues down this path, then the same fury that has seen Gillard become unpopular will be turned on Abbott and he will not last. It will start in the blogs, social media, then make its way into talk back radio and then finally The Australian, Sky News and the rest of the main stream media.

Abbott starts listening

Posted by – 13 May, 2013

Previously Abbott seemed to support Gillard’s proposed change to the constitution to allow the Feds to meddle directly in local government affairs. Now, however, he seems to have started listening to rank and file supporters:

Mr Abbott said it was a ”bit rich” of the government to claim bipartisanship when it had not confirmed what the wording of the referendum would be.

Senator Cory Bernardi has rejected supporting the referendum ‘yes’ case on 2GB tonight.