Hi Bret, On 3/08/2014 8:47 PM, Bret Busby wrote: >>> Actually we are subject to a bill of rights, see here: >>> http://www.clrg.info/2011/02/validity-of-bill-of-rights-1688/ >>> >> That applies only to Victoria - I believe that, like motor vehicle >> roadworthiness testing, human rights legislation applies to only two >> states of Australia. >> > > I apologise - after posting my response, I realise that the material > on that web page, went beyond the first letter, which applies only to > Victoria. Thus, that web page relates to two other states, I believ, > in addition to Victoria. Even so, it might be something that could be challenged by other states if needed. > However, please read the text below, and, please read the citation of > what Michael Kirby said - he is much more an authority on the matter, > at the Australian federal level. Thanks. I wonder about Kirby myself. To me, it shouldn't be the court deciding a matter of fact via *their* opinion. If the law says "xa" and the opinion says "xb" ... then it is up to the parliament to correct the situation if it is faulty, not the courts to decide "xb" instead of the letter of the law that is "xa". I could never understand how the courts could get away with that. Judges should not be judge and jury as they often are, they should only rely on the facts, 100% facts of the law, not their opinion to make a judgement against the facts and Kirby seems to be a great offender of my view of what is required here. >>> Don't let them screw with our constitution either, under false >>> pretenses. Local councils corporations operate as local government >>> bodies today, but without the rights to do what they are doing ... >>> legitimize those corporations and they'll go gang busters -- give them >>> an inch, they'll take a 100 miles! >> >> It depends on how you regard the status of local governments in Australia. We are over-governed already, I DO NOT EVER want local council corporations getting more power than they already have; heck I'm not even sure there is a place for local government meddling at all, let alone all their fees and /localized/ sub-laws (that should not be binding on the people). Already they have far too much power and they are just corporations that we are effectively *forced* to do business with whether we like it or not! >>> And as for the recognition of >>> Aboriginals in AU ... that is also completely unnecessary; any person, >>> no matter what, if they set foot in Australian, then they are covered by >>> our constitution. Aboriginals are no different to other Australians, >>> every person is covered. They want to screw the Constitution under the >>> guise of /fixing/ these things, instead they'll f*** things right up and >>> we'll lose even more rights. >> >> Regarding the issue of the Aboriginals, and, any other race; I do not >> know whether you have read the Australian Constitution Act, but, >> apartheid (= "apartness" - racial segregation and racial >> discrimination) is constitutionally legal and enforceable, in >> Australia. Regardless of that fact, if it is true or not, it is not practiced in this day and age. It is completely unnecessary to risk changing the Constitution to fix this issue that is /fixed/ otherwise current practices and other laws relating to how all persons are treated in AU. We don't have slavery and separation in AU, and if there was a problem then it is often addressed via the "guilt" adverts. like those of Adam Goodes (an AFL footballer). We have full integration as a multi-cultural society and non-racist people are by far the majority in many areas of AU. There may well be more of an issue of reverse discrimination trying to right the wrongs of the past, that's another matter, not one that needs constitutional *destruction*. Leave the AU Constitution in tact, create new laws if necessary, but only if necessary to /fix/ issues and problems that really do need to be addressed, but definitely do not risk the integrity of the Constitution under any circumstances, it really is not worth the risk and changes may very well lead to it being effectively useless, ala not worth the paper it is printed on. Cheers A.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature