INCONSISTANCIES WITH GOVERNMENTS AND THE CONSTITUTION
Did you know? that, if Australians wanted their elected members of Parliament to honour their party's pre-election promises, they would insist that Government (Govt.) carry out fulfilling their promises by legislating the introduction of a “Citizens' Initiated Referendum”? This means that an allotted percentage of Australians can sign a collective petition, calling for the Govt. and the Opposition Parties to allow the Australian voters to decide by “Referendum” whether a Bill should be made law. This would lead to having a Govt. “of the people, by the people, for the people.”
Did you know? that the Barry O'Farrell - Andrew Stoner, Liberal-National N.S.W. Govt. continue to renew Coal Seam Gas (C.S.G.) licenses to mining companies including A.G.L., Apex and Mergasco, to mention a few, who were originally granted licenses by Ian Macdonald, the former Energy Minister in the previous Labor Govt.? Ian Macdonald is facing monumental allegations at ICAC hearings involving claims that he fraudulently issued C.S.G. mining and exploratory licenses.
During the last NSW State election and while the government was in caretaker mode our investigations revealed there were 12 mining licences renewed. It appears that the N.S.W. Govt., regardless if they belong to Labor or the Liberal-National Coalition, are as useful as teats are to a bull. In addition, the O'Farrell Coalition often shrouds what would be useful information to the voters of N.S.W. by claiming “cabinet in confidence.” This, we believe, is a good enough reason to abolish State Governments and, retrospectively, their pensions. Why should elected members of Parliament receive a taxpayer-funded lifetime pension for serving only two, three or four year terms?
Did you know? that Local Councils and Local Shires are unconstitutional entities, as is the Local Government Act Australia-wide since the result of the Federal Referendum, which was held on September 3, 1988? In every State and Territorial Govt., the appointment to Cabinet for the position of Minister for Local Govt. is not only in breach of the Commonwealth Constitution Sections 5 and 109, since the aforementioned Referendum result was finalised.
A Proposed Law: To alter the Constitution to recognise local government.
Do you approve this proposed alteration?
The Constitution recognises government at the Commonwealth and State levels, but makes no mention of local government. Constitution Alteration (Local Government) 1988 sought to give such constitutional recognition to local government.
Referendum result: Obtained majority in no State, an overall minority of 3,084,678 votes - Not Carried.
On 8th July 2010, Mr. Kevin Thompson received the following response from the Federal Attorney, General The HON. ROBERT McCLELLAND M.P. With his letterhead:
Dear Mr. Thompson,
I refer to your letter received on 10 June 2010 regarding the 1988 referendum.
In 1988 four proposals to amend the Constitution were put to voters in accordance with Section 128 of the Constitution. One of those proposals sought to give constitutional recognition to local government, but the proposal was not carried.
The Constitution does not currently recognise local government. Any change to the Constitution to recognise would need to be approved by voters at a referendum. The Government will continue to explore reform, including constitutional recognition, to facilitate co-operation with local government.
(The Minister's personal signature was affixed.) Robert McClelland
All Australians must understand the meanings and values of our Constitution.
We must emphasize this because our educational institutions have failed to include the interpretation of our Commonwealth Constitution in their curriculum. We will explain it to you in its simplicity.
Our Commonwealth Constitution is, in fact, Australia's premier laws.
The only way the result of a Referendum can be altered is by holding another Referendum under Section 128.22 of our Federal Constitution.
The Referendum is a Proposed Law: And whether the result is a positive or negative vote, it is law.
We believe the most important part of our Federal Constitution is Section 5, in part:
Operation of the Constitution and laws.
This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State;
Another important part of our Constitution is Section 109:
Inconsistency of laws
When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.
But the Referendum result that legitimises the previous Referendum results was the one held on November 6, 1999. Question 1:
A Proposed Law: To alter the Constitution to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic, with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament.
Do you approve this proposed alteration?
Constitution Alteration (Establishment of Republic) 1999 sought to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic, with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament.
Referendum result: Obtained majority in no State and an overall minority of 1,137,763 votes - not carried.
In addition, added evidence that Local Councils and Local Shires are unconstitutional and acting illegally comes from the “horse's mouth”, on page 3 on introduction to the Liverpool City Council Public Inquiry Report – Terms of Reference: In announcing the Inquiry, the Minister for Local Government, the Honourable Tony Kelly MLC, outlined these terms of reference. These terms established the parameters for the Inquiry. The Terms of Reference provided for the conduct of a wide-ranging inquiry into the affairs of the council, involving the conduct of the Councillors as the Elected Body, and also of the council staff and council's operations, as comprising the Corporate Body.
We emphasize Minister Kelly's words that “council is a Corporate Body.” This was announced by Mr. Kelly on November 5, 2003. His statement, plus the result of the Federal Referendum held on September 3, 1988, makes the so-called Local Government Act, legislated after confirmation of the result of the aforementioned Referendum in all States and Territories, “invalid” and a breach of the Commonwealth Constitution.
Another precedent eventuated:
In the Matter of Bankstown City Council v Alamdo Pty. Limited (2005) HCA46:
Their Honours GLEESON C.J., HAYNES AND CALLINAN J.J. stated: “The Appellant (the Council) is a body corporate constituted as a council.” Although they are constituted as a council, they remain under the auspices of Corporate Law as a body corporate. Therefore Councils and Shires cannot:
(1) act as a Government and impose taxation (i.e. Rates).
(2) act as Lawmakers and impose fines.
(3) act as a Property Valuer or Property Agents.
(4) act as a Business or Enterprise.
(5) act as Investment Bodies for their Ratepayers.
We are convinced that the major Political Parties appear to have hijacked Local Councils and Shires for the purpose of using them as a political kindergarten for their financial members, who have aspirations to climb the political ladder at the expense of ratepayers. It is worth remembering that those Australians who pay rent are themselves de facto ratepayers, as their landlords incorporate their rates into the rents. When rates rise, so do rents. It is well overdue for the citizens of our Nation to join together to become one Australia for all Australians. We must reverse the current trend and return our Nation to once again being one with Democratic values.
A young 16-year-old girl, who is a regular visitor to our website, put a suggestion to us, saying it is financially impossible for anyone to institute litigation against large organisations, so why not appeal to the visitors to “Voice of the People” website, asking if they would be interested in joining a National class action in the Supreme Court and all the way to the High Court as it involves Constitutional argument. This young lass said she would be quite happy to part with $20 of her hard-earnt pocket money to be part of the class action. We are so touched with the offer that we have decided to ask the visitors to our website, and our supporters, if it is worth having a go at such a large politically-backed organisation?
If you are interested in taking up the challenge, and would like to be part of the class action, please email Chris at: email@example.com or ring Phil at: (02)9787-2089 between 10.30 a.m. and 8 p.m.
When our class action succeeds, we can sue the General Manager and his individual Councillors in every Municipality and Shire throughout the Nation in which the residents live, and are part of the joint class action. We can sue the aforementioned, right back to when the official result of Question 3 of the September 3, 1988, Referendum became official.
They can be sued for the following: Investing ratepayers’ money in financial institutions such as the American Merchant Bankers, Lehman Brothers, in which Councils and Shires lost more than $1.5 billion. Any resident/ratepayer can sue for being charged for late paying of rates, for being fined for failing to vote in Council elections, being fined for making alterations to your property without permission, including removal of trees and trimming trees, for being fined for traffic infringements, and for approving developments against the wishes of the local resident/ratepayer.
Did you know? that a researcher reported numbers of mutant cane toads, with extra legs, eyes and toes, are becoming more common in Gladstone (Queensland). Scott Wilson from Central Queensland University says that, while mutations generally occurred in one per cent of cane toads, abnormalities were consistently being found in 6 to 8 per cent of specimens in Gladstone, the city at the heart of the country’s gas boom.
Did you know? that any country world-wide, that is over-governed, leads to higher taxes and inefficient planning through incompetent Government Agencies?
Is the skilled workers immigration visa programme a rort
Did you know? that Australia's leading talk-back radio host Alan Jones often offers some brilliant suggestions to the members of our Federal and State Governments, but in late February he struck out “big time” when he bombastically supported the “so-called” skilled-workers 457 temporary visas. We have no doubt that Mr. Jones was digging in to support the Coalition's spokesman on Immigration Scott Morrison's challenge to his counterpart in the Gillard Govt. Brendan O'Connor to substantiate his claims of rorts and abuse. Scott Morrison has accused the Govt. of shifting its aproach since moving former Minister Chris Bowen in the February reshuffle. “The transfer from Minister Bowen to Minister O'Connor has effectively seen the portfolio handed over to the unions,” Mr. Morrison said.
Well, for the information of Messrs. Jones and Morrison, the 457 temporary visas were introduced by the Howard Coalition Govt., and were sustained by the Rudd and Gillard Govt. up to the present, February 2013. In almost seven years the Rudd, Gillard Govt. have failed to challenge or alter the Howard Coalition's temporary 457 visas. This is nothing but an election stunt to retain the Australian Union's support.
Does the Federal Labor Govt. - the Greens and the three Independents Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott and Andrew Wilkie, in tandem with the Abbott-Truss Liberal-National Coalition, want to stray down the path of Britain? And finally, no wonder Labor has become a very dangerous left-wing party with Communist ideologies, when their elected members in the Federal LegislativeAssembly (Lower House) has 32 former Union officials, and 23 in the Senate (Upper House). No wonder Australian voters believe that the Labor Party (ALP) is controlled by the unions.
Link>Update-July 2007 Part 1
Index – MIGRANT WORKERS FLOOD BRITAIN
Index – Underpaid illegal workers continue to steal Australian jobs.
Link>Updates-October-Part Two 2006
Index – Foreign Workers Fall Foul of Safety Laws
Index – Guest 457 Workers Die on the Job
Next Step towards a third world country
Did you know? that the three senior political parties, all in Federal, and three of the largest States, appear to be doing everything within their power to destroy Australia's largest food-bowls, which include the Darling Downs (Qld.), the Liverpool Plains (NSW), the Hunter Valley (NSW), the Murray-Darling Basin (NSW and Vic.), and the Clare Valley (S.A.), to mention but a few areas. Is it possible that the Labor (Federal Govt.), the Liberal-National Coalition (Qld., NSW, Vic.) and the Greens are working in tandem to become part of the “New World Government?” This appears to be the case, when you bear witness to the selling off of Australia's Prime Agricultural Land for Coal Seam Gas mining or to Foreign investors such as Communist China, who need the Prime Land to grow food to feed their huge population now, and into the future. We would hate to think that Australia's farmers and primary producers will become extinct, sooner rather than later.
Is it possible that our Federal and State Govts., behind the scenes, are pushing for our fellow Australians to rely totally on imported foods and meats? This would lead to our two major Supermarkets, Coles and Woolworths, and their Subsidiaries, controlling prices through manipulation, without opposition from smaller Independent franchises, who the two major companies forced out of business by undercutting their prices. We can guarantee our fellow Australians that, by supporting Coles and Woolworths by using their Petrol Discount dockets, we (to a lesser extent,) and our children and grandchildren are going to pay through their noses for the future manipulation by Coles and Woolworths of prices, with no opposition.
NSW Department of Public Prosecutions [DPP] has a decade of Questionable decisions
Did you know? that former State Labor Member of Parliament, Karyn Paluzzano, on Friday February 15, 2013, won her appeal against a home detention sentence for stealing Parliamentary taxpayer-funded payments and then lying to the corruption watchdog ICAC. In 2012, Paluzzano was sentenced in October to 18 months' detention, with a non-parole period of twelve months. Judge Anthony Blackmore ruled on her appeal in the District Court, describing the penalty as “excessive”, quashed it, and gave her a 14-month suspended sentence in its place.
The former Member for Penrith pleaded guilty in June 2012 to falsely claiming Parliamentary sitting-day relief payments between 2006 and 2007, as well as giving false and misleading evidence to a 2010 corruption inquiry into the payments. She admitted signing some forms, knowing they were false, and signed others that were blank. She quit Parliament on May 5, 2010, after confessing she lied to ICAC during their inquiry the previous month.
The magistrate who ordered the home detention said that she had made repeated attempts to minimise or deny the full extent of the criminality of her behaviour. One of the questions most asked, “is there a law for one and another for us?” Judge Blackmore said he understood that Mrs. Paluzzano's new career as a teacher would be in jeopardy because of her punishment for rorting the relief claims and lying to ICAC about it, and that it was important to her as she had no desire to return to politics.
“I accept that the appellant is completely reformed,” he said. “She is not a danger to the community or the students at school.” One has to ask, “is Justice Blackmore a qualified psychiatrist?” One could be forgiven for thinking this was so, after studying the judgment he handed down. How did the judge reach his decision when he said Mrs. Paluzzano, a proven thief of taxpayers' money, as well as being a confessed liar, wouldn't be a danger to school students?
For more than a decade the NSW judiciary has been responsible for some very questionable decisions which have a vast number of the public perplexed. They believe the Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) should have lodged a number of appeals against judicial decisions, but failed to do so.
Did you know? that besides the NSW O'Farrell Coalition Govt. often operating in secrecy, the Australian Local Councils and Shires operate under the State and Territorial – Local Government Act, which is in breach of the Commonwealth Constitution.
Countless resident/ratepayers have asked their Local Council and Local Shires for information personally, or by way of Freedom of Information (F.O.I.), only to be advised that, due to “Commercial in Confidence” clause, they are not obliged to respond to a resident/ratepayer's request.
Link – 2013 Feb. latest updates – Index – Are the Major Political Parties, both Federal and State, Responsible for Committing Treason Against Their Fellow Australians for the Past 37 Years?
Scroll down PART 1 to the last two pages – with the sentence beginning with the words “The world's biggest rorts.”