Foundation for National Renewal
The "Model
Constitution" ActivityFederal Election October
2004:
Which Candidates Trust the People?
| Foundation for National Renewal The "Model
Constitution" Activity |
Federal Election October
2004: |
FOUNDATION FOR NATIONAL RENEWAL
Crafting a Model Constitution
Task 31 - Amending the Constitution: Candidate Pledges
In the late 1800s, our Founding Fathers wrestled with drafting a Constitution that could and would unite the people of Australia. They faced the daunting task of persuading six largely autonomous colonial governments to give up some of their powers to a new Federal Government. The fact that this Federation was achieved at all is a minor miracle. The drafters of the Constitution knew the compromises they had to make would result in need for amendment down the track to correct deficiencies and also knew there would be need for amendment as circumstances changed. And so the Founding Fathers included Section 128 in our Constitution to allow for changes to be made.
It is no accident that Section 128 stipulates the Constitution can only be changed by the People voting at a referendum. This provision has prevented successive governments from making changes the People did not want and has kept our Constitution virtually intact for 100 years. Of 45 changes proposed by government, the People have voted at referendum to accept only eight. However, the time has come to update our Constitution to make it relevant to Australia in the 21st century and this is what The Foundation for National Renewal is all about.
There is however, two problems. Firstly, many of the changes required involve restoring power to the People. Currently only the Federal Government can initiate changes to the Constitution and history is proof that governments are not likely to do anything that will reduce their power. Secondly, there is currently a grave danger that a Federal Government might produce a new Constitution and make the People feel compelled to accept it even though it does not restore sovereignty to the People and does not adequately address many other problems of which we are aware. It is therefore imperative that the People secure a means of achieving the Constitution they want.
It is a long-held aim of The Foundation for National Renewal to secure amendment to Section 128 of our Constitution to allow the People to initiate changes. (See Paragraph 7 of The Foundation for National Renewal brochure.) It is felt that the time is now right and that the up-coming Federal election provides a window of opportunity.
This FNR Task is different to all others in that you will be asked to comment on a proposal for a here and now activity. The idea is to get all Federal election candidates to pledge that they will support a move to amend Section 128 of the Constitution to allow citizens to initiate referenda to change the Constitution. This amendment would not diminish the power of the federal government to initiate referenda and so it is difficult to imagine any aspiring candidate or any of the political parties opposing it.
However, to be effective, any such campaign would have to be able to demonstrate not only the advantages of accepting the pledge, but also the damage that will occur to those rejecting the pledge. Public disclosure in the media would seem to be the most effective means of achieving this. That probably means we would have to take out advertisements in the mass media to gain traction with political parties and in local media to cover each electorate. On the other hand, a press release might generate so much interest that media outlets would run the story editorially.
Whatever methods are used, candidates would need to know that their response is to become very public knowledge prior to any votes being cast.
The pledge being considered is as follows:
"I pledge to support a Bill for a referendum to amend Section 128 of our current Constitution to allow citizens to initiate referendums to change the Constitution."
It is important to make the point here that this initiative should not be confused with Citizen Initiated Referenda or CIR as it is generally known. CIR means citizens having the right to initiate legislation. Although CIR has much merit, there are well known and well rehearsed arguments against it - the term carries with it much baggage and we should be at pains to ensure it is not confused with the initiative proposed in this paper.
A full disclosure will also be necessary to ensure that everyone is fully aware of what is being pledged or rejected. A full disclosure should ensure that the media is unable to misrepresent the initiative and that no weasel wording is introduced down the track to confuse and/or defuse the issue. This explanation could take the form of one A4 sheet of paper with the full text of the referendum question that could be put to the People. A suggested wording follows.
The next problem to be overcome would be the mechanics of having each candidate confronted with the pledge. It would be great if a central organisation could mail the pledge to every candidate, consolidate responses and then have the resources to place advertisements in the national press and local media in each electorate to promulgate results.
A quick calculation can serve to reveal the costs involved. Considering there will be 145 House of Representatives seats and half the Senate seats up for grabs, and estimating an average of eight candidates per seat, a rough total of 1700 letters would have to be printed and posted. It would also be nice to include a self addressed and stamped envelope to ensure prompt replies. This would entail an additional $900 in stamps alone. Minimum cost for printing and postage would be $2100.00. The cost of advertising would run into thousands of dollars. An example of the advertisement to be placed in local media could be as follows:
Local Candidate Denies Citizens the Right to Change the Constitution
Mr Joe Polanski, X Party candidate for Hooplipoop Electorate in the Federal Election has refused to commit to a referendum that would give citizens the right to initiate Constitutional amendments to be put to referendum.
All other Hooplipoop candidates have signed a Pledge to support such a referendum.
Or
|
Only Joe Polanski Supports Citizens Rights Of all the Candidates for the House of Representatives in Hooplipoop Electorate, only Joe Polanski has signed a Pledge to support a referendum to give Citizens the right to initiate changes to the Constitution. |
An alternative method of achieving the aim might be for affiliated organisations to accept responsibility for a certain number of electorates. Current members of The Foundation could perhaps handle distribution of pledges to candidates in about 40 or 50 of the 145 House of Representative electorates and could possibly also cover Senate candidates. Other organisations to which we are affiliated might be prepared to undertake other electorates.
FNR Task 31 - Amending the Constitution:
Candidate Pledges
In the Task for this month you are asked to evaluate a proposal to conduct a campaign to solicit pledges from candidates in the forthcoming Federal election. The idea is to secure an amendment to our Constitution. Your response to the following questions would allow the Foundation to gauge support for this proposal and to refine implementation procedures.
Q 1. Do you consider that the basic, one sentence pledge is drafted satisfactorily?
Q2. Do you recommend any changes to the basic pledge?
Q 3. Do you recommend any changes to the draft Constitutional amendment?
Q4. Would a positive response to such a pledge by only one candidate in your electorate influence your vote in the coming Federal election?
Q 5. Would a refusal to commit to such a pledge by the candidate you might otherwise vote for, influence your vote?
Q 6. If the proposed amendment of the Constitution was put to referendum, would you vote for the proposed amendment?
Q 6. Can you undertake to distribute pledges to the candidates in your electorate?
.
Q 7. What is the name of your House of Representatives electorate?
Q 8. In what other electorates could you undertake to distribute and collect Pledges?
Q 9. Would you undertake to forward responses from Candidates to a central co-ordinating body such as FNR?
Q 10. Could you undertake to place advertisements in your local press to promulgate results?
.
Q 11. Could you finance such advertisements?
Q 12. In your opinion, is it appropriate that The Foundation for National Renewal sponsor such a campaign?
The Foundation for National Renewal
ABN 67 078 967 960 ACN 095 238 289
Post Office Box 82, Woombye, Queensland, 4559
Telephone: (07) 5442 1589 Facsimile: (07) 5442 1587 Email:
Parliamentary Candidate Pledges
I, ,
of (address) . , a
Senate / House of Representatives (delete one) candidate for election in the electorate
of .. , pledge to support a Bill to conduct a referendum to delete Section 128 of our current Constitution and to substitute the following;
Chapter VIII. Alteration of the Constitution
128. This Constitution shall not be altered except in the following manner: -
A. Proposals for amendment of this Constitution shall be submitted to electors qualified to vote for the election of members of the House of Representatives.
The above represents no change to the current system.
B. To be successful a proposal must receive the approval of two thirds of those voting at a compulsory referendum.
This clause proposes a change. Our current Constitution requires a majority of only 50% plus one and a majority in a majority of the States. It is argued that a proposal that receives the support of two-thirds of the voters is a truer reflection of the will of the People.
C. Proposals for change may be initiated by;
(1) The People. Any Citizen or group of Citizens eligible to vote in a House of Representative election may initiate a proposal for change to the Constitution.
In the first instance a proposal must be forwarded to the Office of the Parliamentary Draftsman and must be accompanied by a sum equal to six times Average Weekly Earnings (AWE). The Parliamentary Draftsman is required to prepare a Petition in consultation with the initiator. On receipt of such a Petition signed by 1% of eligible voters, and verified by the Electoral Commissioner, the Governor General shall submit the proposal to referendum.
The involvement of the Parliamentary Draftsman at a very early stage in the process is considered necessary to ensure that the proposed amendment is framed in an appropriate way, and that alterations to the wording will not be required before the amendment can be put to referendum or incorporated into the Constitution.
The fee of six times Average Weekly Earnings (approximately $5500 in 2004) is included to discourage frivolous proposals. The figure of 1% of eligible voters equates to about 130,000 signatures.
2. National Peoples' Convention. A National Peoples' Convention convened for the purpose may initiate a change to the Constitution.
To be valid, such a National Convention must consist of delegates elected by Peoples' Conventions conducted in at least thirty House of Representative electorates including some in each State and Territory.
A proposal approved by two-thirds of the delegates voting shall be forwarded to the Parliamentary Draftsman. The Parliamentary Draftsman shall prepare an amendment to the Constitution in consultation with a committee elected by the Convention.
The Committee shall then present the proposal to the Governor General. On receipt of such a proposal the Governor General shall submit the proposal to referendum.
The enormous public interest and input during the 1998 Peoples' Convention on the question of the Republic demonstrated the attraction of such a method of involving the public in constitutional issues.
(3) The Parliament. A proposal to change the Constitution may be initiated by either House and shall be presented to the Governor General once the proposal has been approved by a two-thirds majority of a joint sitting. The Governor General shall then submit the proposal to referendum. On receipt of confirmation from the Electoral Commissioner that a proposal has been successful at a referendum the Governor General shall sign the amendment into the Constitution.
Currently, in the worst case, a majority in only one House is sufficient to have a proposal put to referendum. It is argued this leaves the system open to manipulation by one particular political party with a majority in just one House. A two-thirds majority of a joint sitting should ensure a proposal is much more openly debated in Parliament.
Plebiscites. On issues that cannot easily be framed as a referendum question an indicative plebiscite shall be conducted in the following manner:-
A. Proposals shall be submitted to electors qualified to vote for the election of members of the House of Representatives.
B. Proposals may be initiated as provided in Section 128 of this Constitution.
C. On receipt of the results of an indicative plebiscite from the Electoral Commissioner the Governor General shall direct the Executive to proceed with measures to execute the will of the People and the Governor General shall monitor progress.
The current Constitution makes no provision for plebiscites. It is argued that a plebiscite is a valuable tool to gauge public opinion on an issue and to determine, from a range of options, the direction in which the People would like to proceed.
·=============== 
===============·
Last updated: 3 May 2006