Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen, adjudicator, opposition and my fellow debaters. The topic for our debate is that ‘Australia should become a republic’. We, Gladstone Park Team 2 agree with the definition put forth by the affirmative team. However, we, the negative team, believe that statement is false. Before I officially begin my arguments, I would like to clear up some misconceptions made by the positive side. -REBUTTLES- Today as first speaker, I will be speaking about how much money becoming a republic would cost and how Australia is fine just the way it is. Our second speaker, will inform you all on the urgency to stay a democracy as it is an Australian tradition. Last but not least, our third speaker, will rebut and sum up our team’s
A Twomey and G Withers, Federalist Paper 1 – Australia’s Federal Future, Council for the Australian Federation, April 2007, p 15.
Australia 's Federal System is dynamic and the division of lawmaking power between the Commonwealth and State since 1901 has changed dramatically; Critically discuss, focussing on the major reasons for those changes.
In order to determine whether Y and Z are subject to the proposed law, the
The Australian government system has been originally created in 1901 through the Constitution. With the fundamentals carved in the Constitution, the Australian System is often referred to as a ‘Washminster System’ as it is a hybrid of the Washington (US) and Westminster (UK) system of government. With the fusion of North America and the United Kingdom’s government systems, the phenomenon of the bicameral system was implemented in the Australian system. Bicameralism’s origins are from England and it was later established in the United States. Hence, the onset of the Australian system’s structures was anglocentric by reflecting the foundations and concepts of England. However, the concept of bicameralism is known to have existed since medieval times and has since been in the chronical of the Western political progress for centuries. Bicameralism is an important system in the Australian government. It refers to a government which consists of two chambers, or houses. Alike North America, the houses are known as the House of Representatives (the lower house) and the Senate (the upper house). On the other hand, in the United Kingdom, the chambers are known as the ‘House of Commons’ (the lower house) and the ‘House of Lords’ (the upper house). In 1789, North America altered their constitution in order to ratify how the American citizens were represented. Through bicameralism, the House of Representative would represent the people equally by population, whereas the Senate would
In this referendum, 54.87% of the population voted in the negative to Australia becoming a republic. The result obtained through this nationwide ballot show that the overwhelming majority of Australian’s have chosen to not become a republic when presented the opportunity. Additionally, they contest that the current system of governance has effectively worked since the days of conception to now. So a system which has been functional and a major source of stability for over 116 years, doesn’t require any restructuring or overhaul. Another argument held by the right wing conservatives is that in being constitutional monarchy under the monarch of Great Britain we have gained many advantages such as important relations with the UK and other Commonwealth countries, these relations have allowed us to become the functional, strong and independent country we are today. Another argument held by the monarchists is that the cost of changing to a republic would be astronomically high. The previous expenses spent to run the 1999 referendums which was $87.5 million as well as the estimated costs of changing references to the monarchy in government stationary, letter-headers, logos, etc are estimated to go into the billions of dollars. Expenditure of this magnitude is currently not viable considering the
The Australian Parliamentary system reflects a variety of qualities of democratic purposes. This is noted since the Australian system is an accountable and responsible government, which means that the government debates the passage of a bill in parliament and through the committee system. It must also submit itself to election within three years of taking control of the House of Representatives and the senate goes to election every six years. This
Negativity has been surrounding our identity ever since “Invasion Day”, due to the poor treatment of the original owners of the land. Kevin Rudd’s speech left us all shocked, yet empowered to embrace this opportunity to change the face of Australia.
The piece Advance Australia … within reason, was conveyed on the 5th of January by Amy Mackintosh, at the annual “University of Students for Youth Political Activism’ meeting held at The University of Melbourne. Mackintosh steadily argues the reasons why Australia should not have become a republic, and how the country should stay as a monarchy. The tone of the speech is very colloquial and even sarcastic, with the middle part being more analytical and serious. The speaker gives the impression that the argument for Australia to stay as a Monarchy is unbiased and logical.
As the Prime Minister of Australia, it is my duty to present my democratic nation with their elected desires. The current issue is concerning the movement of Australia’s governing system from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. I believe that Australia should become a republic, as our sunburnt country has overtime developed culturally and democratically since 1901 when we become the Commonwealth of Australia, and started living under the ruling of Queen Elizabeth the Second. We have created a place that is in no way similar to the British Empire. As Australians we respect and acknowledge the traditional owners of our land, the Aborigines. Over time, it seems as though we have taken this country out of their hands and handed it to the
The Australian Constitution is a rich amalgam of various classical political principles. The concepts of the Rule of Law and the doctrine of the Separation of Powers evident in Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws are both salient examples of political theses that are central to Australian Constitutional Law. The structure of the Constitution itself and decisions of the High Court of Australia unequivocally validate the entrenchment of the doctrine separation of powers in the Commonwealth Constitution . In particular, the High Court has applied this with relative rigour with respect to the separation of judicial power. The separation of the judicial power is fundamentally critical to upholding the rule of law. The High Court in Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs noted that “the separation of the judicial function…advances two constitutional objectives: the guarantee of liberty and, to that end, the independence of Chapter III judges” . Kitto J in R v Davidson also identified that the judiciary should be subject to no other authority but the law itself . This is a critical aspect ensuring the concept of legal equality is upheld. Therefore, its role clearly extends to providing checks and balances on the exercise of power by the legislative and executive arms of government . This ensures the liberty of the law and limits the abuse of the judicial system. Judicial Power is defined as “the power which every sovereign must of necessity have to decide between its subjects
This is mainly due to the party politics that influences parliament’s ability to make objective, constitutional decisions on the account for the Australian public’s interest. A recommendation, for which this paper argues, is that the current Australian constitutional amendment system must be altered. This includes taking on some elements of the Canadian system, while retaining some characteristics of its current form. A new mechanism where amendments relating to the function and operation of government, especially those relating to the three branches of government in chapters I, II and III of the constitution, must be passed using the existing Australian amendment process set out in s128.
At the present time, evidence of how the role of the constitution applies to the governance of Australia, can be illustrated by the current considerations due in the High Court in determining citizenship eligibility of parliamentarians. This ruling, dependent upon the High Courts’ interpretation of the constitution, will determine the legality of some parliamentarians to be members of parliament. Example3: Over site
Research Essay on Democracy and Citizenship in Australia “Australia is an excellent example to the world of a democracy which values the participation of its citizens in all levels of government. Discuss”
When you think of the “land down under” you don’t really think of the kind of government they have. I chose to write about the Australian government because I really don’t hear much about Australia. It currently has a pretty interesting story to tell when it comes to their government. I became a bit interested in Australian politics when I saw a political animated cartoon on the internet that depicted Kevin Rudd, the last Prime Minister, on a news television show and it was quite humorous. I am going to give a quick history lesson on Australia then go into how the government formed and came to be. Then I will talk about the Australian constitution, the Australian arms of government, their federal system, political parties and Australia’s
Becoming a republic is the vision of future in Australia, it is the last stepping stone for Australia to become truly independent.