Australian Federal Roles

Although these laws were designed for all of the states, Tasmania (Vans Demons Land) provided the rest of the states with crops as the soil was better to grow crops on there’s. New South Wales also can provide the country (other states) with resources because they are the most populated they have a better industrial industry which was frequently shared with the other states (after the laws and beliefs were enforced). These laws and beliefs privileged every single state although was thought to be

Before 1901 Australia was not a federation, it was a collection of 6 British colonies, with them being, New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria, Queensland, Southern Australia, and Western Australia. In the 1850s the forming of an Australian Federation was not as popular, due to the fact that the colonies were more worried about their own nation and people. It was not until the 1880s until people considered the advantages of forming a nation, and in 1901 they formed a nation. The there are plenty of reasons for this, however the 3 main reason they formed a nation was because, they wanted to have a united defense force and could protect Australia better, they also wanted to increase their policies on the white Australian policy, and they could

Able to compare, contrast and critique theories and models. Some evaluation of evidence or positions.

How Australia applies the doctrine of separation of powers at both the federal, state or territory levels?

The Division and Separation of power are essential to keep our societies rulers to have a restriction on their powers. The importance of each on the Australian domestic law especially in relation to the rule of law, and protecting individual rights, and the legal system.

The Australian federal system is a system with a central or national government, sovereign states or regional governments, and a division of power between the national and state governments. One of the strengths of this system is it builds a good relationship between the people and the government. It allows state governments to better understand the needs of the people. As with most nations, local communities have certain necessities that may be outside the range of concerns or influence of national policy. In the Australian federal system, there are two ways this can be reconciled. There are local government councils that can achieve objectives in various policy areas and state or territory governments which are charged with decision making within the state or territory. Basically, the federal system provides a more accessible mode of operation as there are more chances for citizens to be involved in the decision making process. This allows policies to fit local demands.

In Australia, the main source of judicial review is found within our Constitution; s75(3) states that High Court with have original jurisdiction over all matters in which the Commonwealth, or a person suing or being sued on behalf of the Commonwealth is a party, and under s75(5), will also have jurisdiction over matters where in which a writ of Mandamus or prohibition or an injunction is sought against an officer of the Commonwealth . With the High Court’s jurisdiction essentially defined by a series of constitutional writs, ‘jurisdictional error’ has become a unifying principle for judicial review . In order to evaluate the ability of a person to seek judicial review of an administrative decision, it is essential to understand how our system has developed over time. It is important to

|enhanced via the Council of Australian Government – separation of responsibility, competitive governments and increased |

In Australia the judiciary system is a key aspect to uphold peace, order and a good government. The Australian government is ruled by a separation of powers; the parliament, Executive and the judiciary. These powers are a significant feature of the Australian system of government as the power to change and make federal law is divided between these powers (Parliamentary Education Office). The judiciary is a part of the government which delivers justice according to the law (Queensland Parliament 2015). The term ‘judiciary’ refers broadly to the persons who run the system; the courts, judges, magistrates, adjudicates and other support personnel (Queensland Parliament 2015). The judiciary must not be biased and act without fear to those of

Australia being a Federal Government was established in its constitution. Australia practices a parliamentary or responsible government system of governance. However, some of the features of Australia's system of government were also based on customs and traditions which were not described in its constitution.

There are two important questions towards which your attention ought to be directed. You must have heard something of the Federal Council, on which NSW has not yet taken a place. It sat in Tasmania and held sessions which never appeared to interest any one. But if we are to carry out the recommendations of General Edwards on matters military, it will be absolutely necessary for us to have a central authority, which could bring all

Looking at the separation of powers in States such as Queensland, there are unique features. Commonwealth Constitution confers separation of powers but States do not have constitutional separation of powers. Influence of executive on

Australia Providing protection of life, property and the environment within the country of Australia is the duty that lies within the scope of the states and territories of the country. Similar to the United States, the Australian government provides a supporting role to the states and territories by evolving their ability to manage events; as well as provide tangible assets when their own local resources are overwhelmed. Any humanitarian aid outside of the country falls on the shoulders of the Australian government.

Judicial review is an intrinsic necessity to the Australian Government and is a critical aspect in enforcing accountability of both the legislative and executive branches. Essentially, the actions of constituent legislative and executive branches are subject to review, regardless of these governmental counterparts holding authority exceeding that of the judiciary. In fact, a number of provisions for judicial review are upheld by the Australian Constitution itself, confirmed valid in a multitude of case law. Plaintiff s157 of 2002 v Commonwealth highlights the “minimum provision for judicial review” entrenched in the Constitution under s75. The case goes on to state that “under the Constitution of

The issue of the Commonwealths spending power?????. The recent High Court decision of Williams’s v Commonwealth [2012] , saw the introduction of significant changes to this area, and the forthcoming Williams v Commonwealth No 2 , currently before the High Court, will likely see issue further developed. The debate surrounding this area has to do with the fact that in addition to the legislative heads of power in sections 51 and 52 of the constitution, there are a number of other constitutional provisions which the federal government has attempted to use as a source of Commonwealth spending power. The two most frequently cited examples being the section 81 Appropriations power and the section 61 Executive power. In considering both of these sections the High Court has come to the conclusion that the scope of the spending powers should be limited. This essay will argue the position that the High Court is justified in this approach and, with reference to the various principles of interpretation set out by the High Court and the notions of Federalism and Responsible Government, will show that limiting the Commonwealths spending powers, outside of the legislative heads of power and the grants power in section 96 is both constitutionally valid and necessary for the democratic process in Australia.