20140502-g. h .schorel-hlavka o.w.b. to mr tony abbott pm- kevin andrews and joe hockey - etc

p1 2-5-2014

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD

A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0

PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also

Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Mr Tony Abbott MP 2-5-2014

[email protected], [email protected] 5

Cc: Joe Hockey [email protected] Kevin Adrews [email protected]

Mathias Cormann c/o [email protected]

20140502-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re correspondence 10 Tony,

the National Commission of Audit seems to have made numerous recommendations but

did it consider the true meaning and application of the constitution as such how their

recommendations could fit within constitutional principles? What is the use to have

recommendations if they ignore what is constitutionally appropriate? 15

While some items may be addressed without being in conflict with the true meaning and

application of the constitution still, the first question always must be asked if it is

permissible within constitutional context as to avoid overlooking it.

This in fact should be with any legislation also.

I do not propose to raise all issues that were canvassed by the National Commission of 20

Audit for the mere fact I haven’t even a clue about what it addressed

Age Pension

Disability Payment 25

Education

Family Home

30

GST

Income tax

National Disability Insurance Scheme 35

Politicians-public servants-party environment

Private Health Insurance

40

Sport

http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/

http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

mailto:[email protected]





p2 2-5-2014





SUBJECT MATTERS

Age Pension 5 Hansard 21-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

Australasian Convention)

QUOTE

Mr. HOWE.-Then my sub-section will take the place of subsection (24). The amendment is to insert as a

new sub-section. 10

Invalid and old-age pensions.

I have been long of opinion, after giving a good deal of thought to this question, that it could be more

effectually dealt with by the Federal Parliament than by the Government of any individual Australian state.

When we come to trace the history of this question we find that all the great philanthropists, and many

leading statesmen, of the world are endeavouring, by all the means in their power, to solve the problem of 15 how best to provide for the deserving and aged poor. We know that some of the countries in the old world

have already adopted legislation dealing with this question, and we know that others are on the eve of doing

so. Australasia has not been altogether asleep with regard to this question. Several of these colonies have,

from time to time, appointed commissions to inquire into the question, and the province which I have the

Honour to belong has recently appointed a Royal commission to inquire into the subject. We are a little 20 behind one part of Australasia. I refer to New Zealand. That country has already passed through one branch

of her Legislature a measure dealing with the question. We are more favorably situated for legislation of this

kind than many of the countries in the old world inasmuch as our poor are [start page 7] not so numerous in

proportion to the population; neither is their misery so great. It therefore follows that this ulcer of our

civilization will be more amenable to judicious treatment. I know this is not the time nor place to discuss in 25 detail the various systems which have been adopted by some countries, or the systems which have been

formulated on broad lines of thought; neither, indeed, is it the time nor place for me to enter into detail with

regard to systems, although there are one or two which I prefer. But I cannot conceive of any country being

better situated to pass legislation of this kind with a greater likelihood of success than our own country. Here

we have an extensive continent, divided from the rest of the world by thousands of miles of ocean, where the 30 workers must essentially be almost always Australians, whose interests will be mutually bound together by

kindred ties, and must always remain so. Therefore, we have a better opportunity for legislature successfully

on a question of this kind than they have even in some countries in which the system obtains, I am quite

willing to admit that the question of old-age pensions is one of great magnitude; but, looking at our isolated

position, no country is more favorably situated for carrying out such a system. It is admitted on all hands that 35 the existing means adopted for dealing with this great ulcer of our civilization are altogether inadequate, and

that it is imperative that some other system more in keeping with the times should be adopted. I hope when it

is adopted that system will not take from the people their self-respect. There is no reason why those who

receive pensions from the State should be looked upon with contumely. Does any one speak with scorn of

those who at present are pensioners of the State-men who have given their best services to the country, who 40 have neglected their own interests in rendering those services? Certainly not. Then why should not the

humblest worker in Australia, or in any other country, participate, perhaps in a more modest degree, in those

privileges which at present exist? I know that when we review the industrial conditions obtaining at the

present time, pervaded as these are with machinery the most efficient that the brain of man can devise, we

find therein another reason why there is so much suffering, particularly among the aged, because all these 45 factors tend to give the pride of place to youth and activity rather than to age and experience. I know there are

records which prove conclusively that the virtue of thrift has been practised to a great extent by the people of

Australia; the records of our financial institutions, savings banks, benefit and building societies, all show that

that is the case. They show that the thrift practised by the people of Australia is unparalleled in the history of

the world. But there is another side to this question, and a very gloomy and sorrowful side indeed. There are 50 records of bankruptcy, of reckless, and in some instances corrupt, management, when the hard

earnings of the people and the savings of a lifetime have been swept away-have melted away like snow

before the noonday sun. Through this reckless and corrupt management men who thought they had

provided for their old and declining age found themselves stranded on the cheerless shores of charity,

and many of them have had to accept even amongst ourselves the pauper's lot. The pauper's lot in 55



p3 2-5-2014





Australia or in any other country is to the deserving poor one of the saddest and darkest blots on our

civilization. END QUOTE

Hansard 21-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National 5 Australasian Convention)

QUOTE Mr. HOWE.-

The Right Honorable Mr. Chamberlain, in speaking on this subject, denounced the present system obtaining

for the relief of the aged poor. He said that of all the workers of Great Britain one out of every two, if he has

attained to the age of 65 years, has to seek parish relief. As he said-"This inadequate provision for old age 10 is a disgrace to the nation, and a danger to all social order." I have given this subject considerable study,

and I have come to the conclusion that any system to be effective must be compulsory. We are met

sometimes by people who dearly love liberty-and no one loves liberty more than I do myself-who say that it

would be an encroachment upon the liberty of the subject if we compelled people to contribute to an old-age

pension fund. All direct taxation, however, is compulsory, and I presume direct taxation is necessary for 15 the good government of the country. If that be the case, does it not follow that a compulsory contribution to

an old-age pension fund is for the good government of the people? and, more than that, it will wipe away for

ever the stigma of pauperism from the people of Australasia. I hope we shall be able to formulate a Bill-I

have no doubt we shall-that will be acceptable to the people of Australia, and be adopted by them; but I hope

that the Draft Constitution which will be submitted to the people will contain amongst its provisions the 20 power which I respectfully wish to insert. I am sure that if it does contain such a provision the measure will

not be the less acceptable to the people of Australasia.

END QUOTE

I am not going to argue that the Age pension should be increased, beyond the CPI increases, not 25

because I do not hold it would not need to be but because it would side track from my intentions

to write about certain issues.

One issue seems to be by the National Commission of Audit that the family home should be

included in asset calculations. What effectively this may result to is that people wouldn’t bother

to try and remain to live independent by saving during their life being it by paying mortgage, etc, 30

because those who would gamble, drink etc, their monies away would be rewarded with age

pension full entitlements while those who live in a moderate form to try to have a near

comfortable retirement would be so to say punished and receive less than the full pension.

Now that doesn’t means that a person on a pension should own a multi-million dollar home but

that the pension excludes the family home below a certain value, and only the balance is 35

considered for purpose of an asset test.

It means that say of the average property were to sell for about $800,000,00 in a major city such

as Melbourne then if a person has a family home say valued for 1.2 million dollars then this

$400,000.00 above the average value is considered for the asset test.

. 40

However, such asset test should be considered on a local basis, this as a person could have a

family home in a country area that might be merely worth say $50,000.00 and yet be above the

average of homes in that Area.

As such, I view the family home should be rated upon the average in the relevant area.

As I also will allude to regarding disability payments, I view it should be based upon the ordinary 45

living expenses in the place one resides. As such with the Age pension, if a person moves to a

country that say the daily cost of living is only one tenth of that in the Commonwealth of

Australia, then the payment should be adjusted accordingly. After all, payments are supposed to

be based on real cost of living and the intention of the CPI increases is to reflect this.

Rates in a country area for a residential property is generally far less than that in a major city. 50

Likewise rates in a foreign country also may likely be far less because of a far lower cost of

living in that other country.

While it may be argued that this kind of scheme may then have people moving to countries

where there is a higher cost of living, but in my view the maximum to reside in another country

should never be that which is applicable in the Commonwealth of Australia. 55



p4 2-5-2014





It should be recognised, as my wife (now 81 years) made clear she paid during her working life

for her pension (As I understand it the Federal Government introduced decades ago a percentage

for old age pension and this remains in place) and as such she paid for her pension and should

not be held accountable for the mismanagement of any Federal government. After all, it is the 5

Federal government which wasted money left, right and centre and as indicated previously Joe

Hockey as son as he was commissioned as treasurer reportedly handed to the private company

called the Reserve Bank of Australia about $8 billion, without any Appropriation Bill for this

having been enacted. As such, let’s not just blame former Governments as clearly Joe Hockey

participated in a spending spree I view was unconstitutional. As such take the about $8 billion 10

back as it was never authorised by a Appropriation Bill, and the Framers of the Constitution

made clear that any form of expenditure of monies from the Consolidated Revenue Funds must

be authorised by an Appropriation Bill by the Parliament.

Why then should Age pensions have to suffer because Joe Hockey is so to say playing Santa

Clause with the monies he had no right to. 15

Even if he was to argue that the Commonwealth of Australia had borrowed this monies from the

Reserve Bank of Australia, nevertheless he still needed an Appropriation Bill to be passed by the

Parliament because the monies were from the Consolidated Revenue Funds. It would obviously

be of interest to discover if the Reserve Bank of Australia made a political donation to the

Liberal Party in regard of the election and now basically was handsomely rewarded for this. 20

Let’s be clear about it my wife and I try to live to avoid overspending and much of the repairs

needed to be done I do around the house. It is by this we are living within our budget. Now, We

had Prime minister Julia Gillard who had for some reason the Federal government upgrading her

Altona property, even so it was not her official residence, and yet she sold it after the election

with a huge profit and yet why didn’t the Federal Government reclaim the monies such as for the 25

bollard, which I view never should have been in the first place been paid for by the Federal

government. Where indeed was the Appropriation Bill to permit this kind of expenditure, where

this was not part of the ordinary Appropriation Bill for annual expenditure? As the Framers of

the Constitution made clear that even funding for those affected by fire would require a special

Appropriation bill. Besides of it being unconstitutional to pay for any office of a former Prime 30

minister and further associated expenditure such as a chauffeur driven car, free flights, etc, where

are the Appropriation Bills for each such former Prime Minister, former Governor-General and

former Members of Parliament which all are claiming monies for expenses and unconstitutional

superannuation and yet it seems not a single Appropriation Bill for each such separate

expenditure, not being the ordinary annual expenditure, seems not to have been passed by the 35

Parliament. It therefore appears to me that before considering attacking the entitlements of those

on an age pension it would be better to organise current expenditure and reign in all those

unauthorised and unconstitutional expenditures. You may find this unconstitutional and

unauthorised expenditure will amount to billions of dollars. So, would it not be appropriate that

as Joe Hockey claimed even politicians will have to feel the consequences of cuts (well that is 40

the message I understood he was given) he actually shows to have the guts to stop the rorting by

former politicians?

But I suspect that National Commission of Audit never bothered to address the issue of

unauthorised/unconstitutional payments regarding former politicians, etc, because after all some

of them would then also be cut off from those unauthorised/unconstitutional payments. So clear 45

the National Commission of Audit was and must also be deemed bias where they fail to expose

the rorting by themselves.

As such, well cut from those who are entitled but do not cut from those who are not entitled to

payments as rorting the system obviously is not their concern.

Age pensions are receiving an Age pension because they are entitled upon it. And having the 50

National Commission of Audit making recommendations without any regard to their own theft



p5 2-5-2014





(as that is what it really amounts to) from the Consolidated Revenue Funds then I view its

credibility is so to say shot to pieces.

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I would have no issue to provide recommendation which I view

would be appropriate within the context of the true meaning and application of the constitution

but I do not accept that there was a competent National Commission of Audit addressing 5

expenditure and the limitations of this, etc, where it failed to address to reign in the

unconstitutional/unauthorised payments to former politicians, etc.

The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL

RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution; HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National 10 Australasian Convention)

QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-

for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual citizen is entitled to

claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and secure to him.

END QUOTE 15

In my view fundamental rights includes an appropriate level of financial support by the Federal

Government as intended by the Framers of the Constitution but not one that somehow allows

people so to say move to a country where the cost of living is much lower and yet still receive the

pension as if they are having the cost of living of that of Australia. 20

Also the Federal Government should clampdown on States (including municipal/shire councils)

to increase charges for pensioners above the CPI as it undermines the intentions of the

Commonwealth of Australia.

.

HANSARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 25 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-

The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative

power, except that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is

necessary or incidental to a power given.

END QUOTE 30

Clearly the Commonwealth had the incidental powers to legislate as to the CPI increases and

therefore the States must be bound by this to comply with this and not infringe upon the

intentions of the Commonwealth of Australia.

Show you got balls and stick up for the Federal Government policies! 35

Disability Payment

It appears to me there should be a rethink about what the true meaning and application is about

disabilities, pensions, etc. 40

When the Framers of the Constitution were debating the need for a pension, etc, they made clear

that people are moving from colony to colony (now from State to State) and so it would be more

appropriate that the Commonwealth of Australia would provide for disability and old age

pensions.

There was nothing to me to indicate that the framers of the Constitution intended to support 45

people not residing within the Commonwealth of Australia with disability payments.

As I understand it Commonwealth payments are based upon Australian conditions and I for one

cannot accept that if a person moved to another country where weekly payments are a mere

fraction of what is applicable in Australia that then such a person nevertheless should be paid the

level of payment as if still residing in Australia. As such, for so far it is deemed appropriate I 50



p6 2-5-2014





view that payments should be adjusted pending the ordinary cost in that country in which the

person has moved.

.

I also view that it would be plain nonsense to argue that a person needs to reside in Bali for the

temperature to have a better way to live because of a back injury (as was reported in the media) 5

where surely in some parts of Australia simular weather conditions exist.

In my view anyone who is a resident of the Commonwealth of Australia who is deemed eligible

to receive a disability pension then should be prohibited to move away from Australia without

the permission of the Government to do so as otherwise the person would no longer be entitled to

receive the disability pension. 10

Also, by law it should be prohibited for anyone person upon disability pension to move to

another country which doesn’t have a treaty in place governing the payment of disability

payments.

In my view, unless a person say for an operation in a foreign country requires for a number of

weeks to reside in that foreign country for an operation, any travel abroad by a person ion a 15

disability pension should be prohibited as a matter of principle unless special Ministerial

permission was provided.

As such, a severely disabled person who really is a disabled person (not some make do person)

may obtain a Ministerial approval whereas a person who claims a backache may be denied.

After all, what stops a person to move to Australia just so as to then work and quickly claim a 20

disability payment and then move back to his/her own country living there like a millionaire

because of the low cost of living there? That I view the Framers of the Constitution never

intended.

Also, why should a person living abroad be able to obtain disability payments if the person may

very well be outside the scrutiny of the Government if this person is employed in a job not 25

supposed to be done and for which disability payments are being made. In my view ordinary

without special Ministers consent payments should be stopped regarding disability payments the

moment a person leaves Commonwealth of Australia.

Perhaps what should be done is that a person on disability support payments is placed under the

supervision of the country he/she moved to and payments are made under strict conditions that a 30

periodic appreciation is made about the person and failing such assessment then the payments

will automatically stop. As such place the onus upon the supporting disability payment to ensure

periodic assessments are attended to.

Essential is that no tribunal, other than a court of law, can overturn a Ministers decision. It is in

my view ridiculous that an administration tribunal can somehow rule contrary to a Ministers 35

decision. We have a “responsible Minister” and I view you cannot hold a Minister responsible if

an administrative tribunal can willy nilly overturn a Ministers decision.

Even with persons who claim asylum but the minister has refused this must be stopped from

being allowed to be overturned. For example where a person convicted of murder in another

country was deported from the Commonwealth of Australia, and rightly so as the framers of the 40

constitution made clear the Commonwealth could prevent criminals from entering the

Commonwealth of Australia, and yet this deported criminal having re-entered under a false

identity, then allegedly got a woman pregnant and used this successfully in court to overturn the

Ministers decision for to be deported again. In my view the Courts conduct was in defiance of the

intention of the Framers of the constitution and I view such ability to go to the court for a 45

convicted murderer to be allowed to stay makes a mockery of the responsibility of the

responsible Minister.

The ability of a person to enter Australia, get a job then fake some injury and then move back to

his/her native country while bludging on a disability support payment must be stopped.

50



p7 2-5-2014





Education

I have in the past indicated the Commonwealth of Australia should but out from education as it

has no business to get involved with it other than to make payments and that should be organised

appropriately. I will not go into details about this, having done so in the past but safe for making 5

payments per student it should but out of the education website and trying to dictate the States

how to conduct education.

. Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

Australasian Convention) 10 QUOTE

Mr. WISE.-If the Federal Parliament chose to legislate upon, say, the education question-and the

Constitution gives it no power to legislate in regard to that question-the Ministers for the time being in each

state might say-"We are favorable to this law, because we shall get £100,000 a year, or so much a year, from

the Federal Government as a subsidy for our schools," and thus they might wink at a violation of the 15 Constitution, while no one could complain. If this is to be allowed, why should we have these elaborate

provisions for the amendment of the Constitution? Why should we not say that the Constitution may be

amended in any way that the Ministries of the several colonies may unanimously agree? Why have this

provision for a referendum? Why consult the people at all? Why not leave this matter to the Ministers

of the day? But the proposal has a more serious aspect, and for that reason only I will ask permission to 20 occupy a few minutes in discussing it.

END QUOTE

.

We need to go back to basics as to what is or isn’t permissible within the true meaning and

application of the constitution. 25

Family Home

As indicate above the family home is not necessarily a luxury, rather than for goods citizenship

those who lived a careful land modest live to at least provide themselves with a roof above their 30

head are not ending up so to say being punished. Maintain a family home also cost money. The

last thing that is needed is to have people at old age having to rely upon the States to provide

them with a residence because to do so themselves over their working life would end up being

denied their rightful entitlement to a pension. As such, any cut back, other than indicated above

already, and would enhance a greater drain on social service of a State or Territory because 35

demand for housing would then be even greater.

GST 40

As indicated under the heading “Income tax” once a Commonwealth tax always a Commonwealth

tax and hence I view the National Commission of Audit allegedly recommending for the states to

raise GST clearly is in my view sheer and utter nonsense. Moreover it is an unconstitutional tax as

it is so to say a tax both on the railing and the post.

45 https://au-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=bcaul03hi4k6d

QUOTE

Napthine Government announces $25 base increase for car registration.

Jim Annual vehicle registration is a scam and an infringement on our constitutional right of passage and

travel, and our human right to freedom of movement upon the roads that we already pay many taxes fo 50 To Andrew K.Bruce & Gail H.Daniel Bodkin and 26 More...



https://au-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=bcaul03hi4k6d

p8 2-5-2014





Today at 3:54 PM

Annual vehicle registration is a scam and an infringement on our constitutional right of passage and travel,

and our human right to freedom of movement upon the roads that we already pay many taxes for roads

infrastructure and maintenance. Exercise your constitutional and civil rights to dissent and protest against

paying unfair and excessive vehicle registration tax that conditionally limits your right of passage and travel. 5

Also wasn't the state government supposed to save hundreds of millions of dollars annually by abolishing the

printing and mailing of vehicle registration labels? This fee increase is unjustifiable greed and the

government will get away with it as usual because most people just grudgingly accept it.

10 Meanwhile the politicians are exempt from paying vehicle registration taxes because they receive publicly

funded vehicle and fuel allowances, on top of their generous salaries and other benefits.

Jim

15

Napthine Government announces $25 base increase for car registration

Herald Sun 20 Matt Johnston

April 24, 2014 2:20PM

VICTORIAN motorists will be slugged almost $800 in car registration payments next year after the

Napthine Government revealed a $25 base increase. 25

The fee hike will see the base registration for a car hit $270.

When inflation increases, insurance and stamp duty components are added in, Victorian drivers face a

$791.91 registration renewal charge next year.

The hike was announced as a revenue measure ahead of the Victorian Budget.

It will raise $137 million next year. 30

Is the rego hike justified? Have your say below

Stamp duty on the purchase of new or used cars will also increase, by about $40 for a $20,000 car.

Treasurer Michael O’Brien said he understood the measure would not be welcomed by motorists, but it was

important the government presented a responsible budget that enabled it to pay for infrastructure upgrades.

“The $25 fee increase for motor vehicle registration amounts to less than 50 cents a week,” he said. 35

“We appreciate that any increase in car rego is not likely to be welcomed, but we do note that we will be

delivering major transport infrastructure in this budget that will be of direct benefit to Victorians.”

The stamp duty increase will raise $37.5 million in 2014/15, while the light vehicle registration fee increase

will raise $99.3 million.

Mr O’Brien said Victoria’s share of GST revenue was to blame for the registration and stamp duty increases. 40

Victoria’s GST share is down from 90 cents in the dollar to 88 cents, creating a $286 million shortfall, he

said.

The additional charges would fund major transport infrastructure projects to be announced in the May 6

budget, and support opportunities for workers in Victoria’s ailing car industry, he said.



p9 2-5-2014





The registration fee for a light vehicle will be $270 in 2014/15.

The stamp duty increase will raise $37.5 million in 2014/15, while the light vehicle registration fee increase

will raise $99.3 million.

Mr O’Brien said Victoria’s share of GST revenue was to blame for the registration and stamp duty increases.

— with AAP 5

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/napthine-government-announces-25-base-increase-for-car-

registration/story-fni0fit3-

END QUOTE

Quick & Garran 10 678 COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION [Sec. 55] QUOTE

§ 255. “ Shall be of No Effect."

The next important point discussed was whether a law violating the rule forbidding the combination of 15 taxation with any other matter, or the rule forbidding a tax Act to contain more than one subject of taxation, should be void in toto, or should b e void only to the extent of the irrelevancy, or to the extent

of the additional subjects. Mr. G. H. Reid moved that the prohibition should not invalidate any part of law which did not infringe the provisions of the Constitution, and that if any law imposing taxation contained more than one subject of taxation, the tax first in order of enactment should be taken to be 20 properly passed.

(Conv. Deb., Melb., p. 2O89.) This amendment was negatived by 27 to 15 votes feeling, however, prevailed in the Convention that some provision should be made in the Constitution, to effect that only the parts of the Act in which the forbidden matter existed should b e invalid. At a later stage 25 MR. Reid moved the insertion of the words "and any provision therein dealing with any other matter shall be of no effect." This amendment was accepted without a division. Conv. Deb., Melb., 2415.)

§ 256, "One Subject of Taxation Only." 30

By the first paragraph of the section, laws imposing taxation must deal only with the

imposition of taxation. If the section contained no other limitation regulating and restricting

the exercising of the taxing power there would be nothing to prevent the House of

Representatives from sending to the Senate a bill containing a number of separate and 35 independent taxes. The section, however, goes on to enact that laws imposing taxation shall,

with the exception of those relating to customs and excise, deal with one subject of taxation

only. It is necessary to explain the object of this limitation. By the second paragraph

of sec. 53, the Senate is deprived of the power to amend tax bills, but it may, constitutional ly

reject them. In order to maintain its right to veto, in detail, each specific tax to which it 40 objects, without thereby involving the rejection of other taxes of which it approves , the

Constitution prohibits the combination of taxation proposals; it requires each proposed tax to

be submitted by the House of Representatives to the Senate, in a separate bill. This

procedure being followed the Senate can exercise its discretion with respect to each tax,

without being coerced to pass a tax to which it objects, in order to carry a tax which it desires. 45 In this respect the Senate will have greater control over taxation than the House of Lords

enjoys.

The Papers Duties Precedent may be here referred to in illustration of the manner in which

sec. 55 will operate in strengthening the Senate. In 1860, the Commons 50

§ 256.] POWERS OF THE PARLAMENT 697

55 determined to balance the year's ways and means by an increase of the property tax and stamp

duties, and the repeal of the duties on paper. The increased taxation had already received the assent of Parliament, when the Lords rejected the Paper Duties Repeal Bill; and thus overruled the financial arrangements voted by the Commons. That House was naturally sensitive to this encroachment upon its privileges; but the Lords had exercised a legal right, and their vote was 60 irrevocable during that session. The Commons, therefore, to maintain their privileges, recorded upon their journal, 6th July, resolutions affirming that the right of granting aids and supplies



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/napthine-government-announces-25-base-increase-for-car-registration/story-fni0fit3-1226894962847

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/napthine-government-announces-25-base-increase-for-car-registration/story-fni0fit3-1226894962847

p10 2-5-2014





to the Crown is in the Commons alone; that the power of the Lords to reject bills relating to taxation "is justly regarded by this House with peculiar jealousy, as affecting the right of the Commons to grant the Supplies, and to provide the ways and means for the service of the year; and that to guard, for the future, against an undue exercise of that power by the Lords, and to

secure to the Commons their rightful control over taxation and supply, this House has in its 5 own hands the power so to impose and remit taxes, and to frame bills of supply, that the right of the Commons as to the matter, manner, measure, and time may be maintained inviolate.” In accordance with these resolutions, during the next session, the financial scheme of the year

was presented to the Lords for acceptance or rejection as a whole. The Commons again resolved that the paper duties should be repealed: but, instead of seeking the concurrence of 10 the Lords to a separate bill for that purpose, they included in one bill the repeal of those duties with the property tax, the tea and sugar duties, and other ways and means for service of the

year; and this bill the Lords were constrained to accent. The budget of each year has since that occasion been comprised in a general and composite Act- a proceeding supported by precedent. In 1787, Mr. Pitt's entire budget was comprised in a single bill; and during many 15 subsequent years great varieties of taxes were imposed and continued in the same Acts.{May’s

Parl. Prac. 10th ed. pp. 550 1.)

From this precedent it appears that the Commons have the right to send to the Lords a single scheme of taxation embodying the repeal of old taxes and the imposition of new taxes; the function of 20 the Lords being, in such a case, limited to a simple assent to the whole scheme or a simple negative of

the whole scheme. Such a composite or general tax bill could not be submitted by the House of Representatives to the Senate; it would be unconstitutional, the maxim being "one tax one bill" , except in the case of bills dealing with customs and excise.

We have now to consider what will be the consequence if Parliament should, whether by 25 accident or design pass a law imposing taxation, yet dealing with more than one subject of

taxation--a law, say, imposing an income tax and a stamp duty. A proposal that the tax

standing first in order in the enactment should be valid, whilst the other, or others, next in

order should be null and void, was rejected by the Convention. No provision is made in the

Constitution, therefore, for segregating the taxes and providing for the validity of one and the 30 nullity of others. Where the Constitution intends that one portion of an Act only shall be of no

effect and the rest operative it is so expressed. The only conclusion is that an Act embodying

a plurality of taxes would be absolutely and completely ultra vires.

END QUOTE

35

Income tax

If anything to me may indicate the sheer and utter nonsense, at least as was reported by the

media, was the recommendation by the National Commission of Audit as to permit the States to 40

raise income tax.

As shown below, one a Commonwealth tax it always remains to be so and cannot be reverted

back to the states. The Commonwealth must provide for a “uniform” taxation and even if it were

proposed to allow a state to raise an income tax (besides it being unconstitutional) they couldn’t

raise a separate level of tax pending in which State/Territory one resides because any so called 45

delegated taxation powers still must remain uniform. If therefore you had one or more former

Ministers on the National Commission of Audit than clearly he/she/they didn’t have a clue what

is constitutionally permissible. What a sheer waste of monies having such a kind of National

Commission of Audit. Let’s look at some quotations;

50 HANSARD 3-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE

Sub-clause 3. Raising money by any other mode or system of taxation; but so that all such taxation shall be

uniform throughout the commonwealth.

Sir HARRY ATKINSON: Do I understand that the Convention is prepared to give to the federal 55 parliament the power of levying taxation, without at the same time taking over the debts of the colonies? I

venture to say that, if you do, there must of necessity be several bankrupt colonies before long, because you

take away the power of taxation which each colony possesses. I want to know, if you take away the power



p11 2-5-2014





from our state parliament to levy customs duties, how the state can raise sufficient revenue to pay its way? If

anyone can tell me, I shall be happy to hear the answer.

Mr. MCMILLAN: Direct taxation!

END QUOTE

HANSARD 3-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates 5

QUOTE

[start page 677]

Mr. THYNNE: Before the clause is passed I would like to reply to the argument of the hon. member, Mr.

Deakin. He stated that in certain circumstances the power of taxation by the local state parliaments would be

undoubtedly affected by the provisions of the bill. In clause 3, chapter v, it is provided that when the law of 10 the state is inconsistent with the law of the commonwealth, the law of the commonwealth shall prevail. It is

quite easy to realise circumstances under which a tax, say upon land, might be imposed by the state,

and made a first charge upon property, and a similar impost might be levied by the commonwealth;

but the state law would have to come second, and the, commonwealth would, therefore, have the first

helping out of the fund for providing that particular tax. 15

END QUOTE

Clearly, the intention to pass on legislative powers of income tax to the Commonwealth was held

to prevent the States to continue any income tax. With the failure of what is now s96 of the

constitution the politicians at the time opposed the referendums and they failed. Then the

premiers Conference introduced what is now known as s96. However, it was clear that the 20

Framers of the Constitution were concerned about bankruptcy of a State and not to use s96 for all

kind of nonsense as now is done.

Hansard 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 25

The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: The moment the commonwealth exercises the

power, the states must retire from that field of legislation. END QUOTE

.

Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates 30 QUOTE Mr. REID:

We must make it clear that the moment the Federal Parliament legislates on one of those points

enumerated in clause 52, that instant the whole State law on the subject is dead. There cannot be two

laws, one Federal and one State, on the same subject. But that I merely mention as almost a verbal

criticism, because there is no doubt, whatever that the intention of the framers was not to propose any 35 complication of the kind.

END QUOTE

.

Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE 40 The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: We ought to be careful not to load the

commonwealth with any more duties than are absolutely necessary. Although it is quite true that this

power is permissive, you will always find that if once power is given to the commonwealth to legislate

on a particular question, there will be continual pressure brought to bear on the commonwealth to

exercise that power. The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from 45 that field of legislation.

END QUOTE

.

Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 50



p12 2-5-2014





Mr. OCONNOR.-Directly it is exercised it becomes an exclusive power, and there is no doubt that it will

be exercised.

END QUOTE

HANSARD 3-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates 5

QUOTE

Clause 54. Laws appropriating any part of the public revenue, or imposing any tax or impost shall originate

in the house of representatives.

Mr. WRIXON: I would suggest a trifling amendment in this clause. I think that the word "laws" is not a

very happy expression as applied to measures appropriating public revenue. I think it better to keep to the old 10 phraseology of "bill." It is quite true that a money bill is a law.

Mr. CLARK: It does not appropriate till it is a law!

Mr. WRIXON: There is a difference between money bills, when they become laws and other bills, as we

all may see by the preamble of an appropriation act and the preamble of different bills granting money. They

are, in fact, grants of money by the taxpayers to the government. There is an awkwardness in using the word 15 "laws" instead of "bills." It may give a certain force to the contention that money bills are like other bills, and

are to be dealt with in the same way; but except for that I do not think it is the best term to use, and I should

prefer to have the word "bills" inserted instead of "laws." I move:

That the word "laws" be omitted with the view to insert in lieu thereof the word "bills."

END QUOTE 20

HANSARD 11-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE

I apprehend that the real meaning is that free course of trade and commerce between

different parts of the Commonwealth is not to be restricted or interfered with by any

taxes, charges, or imposts. 25

END QUOTE

Hansard 16-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National


QUOTE Mr. ISAACS (Victoria).-

In the next sub-section it is provided that all taxation shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth. 30 An income tax or a property tax raised under any federal law must be uniform "throughout the

Commonwealth." That is, in every part of the Commonwealth.

END QUOTE

.

Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National 35 Australasian Convention)

QUOTE

Mr. MCMILLAN: I think the reading of the sub-section is clear.

The reductions may be on a sliding scale, but they must always be uniform.

END QUOTE 40

Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National




p13 2-5-2014





QUOTE

Sir GEORGE TURNER: No. In imposing uniform duties of Customs it should not be necessary for the

Federal Parliament to make them commence at a certain amount at once. We have pretty heavy duties in

Victoria, and if the uniform tariff largely reduces them at once it may do serious injury to the colony. The

Federal Parliament will have power to fix the uniform tariff, and if any reductions made are on a 5 sliding scale great injury will be avoided.

END QUOTE

.


10 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-

But it is a fair corollary to the provision for dealing with the revenue for the first five years after the

imposition of uniform duties of customs, and further reflection has led me to the conclusion that, on the

whole, it will be a useful and beneficial provision.

END QUOTE 15


QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-

On the other hand, the power of the Commonwealth to impose duties of customs and of excise such as it may

determine, which insures that these duties of customs and excise would represent something like the average 20 opinion of the Commonwealth-that power, and the provision that bounties are to be uniform throughout

the Commonwealth, might, I am willing to concede, be found to work with some hardship upon the states

for some years, unless their own rights to give bounties were to some extent preserved.

END QUOTE

25 Hansard 31-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:

2. Customs and excise and bounties, but so that duties of customs and excise and bounties shall be uniform

throughout the commonwealth, and that no tax or duty shall be imposed on any goods exported from one

state to another; 30 END QUOTE

Hansard 11-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The CHAIRMAN.-

Taxation; but so that all taxation shall he uniform throughout the Commonwealth, and that no tax or duty 35 shall be imposed on any goods passing from one state to another.

END QUOTE

Hansard 11-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).- 40

That all the words after the word "taxation" where it is first used be struck out, and that the following words

be substituted:-"but not so as to discriminate between states or parts of states, or between goods passing from

one state to another."

END QUOTE

45 Hansard 13-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE

Mr. MARMION: I am afraid I have scarcely made myself understood. I have not said anything as to the

uniformity of the duty. I do not know whether the customs duties, excise or import, would be uniform; but the

case I put is this: Supposing an excise duty were levied on tobacco in Western Australia of 1s. per 1b. The 50 manufacturer would have to pay the duty in the first instance, and later on the consumer would have to pay it.

At the same time, the tobacco grown in South Australia, Victoria, and New South Wales would enter the

colony duty free.

Mr. PLAYFORD: But there would be an excise duty all over the colonies!

Mr. MARMION: Then, I fear I have misunderstood the question; but I thought an excise was a duty 55 imposed upon internal, and not upon external, productions. I have never read of an excise duty referring to

productions outside of the country in which the duty was levied.



p14 2-5-2014





Mr. J. FORREST: It is generally understood to be a duty levied upon home productions!

Mr. MARMION: Then my argument, I take it, is applicable!

Mr. DONALDSON: I think we ought to make haste slowly in this matter. It would be only right that the

federal parliament should have the right to levy an excise duty upon spirits, tobacco, and beer. These are three

items subject to excise at the present time. But suppose the parliament were to go a little further, it might 5 possibly put an excise duty upon sugar, and, as far as I know, there is only one colony in this group at the

present time which grows sugar.

Mr. GORDON: Excise would include licenses!

Mr. FITZGERALD: The states representative would see to those matters!

Mr. DONALDSON: I believe an excise would also include a stamp duty. I should like to have this 10 matter fully considered. It is getting late, and in the absence of the mover of the resolutions I think they might

now be postponed until our next sitting. I therefore move:

That the Chairman do now leave the chair, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

END QUOTE

15

And, the truth is the same with the purported State land taxes. Since the Commonwealth on 11

November 1910 created the Land Tax Office, the forerunner of the ATO (Australian Taxation

Office) then States/Territories no longer can raise land taxes and so neither municipal /shire

councils using its delegated powers they had originally to raise rates. As the High Court of

Australia in 1904 in Sydney Council v Commonwealth made clear that rates by councils was a 20

delegated power of taxation derived from the states. The fact that the Commonwealth abolished

land taxes doesn’t mean it no longer is a Commonwealth legislative power. The Framers of the

Constitution made clear that once a Commonwealth legislative power then always a

Commonwealth legislative power and a reversal of such legislative powers is not provided for

within the true meaning and application of the constitution. 25

But where are those with balls in government to protect citizens against these unconstitutional

rates (taxes)?


QUOTE Mr. GORDON.- 30 The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes on

the Constitution we will have to wipe it out."

END QUOTE

So, if you want to talk about reforming matters then yes let do it within the context of the true 35

meaning and application of the constitution and not despite of it.

National Disability Insurance Scheme 40

There is little I will state about this as I view it is and was an utter scandal that those in

government were filling their own pockets no matter how unconstitutional while depriving those

disabled, and I mean the real and not pretend disabled from appropriate support and services.

THE MORALS OF A SOCIETY CAN BE MEASURED AS TO HOW IT LOOKS AFTER THE DISABLED 45



p15 2-5-2014





I created this slogan and mean it.

We have disabled left in hospitals and retirement places despite this being highly unsuitable for

them, in particular the young, where the Commonwealth by the provisions of the constitution

since federation had the legislative powers to address this issue.

Politicians of all colours are so to say “I am all right jack” I make sure to be able to rob the 5

Consolidated Revenue Funds for decades after I leave the seat of Parliament and the hell with the

rights of the disabled. In my view it should be mandatory for every politicians to help out at a

nursing home where disabled are kept inappropriately to spend a week there to learn how it is for

the disabled. Do you really think that parents are asking for a child to be born disabled so they

can find an ignoring government to blatantly deny their child their constitutional rights? 10

In my view the National Disability Insurance Scheme is a necessity that cannot be ignored. We

shouldn’t have to question if it should or shouldn’t be fully funded as it should be by right it is

fully funded.

15

Politicians-public servants-party environment

As shown below being a candidate to be a member of parliament originally required (prior to

Federation) to be a holder of a certain land value, etc, but with the federation this changed to be a 20

“voter” hence the deposit and up to 100 signatures for nominations is in violation of the

intentions of the Framers of the Constitution as embedded in the constitution.

No use to claim to be a “conservative” and claim to be for the monarchy when you really are

betraying the “general community” and prevent ordinary citizens having the right to be

“voters” then to stand for Parliament by making an obstacle course to prevent many to be 25

candidates. Many of the retired electors could perhaps be elected and use their wisdom of life to

govern and without any unconstitutional superannuation scheme or decades of such a

unconstitutional superannuation scheme payable from Consolidated Revenue Funds. It would

therefore keep public expenditure considerable lower.


QUOTE Sir GEORGE GREY: In moving the motion which I have just read, I wish now to remark that I believe

the decision to which the House has come on this subject is one of the most important decisions that perhaps

any chamber has ever come to-that is as affecting the whole future of the continent of Australasia. I now feel 35 quite satisfied in my own mind that this Convention will arrive at a definite recommendation, which will be

made to the various states which it desires to see enter into the federation which it is now attempting to form.

I feel further satisfied that if such a federation be entered into, it will, under the system which we shall be able

to establish, last for all time. That is, perhaps, from period to period the different states may vary their

constitutions, perhaps almost destroy one constitution and put another in its place; but upon the whole such 40 satisfaction and contentment will prevail throughout the entire federation that it will be lasting, and of the

utmost durability. Now, the object which I had in view in preparing the resolution which I submitted to the

House, and of which this is really a repetition in a shorter form, was this: that in every other federal

constitution which I have seen or known, the first thing done was to form the states, and to assign to them

their powers. In the case of the United States, that was unnecessary, for they already had full powers and 45 almost the same form of government; and they have retained very nearly that form of government ever since,

with slight variations from time to time, perhaps ultimately in the course of years amounting to considerable

changes. I believe that exactly [start page 487] the same thing, will take place in Australasia. And unless this

were done, which I now propose, I do not believe that for many years there would be a firm federation

established on this continent. And for this reason, that undoubtedly in some of the constitutions of the states, 50 antiquated forms have been introduced without the consent of the inhabitants having been obtained; which

antiquated forms were, in many cases, opposed, as, I believe, to the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants

of the states, and which it would have been impossible almost to have altered without great difficulty, owing

to the form in which their legislatures were constituted. That is, by either having a nominated upper house, or

by the upper house being fettered by conditions now unknown absolutely in other countries-such, for 55



p16 2-5-2014





instance, as a money qualification in the members. In England that has been absolutely abolished. In my

youth no man could take his seat in the House of Commons unless he had £600 a year if he was a member for

a county, or £400 a year if he was a member for a borough; and that qualification in the case of counties was

required to be in land. Now, the result of that was that a large number of persons who had no such

qualification really got into the houses of parliament. But they got in in this way: that, being the sons or 5 relations of very wealthy men, their relations conveyed to them the day before the election an estate in land of

the required value. That estate was held until the election was over, and then it was reconveyed to the person

who had made the conveyance in the first instance. The result of that was necessarily that many avenues of

usefulness in political life were closed against everybody, but those who were either wealthy themselves or

who had wealthy relations who were inclined to help them. I was surprised, indeed, when I found that with 10 that experience staring them in the face, they had in some colonies of Australia-certainly in one-gone back to

the old system and established a property qualification. I have no doubt that under the terms of this

resolution, the recommendation of this Convention will go in this direction, that is, that they will

require no qualification at all in the member, except to be a voter; that they will approach, in point of

fact, very nearly to what is the present rule in Great Britain, which is, or, was, regarded as a most aristocratic 15 country. If that is done throughout Australasia, the result will be, if the people at the same time have the

power of electing their lieutenant-governors, that every great post but one in the whole of Australasia will be

open to every man of ability, or of such ability or of such force of character, or occupying such relations of

public life, as will secure him the votes of a large constituency; and an immense amount of talent that under

other circumstances would be shut out from serving the state will have a fair opportunity open to it, and there 20 can be no doubt that numbers of able men will, under such a system, be found who otherwise would have

remained undiscovered, useless to their country, and probably many great measures will hereafter be carried

which could not have been carried under any other system than that which I am convinced will be

recommended for adoption. I cannot help thinking that the advantage of getting this amount of ability and

energy into play is almost wholly over looked, and, but very little conception is as yet formed of the spur that 25 will be given to enterprise and energy, and all that can make men happier and better off by opening all these

places of great importance to every, single citizen of each state in the confederation. This was lately very

forcibly impressed upon my mind. I will just give an example of what I mean, and what I think, perhaps, the

future [start page 488] legislature will agree to.

END QUOTE 30


QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN:

The Constitution we seek to prepare is worthy of any and every personal sacrifice, for it is no ordinary

measure, and must exercise no short-lived influence, since it preludes the advent of a nation. Awed as I feel 35 by the fact that we come from, that we speak to, and that we act for a great constituency, awed as I feel in the

presence of those who sent us here, I am more awed by the thought of the constituency which is not visible,

but which awaits the result of our labors-we are the trustees for posterity for the unborn millions, unknown

and unnumbered-whose aspirations we may help them to fulfil and whose destinies we may assist to

determine. (Applause.) 40

END QUOTE


QUOTE

The Governor-General will call to his Council six or seven gentlemen whom he thinks capable of being 45 the first Ministers in the Commonwealth. He will certainly not choose all protectionists or all

freetraders, but strong, capable, and able politicians, representative of the views of all classes of the

community, and there will be no mandate of the people about it. END QUOTE


QUOTE

The Hon. Sir W.A. ZEAL: The hon. member is altogether wrong; he cannot see [start page 376] anything

good in connection with the Legislative Council of Victoria. If we had the inestimable advantage of that hon.

member's presence for a month or two he might alter his opinion. The hon. member speaks entirely from 55 theory. It seems to me that this question is one of great importance. Our House has taken a great liking to the

system of voting by post. It does so on this ground: that where we have elections in districts principally

populated by farmers and pastoralists great difficulty is experienced in getting the voters to come to the poll.

A farmer will not leave his business to come in and record his vote. If we had a system of voting by post, it



p17 2-5-2014





seems to me that in the majority of cases we might get a large number of voters to record their votes, and thus

take part in the elections.

END QUOTE

HANSARD 17-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates 5 QUOTE

The Right Hon. Sir G. TURNER: Why encumber the bill with it if that is all it means? I take it that if the

government of the day were within a few months of the expiration of parliament, they would not rush for a

penal dissolution. The object of the provision is that if disputes arise in the early life of a, parliament,

there will be some means of going direct to the people and having the question settled at once, without 10 waiting two and a half years for parliament. to expire. It can surely never be intended that this

dissolution is only to come into operation on the expiration of parliament by effluxion of time. That

would be too absurd, and I am sure that my hon. and learned friend never intended such a thing END QUOTE

15

Instead of having A ONE SIDED Government putting its own political aspirations before the

“general community” it was clearly held that to create a government of the competent and the

capable from the diversion of political views might be better.

A mixture of different political aspirations may work much better. After all Ministers of the

crown are appointed to be “constitutional advisors” to the Governor-General to serve the 20

“general community” and not themselves. Or their particular political philosophies.


QUOTE Sir HENRY PARKES:

The resolutions conclude: 25

An executive, consisting of a governor-general, and such persons as may from time to time be

appointed as his advisers, such persons sitting in Parliament, and whose term of office shall depend

upon their possessing the confidence of the house of representatives expressed by the support of the

majority.

What is meant by that is simply to call into existence a ministry to conduct the affairs of the new nation as 30 similar as it can be to the ministry of England-a body of constitutional advisers who shall stand as nearly as

possible in the same relation to the representative of the Crown here [start page 27] a her Majesty's imperial

advisers stand is relation to the Crown directly. These, then, are the principles which my resolutions seek to

lay down as a foundation, as I have already stated, for the new super structure, my object being to invite other

gentlemen to work upon this foundation so as to best advance the ends we have in view. 35 END QUOTE

As I understand it you (TONY ABBOTT) stated; (Kitchen Cabinet 8.00pm 2-5-2014 ABC

Television) QUOTE 40 As a leader you no longer have a private view but a corporate view. END QUOTE

You statement: QUOTE 45

Better to seek forgiveness then to ask for permission END QUOTE

But as you stated you cannot always use this. Let’s make sure you will not use this against

taxpayers to abuse your powers and then seek to seek apologise afterwards because this is not 50

what leadership is about when you are elected as an agent for the constituents.

. HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE



p18 2-5-2014





Mr. BARTON.- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an

Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and,

therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. END QUOTE

5

While we have the incorporation of the Commonwealth of Australia in the District of Columbia,

this I view is in violation of section 44 of the constitution, just as a starter. So, get rid of this

nonsense and ensure that the Commonwealth of Australia is and remains to be by the people for

the people.

10

The Framers of the Constitution held (as shown below) Australia was over-governed and

regretfully instead of ensuring the divided legislative powers kept each government within its

legislative powers we found that the Commonwealth is intruding upon area’s such as

environment, health, education, sport, etc and so causing undue duplication of cost to tax payers.

And the states now have started to set up offices in foreign countries, legislating in regard of 15

weight and measurements, etc, and it seems there is no one to stop this rot and dual burden upon

taxpayers. And, for the ordinary taxpayers to seek to challenge this in the courts may more than

likely result in being shafted by the judiciary as they rather serve so to say their political masters.

Hence a VELVET REVOLUTION may don upon us earlier then you might expect, as to

reclaim our constitutional and other legal rights. After all why pay some adviser about 20

$8444,000.00 a year where we pay a Minister of the Crown to do the job? As such why have a

Minister of the Crown at all? What we have is a gross abuse of public service and we must

rethink if we really need so many public servants and in the end up in a financial mess as we are

now which only underlines we have too many public servants. It also proves that paying huge

sumps of moneys to people in government is not at all any assurance that this will provide a 25

better and more economical responsible Government. Indeed, if anything the huge payments

prove the opposite. This, because politicians no longer are in it, as the Framers of the

Constitution stated for the “honour” but for their own self-interest how they can get rich and very

fat from the public purse.


QUOTE

Mr. CARRUTHERS: I presume also that the resolutions will provide for the committee reporting. I have

a strong objection to a committee which will usurp the functions of the Convention in reporting

recommendations. I should like them to examine into matters and get information, and let it be available to 35 the members of the Convention. Not a day should be lost before steps should be taken to collect the

information on the financial problems, so that we may at the proper time have before us facts and figures and

data which we have not now. Any system of finance to be popular should be one which aims at economy, and

throughout the whole of our federal ideas there should be an anxiety not to increase the machinery of

government in Australia, but to diminish it. There is no country, I suppose, on the face of the earth that is 40 so over-governed as Australasia.

Mr. PEACOCK: Hear, hear.

Mr. CARRUTHERS: With 4,000,000 of people we have seven Governors, seven Agents-General,

fourteen Houses of Parliament, seven Postmasters-General, and several distinct Supreme Courts,

whilst the whole work for over 40,000,000 of people in the United Kingdom is done by one Parliament 45 and one head for all of these. It does seem to me manifestly wrong that we should attempt in any way to

multiply rather than to lessen the machinery of government, and it will be doing good service if our efforts

are directed at every point not to increase the expenditure of Australasia, but rather to diminish it-not to

multiply governments, but rather to diminish them. Let the people have less intricacy in the forms of

government under which we live; and this can very well be done in many directions which may be pointed 50 out-the abolition of six out of the seven Agents-General and the appointment of one Governor-General, for

example. I have no extreme anxiety to see in our Constitution a provision to impose upon the colonies seven

Lieutenant-Governors receiving salaries, when the present Lieutenant-Governors, the Chief Justices, so



p19 2-5-2014





admirably fill the positions, which are to a large extent formal. I was very glad indeed to hear Sir George

Turner speak so strongly in favor of having the Customs barriers on our borders absolutely removed. I was

very glad to hear that sentiment so heartily reciprocated by our friends of South Australia.

END QUOTE


QUOTE

Mr. WISE: I will not deal further with the question. The interjection of Mr. O'Connor has summed up my

ideas on the subject. Then there is the matter of the civil servants: and I would like to throw out a suggestion

whether it might not be possible to insert some clause to prevent a danger in connection with the Civil 10 Services. There will be undoubtedly an important and extensive Civil Service. If the Post and Telegraphs are

taken over that will give a very large number of federal civil servants, and the Customs will considerably

increase the number. Now, there must be retained in the Federal Executive the power to dismiss any servant,

but it seems to me that power should not be exercised except for cause shown. A provision that the Federal

Government should have to lay before the Federal Parliament the reasons for dismissal of servants would be 15 some check upon arbitrary dismissals.

Sir GEORGE TURNER: Would you put that in the Constitution?

Mr. WISE: I can see no other course. It has taken 100 years for the United States to pass a Civil Service

Act, and now it is not of very much value. If we get a party system, and follow it out in the appointment of

civil servants, we will be initiating a system of corruption which would gain strength every day. 20

Mr. ISAACS: Do not the evils in America arise from the position of the President?

Mr. WISE: I know that the party system gains strength from causes which do not exist here, but we cannot

hope to be entirely free from it. Therefore, I propose that this should be inserted:

That all civil servants should hold office during good behaviour, or until they resign or are discharged by the

Executive for cause stated. 25

Mr. GORDON: You secure them like the judges?

Mr. WISE: No; because judges are not dismissed for cause shown.

[start page 117]

Sir GEORGE TURNER: That will apply to telegraph messengers.

Mr. GORDON: The two Houses will have to agree to the dismissal of a junior officer. 30

Mr. WISE: I prefer that the power of dismissal should rest with the Executive, but the Executive should

not have it in their power by the appointment of a commission to shirk their own responsibility, or have it in

their power to work injustice to the Civil Service, and still less should they have the power to make places in

the Civil Service as a reward for services rendered. In my speech I have endeavored to take up the threads of

the argument used in the course of the debate rather than make a set speech. I have to thank the Convention 35 for the attention it has given me, and I join Mr. Carruthers in expressing the belief that if we carry on our

deliberations as we have begun, and show a readiness to make compromises where compromises are possible

without sacrifice of principle, we will, before we conclude, produce a measure more adapted than was the

Bill of 1891 to the requirements of the people of Australia.

END QUOTE 40

As indicated above if we have a government with balls and not a pretend government that rob

Peter to pay Paul, then it would make clear that from today onwards every kind of payment that



p20 2-5-2014





is not authorised by an appropriation Bill and is not part of annual service of a department then

must be stopped. Likewise the over spending by Department such as by the Future Funds and the

bonuses and public servants getting reported $40,000.00 increase to get a yearly salary of

$844,000.00 or thereabout underlines that we have a cancer within our government regardless

which political party is in power. No use to claim that even politicians are to suffer cut when in 5

reality there is a lot of talk but no show for it.

The so called GOLD PAS for former politicians and their family members is and remains to be

unconstitutional, this as none of them are a holder of a seat in the Parliament.

10 Hansard 21-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National


QUOTE

Sir JOHN FORREST.-What about civil servants, who spend all their lives in the service of the State?

Mr. WISE.-We tax the rest of the community to pay pensions to the civil servants. 15

END QUOTE

Members of Parliament, including Ministers of the Crown are not public servants! None of them

are employed by the Commonwealth of Australia. None have any constitutional rights to claim

superannuation for having been a member of parliament and/or having been a Minister of the 20

Crown. But I will not further dwell on this issue at the moment, safe to say the rorting and theft

of Consolidated Revenue Funds by politicians and public servants seems to go on and on as the

little that is or claimed might be done is not so to say touching even the tip of the iceberg, and

this ongoing rorting/theft must stop and so before taxpayers are caused to do with less. After all

not the taxpayers but the politicians and public servants are in the first place at fault for causing 25

these financial problems upon us all.

Private Health Insurance

How cowardly and ignorant politicians are can also be underlined that my 81 year old wife is 30

scared to drop the ever increasing private health insurance because of the fear that if she falls ill

she will not get in time required medical services. Yes, politicians make sure they have all the

perks (lawful or not) for themselves and will not cut into that, other than pretending by words,

but to terrorise an elderly person that she fears to be without private health insurance surely may

underline how low politicians are getting to gutter tactics. 35

Politicians at every election are claiming they will address the problems in health, education, etc,

and yet every subsequent election we hear the same repeated. We by far overpay politicians in

Parliament and this is why I view we are getting crooks and liars who have no regard for the

rights of people unless it served themselves. Having to pay from a pension this large amount of

private health insurance totally undermines the rate calculations of a pension. In my view it is a 40

theft by stealth that should never be existing as such. We are not talking about someone earning a

high income but someone living of a pension being slugged huge amounts and for what? Moist

of the cost charged is actually for what is already covered by Medicare as to free public hospital

bed and so I view the health service insurance companies should have to reduce the charges for

pensioners to omit this kind of charge. In my view it is gross dishonesty to charge a person for 45

something that is actually available for free. I do not intend to go at this time more into details

but safe to say there is plenty and again I view that the National Commission of Audit should

have addressed this issue appropriately. Also, as to ensure that any Government rebate is not



p21 2-5-2014





ending up merely in pockets of highly overpaid managers of insurance companies instead of

reducing the burden on public hospitals. Why not ensure that private health insurance ensure that

its customers actually have access to private hospitals and will attend to them and not to public

hospitals? After all, to enforce this would save tens of millions of dollars if not a lot more?

5

Sport

In my view s96 of the constitution if prostituted for reasons never anticipated by the Premiers.

Indeed, the Framers of the Constitution defeated the insertion of s96. It was the subsequent

Premiers Conference that caused it to be inserted. And it was only to assist a State in dire 10

financial problems and not to channel whatever through it. Therefore the funding of sport is not a

constitutional power of the Commonwealth. Here again we can safe huge amount of monies by

cutting from the Federal budget any monies associated with sports.

A lot more can be stated about this but for the moment I will leave it by this as to the issue of

sport. 15

GENERAL COMMENT

If you are real and not some fake as to claim to be a conservative then prove it, because so far it

seems to me you have done nothing to really prove you are a monarchist , as all I see is that you 20

use the monarchy to drive your own agenda.

As such, pretending to be a monarchist while ditching the true meaning and application of the

constitution for your own ideologies and personal interest.

You got appointed as a Prime minister but not to flaunt your political agenda but as indicated

above to be a constitutional advisor to the Governor-General, a person who I view himself is a 25

criminal by participating in the unconstitutional armed invasion into Iraq. But it seems to me

getting him appointed as a Governor-General was to silence him to talk about the wrongdoing to

invade Iraq. As it appears to me the same kind of conduct Julia Gillard used to appoint former

lawyers to become judges.

30

Let’s be clear about it I wrote on 22 July 2002 (This letter was published by me in my books in

the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series)to the then Gen Peter Cosgrove that to invade Iraq would be

unconstitutional without a DECLARATION OF WAR published by the Governor-General in the

Gazette. Well, no such DECLARATION OF WAR was published and hence I view Peter

Cosgrove violated constitutional requirement and basically became a person participating in 35

mass murder, crimes against humanity, war crimes, etc. And so all members of Government at

the time. So, it seems appointing him Governor-General was so to say a sell-out.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-19/cosgrove-admits-mistakes-in-iraq-war/4581120

QUOTE

Cosgrove admits mistakes made in Iraq war 40

AMBy national defence correspondent C:\news\michael-brissenden\166894Michael Brissenden,

and staff

Updated Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:33pm AEDT

45

The man who led Australian forces during the Iraq war says that, 10 years later, he is not sure if

the conflict made the world a safer place.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-19/cosgrove-admits-mistakes-in-iraq-war/4581120

http://www.abc.net.au/am

http://www.abc.net.au/am

p22 2-5-2014





More than 100,000 civilians are reported to have died in the decade since US and allied forces

rolled into Iraq to unseat dictator Saddam Hussein.

C:\news\2013-03-19\ten-years-on-general-peter-cosgrove-looks-back-on\4581004C:\news\2013-

03-19\ten-years-on-general-peter-cosgrove-looks-back-on\4581004Audio:C:\news\2013-03-

19\ten-years-on-general-peter-cosgrove-looks-back-on\4581004 Peter Cosgrove looks back on 5

Iraq war (AM)

The war rapidly descended into a bitter struggle pitting coalition and Iraqi forces against

insurgent groups as Sunni and Shiite groups jockeyed to fill the power vacuum left by the fall of

Saddam.

This morning the UK-based Iraq Body Count (IBC) published a study which concluded that at 10

least 112,000 civilians had been killed, and the overall death toll could rise as high as 174,000.

General Peter Cosgrove was chief of the Australian Defence Force in 2003 when then-prime

minister John Howard committed Australian troops in support of the US invasion.

There's been a lot of bloodshed along the way and that's always horribly regrettable, but

all war is a mistake, all war. 15

General Peter Cosgrove

A decade later he says he has mixed feelings about the whole episode and he concedes big

mistakes were made in the early part of the post-Saddam period.

"We know so much more about the whole Iraq war and the aftermath, that looking back you'd

have mixed feelings about the whole episode," he said. 20

"I suppose you'd cling to a few things - a horrible dictator eventually was removed and the

people of Iraq have a new chance, even though they've had enormous suffering.

"There's been a lot of bloodshed along the way and that's always horribly regrettable, but all war

is a mistake, all war."

Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, do you think the world is a safer place? Have your say. 25

Then-US president George W Bush said the war was necessary to remove Saddam and prevent

him giving weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups post-9/11, but General Cosgrove says

he is uncertain about whether the Iraq war has made the world a safer place.

"I think we all understood after 9/11 that there'd been a profound change in what might be called

the pervasive security aspirations of democratic countries, and Iraq was, if you like, a step along 30

the way," he said.

"Some may say a side-step, others may say an integral part of a new world.

"In any event there was never going to be a sort of a line drawn under global terrorism as a result

of Iraq."

C:\news\2013-03-18\iraq-war-10-year-anniversary-gallery\4580316C:\news\2013-03-18\iraq-35

war-10-year-anniversary-gallery\4580316Gallery:C:\news\2013-03-18\iraq-war-10-year-

anniversary-gallery\4580316 Iraq war: 10 years on

But General Cosgrove does not believe a "lie" about WMDs was used in order to supply a

pretext for going to war.

"A lie presupposes [that] people deliberately contrived to invent a reason for war, and that’s 40

certainly not the Australian experience," he said.

"The Australian approach to this is that on probabilities, Saddam, who had used WMDs against

the Iranians and then against Kurdish people in Iraq, and had manufactured WMD and

weaponised them with chemical agents etc, the probability [was] that he retained some, that these



p23 2-5-2014





were now arguably available for global terrorists.

"That was, on probabilities, the reason why Australia joined the coalition, and we're still not

persuaded that there was a lie involved in that."

And he says the coalition and the occupation forces led by Paul Bremer, George W Bush's

presidential envoy to Iraq, did not adequately plan for the post-Saddam era. 5

In particular, he criticised the decision to dismantle the apparatus of Saddam's ruling Ba'ath

party.

"Look, 20/20 hindsight shows that there were big mistakes made in the early part of the post-

Saddam period," he said.

"And yes, one might say the breaking up of the Ba'ath party, the breaking up of the Iraqi army, 10

these did not, these were not in hindsight good decisions."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-21834937

15

Iraq 10 years on: 'Fools gold' intelligence

18 March 2013 Last updated at 21:37 GMT C:\news\help-21352667Help

It has been 10 years since the start of the Iraq war and on this anniversary the BBC has learned

that two key pieces of intelligence, which could have prevented the conflict, were either

dismissed or used selectively. 20

The information came from two members of Saddam Hussein's inner circle, his head of

intelligence and foreign minister, and said that Iraq did not have an active programme of

weapons of mass destruction.

But it has been claimed this information was rejected as propaganda.

Peter Taylor has this exclusive report. 25

Read More

Iraq: The spies who fooled the world

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21786506

18 March 2013 Last updated at 00:43 GMT 30

Share this page

Email

C:\1A\I\Iraq\?print=trueC:\1A\I\Iraq\?print=truePrint

C:\modules\sharetools\share?url=http:\www.bbc.co.uk\news\uk-21786506&title=BBC News -

Iraq: The spies who fooled the world&appId=news&facebook-35

message=C:\modules\sharetools\share?url=http:\www.bbc.co.uk\news\uk-21786506&title=BBC

News - Iraq: The spies who fooled the world&appId=news&facebook-message=Share this page

6.6K

Share

Facebook 40

Twitter







http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/email/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21786506



p24 2-5-2014





Iraq: The spies who fooled the world By Peter Taylor BBC News

The lies of two Iraqi spies were central to the claim - at the heart of the UK and US decision to 5

go to war in Iraq - that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. But even before the

fighting started, intelligence from highly-placed sources was available suggesting he did not,

Panorama has learned.

Six months before the invasion, the then Prime Minister Tony Blair warned the country about the

threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction (WMD). 10

"The programme is not shut down," he said. "It is up and running now." Mr Blair used the

intelligence on WMD to justify the war.

That same day, 24 September 2002, the government published its controversial dossier on the

former Iraqi leader's WMD.

Advertisement 15

The BBC has learned that two key pieces of intelligence, which could have prevented the Iraq

war, were either dismissed or used selectively

Designed for public consumption, it had a personal foreword by Mr Blair, who assured readers

Saddam Hussein had continued to produce WMD "beyond doubt".

But, while it was never mentioned in the dossier, there was doubt. The original intelligence from 20

MI6 and other agencies, on which the dossier was based, was clearly qualified.

The intelligence was, as the Joint Intelligence Committee noted in its original assessments,

"sporadic and patchy" and "remains limited".

The exclusion of these qualifications gave the dossier a certainty that was never warranted.

Intelligence failure 25

Much of the key intelligence used by Downing Street and the White House was based on

fabrication, wishful thinking and lies.

L o r d B u t l e r

Lord Butler says he was unaware of some

intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have WMD

As Gen Sir Mike Jackson, then head of the British Army, says, "what appeared to be gold in 30

terms of intelligence turned out to be fool's gold, because it looked like gold, but it wasn't".

There was other intelligence, but it was less alarming.

Lord Butler, who after the war, conducted the first government inquiry into WMD intelligence,

says Mr Blair and the intelligence community "misled themselves".

Lord Butler and Sir Mike agree Mr Blair did not lie, because they say he genuinely believed 35



http://faq.external.bbc.co.uk/questions/bbc_online/adverts_general

p25 2-5-2014





Saddam Hussein had WMD.

The most notorious spy who fooled the world was the Iraqi defector, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-

Janabi.

His fabrications and lies were a crucial part of the intelligence used to justify one of the most

divisive wars in recent history. And they contributed to one of the biggest intelligence failures in 5

living memory.

He became known as Curveball, the codename given to him by US intelligence that turned out to

be all too appropriate.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote 10

I thought we'd produced probably the best intelligence that anybody produced in the pre-

war period”

End Quote Bill Murray Former CIA Paris station head

Mr Janabi arrived as an Iraqi asylum seeker at a German refugee centre in 1999 and said he was

a chemical engineer, thus attracting the attention of the German intelligence service, the BND. 15

He told them he had seen mobile biological laboratories mounted on trucks to evade detection.

The Germans had doubts about Mr Janabi which they shared with the Americans and the British.

MI6 had doubts too, which they expressed in a secret cable to the CIA: "Elements of [his]

behaviour strike us as typical of individuals we would normally assess as fabricators [but we are]

inclined to believe that a significant part of [Curveball's] reporting is true." 20

The British decided to stick with Curveball, as did the Americans. He later admitted being a

fabricator and liar.

There appeared to be corroborative intelligence from another spy who fooled the world.

Continue reading the main story

Panorama: Find out more 25

B B C P a n o r a m a l o g o

Peter Taylor presents Panorama: The Spies Who Fooled the World

BBC One, Monday 18 March at 22:35 GMT

Then available in the UK on the BBC iPlayer

He was an Iraqi former intelligence officer, called Maj Muhammad Harith, who said it had been 30

his idea to develop mobile biological laboratories and claimed he had ordered seven Renault

trucks to put them on.

He made his way to Jordan and then talked to the Americans.

Muhammad Harith apparently made up his story because he wanted a new home. His



http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01l1yxk






p26 2-5-2014





intelligence was dismissed as fabrication 10 months before the war.

MI6 also thought they had further corroboration of Curveball's story, when a trusted source -

codenamed Red River - revealed he had been in touch with a secondary source who said he had

seen fermenters on trucks. But he never claimed the fermenters had anything to do with

biological agents. 5

After the war, MI6 decided that Red River was unreliable as a source.

Handmade suit

But not all the intelligence was wrong. Information from two highly-placed sources close to

Saddam Hussein was correct.

Both said Iraq did not have any active WMD. 10

The CIA's source was Iraq's foreign minister, Naji Sabri.

T a h r i r J a l i l H a b b u s h A l - T i k r i t i p l a y i n g c a r d

Tahir Jalil Habbush Al-Tikriti said Saddam

Hussein had no active WMD

Former CIA man Bill Murray - then head of the agency's station in Paris - dealt with him via an

intermediary, an Arab journalist, to whom he gave $200,000 (£132,000) in cash as a down 15

payment.

He said Naji Sabri "looked like a person of real interest - someone who we really should be

talking to".

Murray put together a list of questions to put to the minister, with WMD at the top.

The intermediary met Naji Sabri in New York in September 2002 when he was about to address 20

the UN - six months before the start of the war and just a week before the British dossier was

published.

The intermediary bought the minister a handmade suit which the minister wore at the UN, a sign

Mr Murray took to mean that Naji Sabri was on board.

Mr Murray says the upshot was intelligence that Saddam Hussein "had some chemical weapons 25



p27 2-5-2014





left over from the early 90s, [and] had taken the stocks and given them to various tribes that were

loyal to him. [He] had intentions to have weapons of mass destruction - chemical, biological and

nuclear - but at that point in time he virtually had nothing".

The CIA insists the intelligence report from the "source" indicated the former Iraqi president did

have WMD programmes because, the agency says, it mentioned that, "Iraq was currently 5

producing and stockpiling chemical weapons" and "as a last resort had mobile launchers armed

with chemical weapons".

Mr Murray disputes this account.

The second highly-placed source was Iraq's head of intelligence, Tahir Jalil Habbush Al-Tikriti -

the jack of diamonds in America's "most wanted" deck of cards which rated members of Saddam 10

Hussein's government.

A senior MI6 officer met him in Jordan in January 2003 - two months before the war.

B i l l M u r r a y

Bill Murray says the "best intelligence" was not

used

It was thought Habbush wanted to negotiate a deal that would stop the imminent invasion. He 15

also said Saddam Hussein had no active WMD.

Surprisingly, Lord Butler - who says Britons have "every right" to feel misled by their prime

minister - only became aware of the information from Habbush after his report was published.

"I can't explain that," says Lord Butler.

"This was something which I think our review did miss. But when we asked about it, we were 20

told that it wasn't a very significant fact, because SIS [MI6] discounted it as something designed

by Saddam to mislead."

Lord Butler says he also knew nothing about the intelligence from Naji Sabri.

Ex-CIA man Bill Murray was not happy with the way the intelligence from these two highly-

placed sources had been used. 25

"I thought we'd produced probably the best intelligence that anybody produced in the pre-war

period, all of which came out - in the long run - to be accurate. The information was discarded

and not used."

Panorama: The Spies Who Fooled the World, BBC One, Monday 18 March at 22:35 GMT

and then available in the UK on the BBC iPlayer. 30




p28 2-5-2014





More on This Story

Iraq: 10 years on

Features

M a r w a

C:\news\magazine-21703819Marwa's story

Gravely injured as a girl in a US air raid, Marwa Shimari's life reveals the personal 5

trauma of war and reflects the difficulties in rebuilding a broken society

C:\news\world-middle-east-21829269C:\news\world-middle-east-21829269John Simpson's

memories of war

C:\news\uk-21823016C:\news\uk-21823016War still casts devastating shadow 10

C:\news\magazine-21723313C:\news\magazine-21723313Films struggle with war's legacy

In pictures

C:\news\uk-21683264Snapped memories

Photographer Sean Smith narrates a slideshow of his pictures from the invasion

15

Video and audio

C:\news\world-middle-east-21839971C:\news\world-middle-east-21839971Bloodshed

affected Iraq's young Watch

C:\news\world-middle-east-21826764C:\news\world-middle-east-21826764Iraq 'not at

peace with itself' Watch 20

C:\news\uk-21827633C:\news\uk-21827633Battling back from Iraq injury Watch

C:\news\uk-21824527C:\news\uk-21824527'I didn't want my son to die' Watch

C:\news\uk-21824527

END QUOTE

25

Now, stop talking about promises when you can’t keep them and finally prove you have the balls

to be a Prime Minister as required within the true meaning and application of the constitution and

not just what you may fancy it to be in violation of what is constitutionally permissible.

I look forwards to your details response, if any courtesy will eventuate as such. 30

Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

(Our name is our motto!) 35



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special_reports/struggle_for_iraq/

20140502-g. h .schorel-hlavka o.w.b. to mr tony abbott pm- kevin andrews and joe hockey - etc

Documents