On 11th of February 2017, Australians will be asked to vote on whether they want to approve one of the most fundamental changes imaginable to our society. On that date, the Australian government will hold a plebiscite to determine whether Australians wish to change our marriage laws to allow parties of the same sex to marry one another.
Under Australia’s current marriage laws, only persons of opposing sexes are allowed to get married. In other words, only a man can marry a woman under current law. The plebiscite will ask Australians whether they want to change that definition of marriage.
The proposed plebiscite has drawn criticism from many quarters, and on various grounds. Two of the main arguments that have been raised are;
• That the
…show more content…
The cost is estimated at around $160 million. In addition, the federal government has recently announced that it will allot each of the “for” and “against” arguments $7.5 million to make out their respective cases. So, the cost is definitely high. None the less, I would argue that the cost needs to be put into perspective. This is a once only cost that will determine the issue for a very long time. Secondly, if we do not ask the community directly to indicate what level of support there is for making the change, then whatever decisions are taken in the absence of consulting the community will undoubtedly be challenged and disputed by those who are not happy with the outcome. The cost of such challenges and disputes is not easy to determine, but it must be significant. A lot of time and effort has already been spent by both the “for” and “against” camps on advocating their respective points of view, which has already had a cost to the community. Although we cannot guarantee that a plebiscite will eliminate challenges or disputes by disgruntled members of the community, it is very likely that there will be fewer of them and that they will be less severe than if there is such
...e observed now as easily as it might be in it's final form. The prevailing notion is that through judicial interpretation or legislative act it should be more onerous to affect legislative override, not to the level of constitutional amendment of the rights in question, but perhaps a moderated super majority . The dialogue created by judicial-legislative interplay is truly indispensable to the democratic process, however the possibility exists that the dialogue could be circumvented and replaced with a legislative diatribe. As equally unappealing is the judicial monologue, the disdain for which increasingly dominates legislative analysis in the United States. The override provision effectively eliminates such concerns in Canada. The inevitable democratization of our override provision will in time perfect the dichotomy so vital to legislative-judicial conciliation.
For many years, the question of how adaptable and flexible the constitution is in Australia has been widely debated. As of now the atmosphere of verbal confrontation on protected change, has restored enthusiasm toward the issue in exploring whether the constitution is versatile and adaptable in meeting the needs of the nation following 100 years in being embraced.
Since the turn of the twenty first century, in Canada voter turnout has made a significant and consecutive decline. In the last five federal elections on average only sixty-one per cent of eligible voters voted. If each eligible citizen voted in an election the government would be on par with the primary interests of the people. The easiest way to achieve this objective is by implementing a compulsory voting system. Mandatory voting systems are appealing because all citizens are affected by decisions made by the government, so it makes sense to have all those affected apart of the election process. As a result, the voting results would be more representative of the country and that would lead to an increase of stability and legitimacy. It would also be beneficial to Canadians because would cause political parties to address and focus on the needs of every socio-economic level. However, one of biggest problems that accompanies mandatory voting laws is that the choice to exercise the right to vote is taken away. Another primary concern about compulsory voting is that a large number of uninterested and uninformed voters are brought to the polls. Conversely, uninformed voters will become familiar with and learn the polling procedures and electoral system over time and uninterested voters are not forced to mark a name on the ballot. Compulsory voting laws would only make registration and attendance at the polls mandatory, not voting itself. Therefore the freedom to exercise the right to vote or not is still intact. A greater emphasis on alternate voting practices may be established such as electronic or online voting. Positive changes would not only be evident in the policies of political parties but also in the voting procedure. Th...
A Constitution is a set of rules put in place to govern a country, by which the parliament, executive and judiciary must abide by in law making and administering justice. In many countries, these laws are easily changed, while in Australia, a referendum process must take place to alter the wording of the Constitution (Commonwealth of Australia, date unknown, South Australian Schools Constitutional Convention Committee 2001). Since the introduction of the Australian Constitution in January 1901, there have been sufficient proposals to alter and insert sections within the body to reflect the societal values of the day, ensuring the Constitution remains relevant to the Australian people. Although Constitutional reform can be made on a arrangement of matters, the latest protests on Indigenous recognition and racial references within the body of the Constitution has called into question the validity of racial inclusion, and whether amendments should be made to allow for recognition. This essay will focus on the necessity of these amendments and evaluate the likelihood of change through the process of referenda.
Some Australians believe that the time is right, for Australia to become a republic. There are many arguments, both for and against, regarding this issue.
In this paper four subjects on the Electoral College will be addressed. These four subjects are: What is the Electoral College? Why did the founding fathers create the Electoral College? What are some major criticisms of the Electoral College? Should we keep it? Before these questions are addressed it should be noted that many people were not aware of the existence of the Electoral College, perhaps even the Author of this paper.
as the laws allowing for gays and lesbians to marry who they wish. The new idea of love and that
The electoral system in Canada has been utilized for over a century, and although it has various strengths which have helped preserve the current system, it also has glaringly obvious weaknesses. In recent years, citizens and experts alike have questioned whether Canada’s current electoral system, known as First Past the Post (FPTP) or plurality, is the most effective system. Although FPTP is a relatively simple and easy to understand electoral system, it has been criticized for not representing the popular vote and favouring regions which are supportive of a particular party. FPTP does have many strengths such as simplicity and easy formation of majority governments, however, its biggest drawback is that it does not proportionally represent
Same-sex relationships have always been a controversial legal issue, and there has been a variety of legal and non-legal responses, coming from a range of different viewpoints regarding the issue. In recent years, there has been many law reforms recognising same sex relationships, which include changes to Medicare, tax, social security, superannuation, worker’s compensation, child support, and allowing people in same-sex relationships to adopt children. These legal reforms come about as a result of extensive lobbying by non-government groups and organisations designed to promote the recognition of same-sex relationships in Australia.
Williams, N. R. (2012). Why the National Popular Vote Compact Is Unconstitutional. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2012, 1523-1583
Canada runs on a democratic model of governing based on the British parliamentary system. Its parliament is thus divided into two chambers: the House of Commons and the Senate. Elected politicians are seated within The House of Commons while the Senate occupies qualified citizens which are appointed by the Prime Minister. Parliament’s purpose is to hold responsibility for passing legislations and the choosing of government, referring to the political party with the largest amount of seats. Depending on the results of the election, Canada has the potential of having either a majority, minority or in the rare case a coalition government. Customarily, an election in Canada usually ends up forming a majority government. The party with more than
"Arguments for and Against the Electoral College." Britannica School. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2013. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.
Stonecipher, Harry C. A Place to stand. 21 Debated Issues in American Politics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2000.
Caroline’s presentation was on the issue of if the electoral college should be retained for the purpose of electing presidents or if it should be done away with. The thesis presented was that the electoral college is too outdated and contradictory to the popular vote to justify its continuation, even if was meant as a more efficient way of deciding victors. Besides the supporting points of its contradictory and outdated nature, it was also pointed out that its does more to divide the country than it does to elect candidates for the whole nation.
The Electoral College was established at the roots of the American electoral process. This system is deemed archaic and many argue that its function is no longer beneficial in today’s politics. In the modern era, we have seen a shift in approval ratings of the system. The system is generally disliked and many agree that because the government is “progressive” and the system is essentially “regressive”, the United States lacks room for improvement and is ultimately stifled by the system. Although there are many benefits to the system, it is important to note that issues arise with time.