Saturday, 1 August 2015

Government Mocks Prayer!


 
There is a whole swag of people and groups in psychospace clamouring for secularism. A logical part of this would be to stop Australia’s elected “representatives” saying The Lord’s Prayer before each sitting day in Parliament.

As an atheist, even I find it a little insulting to true believers that these people recite the prayer and then proceed to act in such a shameful fashion – hurling insults, bullying each other, and competing to see which of them can sink lowest when it comes to inhumane or dehumanising policies.

“God” – whatever that means to an individual – cops the blame quite unfairly for the things people do when they do not want to accept responsibility for their own actions.
 
 

Here’s what the Discussion Draft of the New Constitution has to say on the topic of Religion, directly and indirectly:


91 – Religion

No Australian Government or its delegated authorities shall:

a)    subsidise a religious organisation beyond compensation for approved secular and charitable works

b)    subsidise the promotion or practice of a particular religion

c)    subsidise that portion of an organisation’s budget dedicated to instruction in a particular religion’s beliefs and practices beyond that appropriate to teaching a curriculum of broad general knowledge, or a course of a secular nature.

101 – Rights of Australian Citizens

Australian Citizens have a moral and legal right

a)    …

b)     

c)     

d)     

e)    to express reasonable opinion or belief of fact

f)     to hold, discuss or reject religious beliefs

g)     

h)    to freedom from inferior treatment based solely on

1.     

2.    race, ethnicity or culture,

3.    gender or gender identity,

4.     

5.    sexual identity,

6.    marital status,

7.    religion,

 

103 - Limitations of Rights of Australian Citizens

The legal guarantee of a right carrying with it moral obligations, the rights of Australian Citizens are limited as follows;

a)    the

b)    the right to freedom of assembly, protest, or expression of opinion shall not include the right to

1.    knowingly promote hatred of members of a group rather than abhorrence of specific behaviours or beliefs; or

2.    incite the commission of a crime of violence against person or property; or

3.     

c)    
 

d)    Section 103 c) does not limit the right of bona fide whistleblowers to speak, nor does it grant the right to punish whistleblowers.

e)    the right to freedom from discrimination

1.    shall not include the right to inflict psychosocial or physical violence on persons;

2.    shall not justify a lesser standard for the treatment of animals than that held by the community at large

3.     

4.    shall not justify non-compliance with reasonable health and safety or security requirements;

5.    shall not exempt any person from providing clear and transparent personal identification for purposes including but not limited to

a.    health and safety

b.    administration of Australian law

6.     

7.    should not impose an unreasonable burden on any other citizen, natural or incorporated;

8.     

9.     

10.  

11. shall not provide grounds for exempting any organisation or citizen, natural or incorporated, from complying with the provisions of Australian Taxation Law;

 

There is a further requirement in the draft that The Lord’s Prayer be replaced with the Preamble of the New Constitution.

Ideally, the Preamble people finally approve will be a statement of values upon which Parliamentarians might ponder before they get down to business.

 
 


 

There is a great deal we might say about getting a whole new constitution off the ground, but for this post it would be great to get feedback about what’s wrong, missing or simply okay about the topic of religion.

 

Thanks for dropping in!
 
 
You can read the text of the draft here or PM me through the facebook page and I will happily email you a more readable PDF. The draft DOES need everybody's input, it is just designed to start discussions. 
 
Please join the discussion if you agree Australia needs a new and more democratic constitution. If you don't want to use blogger, you can discuss the idea via facebook.

 
 

Picture of a Democratic Australia


 



this is just an overview
You can read the text of the draft here or PM me through the facebook page and I will happily email you a more readable PDF. The draft DOES need everybody's input, it is just designed to start discussions. 
 
Please join the discussion if you agree Australia needs a new and more democratic constitution. If you don't want to use blogger, you can discuss the idea via facebook.


THE PEOPLE DIRECTLY ELECT
·         President
·         Senate
·         House of Reps
·         Local Government Bodies

THE PEOPLE HAVE STRONGER POWERS TO PETITION [PRESIDENT]

THE PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS
 
 
 
GOVERNMENT HAS CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS TO THE PEOPLE

BRITISH MONARCH IS TITULAR HEAD OF AUSTRALIA
Office of Governor General Abolished

STATE GOVERNMENTS ABOLISHED
Borders retained for Administrative Purposes
All Australians now have ownership of All Australia
Government Accountability Restored

PRESIDENT
The Public Face of the Nation
Provides Leadership
Some Rights to Veto Legislation

PRIME MINISTER & OTHER MINISTERS
Prepare Budgets
Negotiate Policies with President
Military Powers of Cabinet subject to More Democratic Safeguards

COLLEGE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
Elected by Local Government Bodies
Represent Local Government to Parliament

PUBLIC SERVICE
More Control of Contracted Services
National Uniformity of Many Laws/ Consolidation of Services

 


Wednesday, 29 July 2015

Discussion Draft of A More Democratic Constitution

1. I'm not a lawyer. But hey, MPs get help when they write Bills. So long as we can be specific about what we are discussing, the numbering system will probably do for now.

2. I'm not a genius with software. You can request a pdf copy by email with a personal message through the facebook page. OR, if you want to stick with blogger;
If this is too small and you are using Windows, you should be able to zoom in by going to the settings button in the top right hand corner of your screen. It looks like a little gear wheel-cog thingy. Another option is to try Ctrl+

3. It ain't poetry. I'm not a poet. Someone out there in psychospace is.

4. Yep - bound to be full of illogical inconsistencies. It's kept me awake at nights for a year and my brain is frazzled. Let's fix it. Democratically.

5. The important question is - will you join in and say what you like or hate about the ideas, sentiments, model, suggestions and other stuff this draft contains? At the very least, say whether or not you support the idea of a new constitution.

6. No, it won't be easy to get the idea of a new constitution accepted, but if we don't try, it definitely won't.
The more we talk, the more the idea will become a possibility. Some posts will be dedicated to strategies.



7. I'm not in a hurry to re-type and re-format this. If your comments are not troll-like, they will be valued and kept so after a while we can try and "poll" opinions, ideas etc. I know some of my favourite bits probably won't survive. Maybe none of them - I'm all for democracy.

8. Let's agree that any Constitution proposal will contain some assumptions about what is desirable or offensive. If you really hate it, and find it really, really, really offensive, please don't be personal when you say so.
























 

 
 


57 People Chose This Country's Leader - And Call It Democracy









 
 
Australia’s a great big country with a teeny tiny population, but there are a lot more than 57 people registered to vote. So how do just 57 people manage to decide who should be Prime Minister? Easy:
Australia inherited the British form of government;

Lower House; Upper House; and Queen

It's a system based on Parties, Party Philosophies, and Cabinets.
The theory is that the people vote for a LOCAL representative for their LOCAL area.
Voters don't directly choose who will become the Face of the Nation.


24 Nov 2007
Australian voters:
13,645,073
People who voted for the Leader
43,957

 
21 Aug 2010
Australian voters:
14,088,260
People who voted for the Leader:
66,298

 
7 Sept 2013
Australian voters:
14,712,799
People who voted for the Leader:
54,388

 
Even if voters think they know on election day who is likely to be the Face of the Nation, this can change later without anyone asking voters at all.

In Australia,

Faceless Party Hacks decide
who should be the Face of the Nation,

and they do it all the time.

June 2010

115 people got into a huddle and replaced one Prime Minister with another.

[Not actually sure how many of the 115 voted for, and how many against. It might be a democratic secret.]

June 2013

57 people voted in favour of changing things back the way they were before the last time they changed their mind.

[Nobody asked me. Fair enough – I might have just complained the more things change the more they stay the same.]



The Faceless Hacks often change the Face of the Nation if they suspect voters hate the Face. 

But something far worse has happened in Australia recently;

few voters like the current Face of the Nation,

but the Faceless Party Hacks won’t replace him at all.

So what's happening? Can't the Faceless Party Hacks find anyone better? 

And what can voters do about it? 
Even less than when there is an election: Nothing.

--oo0oo--

In Australia, the Queen is represented by a Governor General.

Q. Who protects us from bad Government?
A. The Governor General!

Q. Who chooses the Governor General who protects us from bad Government?
A. The [potentially] bad Government!

This system of choosing a leader and a protector just doesn’t seem terribly democratic or safe. The British people might be okay with it, but that’s their problem. [And secretly I think it really is their problem].

In Great Britain, the Queen doesn’t really get to say “Nope, don’t like it” and reject a law – but at least the British Parliament doesn’t decide who should be Queen.

You might say I’m being unfair – ‘cos in 1975 the Australian Governor General noticed our bills weren't getting paid, and suggested we need an election. The Governor General is able to call an election, but really has no “Nope don’t like the law” power at all. Governments can, and sometimes do, pass bad laws.

The British System relies on people choosing a philosophy and sticking with it - but what if everyone sticks with a party philosophy except the party?

In Australia in 2015, the so called philosophy of each major Party has changed.
  • Great money-management with a good social conscience has become "stuff-you, stuff-them".
  • Great social conscience with mediocre money-management has become "anything you can stuff, we can stuff harder."

Winning matters. That's all. As an end in itself. Parties win - People lose.

--oo0oo--

One thing that could make this country a lot more democratic is a PRESIDENT.

We were asked in 1999 if we wanted a Republic with a President, but it was just more of the same with a name change: The Parliament still choosing the toothless protector, not the people.

 


What we could and should demand is the right to Democratically elect a President.
We could have a President with at least 7 and a 1/2 million or so votes - instead of a leader with just 60,000. Instead of a leader with just 57 votes.

We might get a President who will still disappoint or embarrass us, but what if it was someone who had to actually say something positive to get elected, or even someone with a vision? It would be a nice change to hear a speech from someone who has to appeal to more than just a few faceless party hacks.

A Democratically elected President could even have a little bit of “Nope, don’t like that law power” [but not too much]. Really, anyone with a good reason to speak their mind would be better than someone with a good reason to keep their mouth shut.

 

And, seriously, the Queen deserves a lot more respect than some of the Faces we’ve had lately could ever earn.
 

You can read the text of the draft here or PM me through the facebook page and I will happily email you a more readable PDF. The draft DOES need everybody's input, it is just designed to start discussions. 
 
Please join the discussion if you agree Australia needs a new and more democratic constitution. If you don't want to use blogger, you can discuss the idea via facebook.  

14 September 2015;
Turnbull wins 54 to 44!!!


 

Tuesday, 21 July 2015

WHO WINS, WHO LOSES, WHO CARES?


Every time there is an election, I'm reminded of the graffiti "Don't Vote, it only encourages them!"

It's also often said "Parties don't win elections, parties lose them".

In queues at polling booths every ten minutes we hear something like: "I'm just here to cross my name off - they are all *&^%@#$#s."

It’s official – Australians are fed up


We often express our frustration by fixating on the negatives of one politician or another, but I'm not sure even THAT helps. Behind every good laugh is a feeling we are being treated with contempt. It's easy to be distracted from the REAL problem which is that we have a totally dud constitution.



 
We are governed by a constitution written when few people had the right to vote. It's a constitution cobbled together by people who desperately wanted to abolish the taxes they paid to do business across state borders, or by others who, to our ongoing shame, were desperate to keep Australia White.


Start of Railway from WA to SA - 1915
 
It was cobbled together at a time when people could only travel any distance by horse, or ship, or camel. Before phones existed. At a time when - despite the pitifully small population - the cost of State governments actually made sense.

Dreams of freedom or democracy
couldn't have been further from the minds of our
current constitution's authors.

If lies become truths simply through repetition, one of the biggest lies has to be that we live in a real democracy.

When it is said we get the government we deserve, the unspoken assumption is that we choose our government - in Australia that is simply not true. There are several reasons for this, but our current Constitution is the biggest one.

The government has issued a discussion paper for improving the constitution and dealing with voter dissatisfaction. The dissatisfaction has been acknowledged, but the intent is the same; to simply fiddle with a totally defective constitution.

Aren't governments supposed to help CREATE jobs,
not just blame people for economic mismanagement?

Our constitution has changed over the years in ways that have made it more useless than it already was - so much so that it is like a 120 year old hammer that has had two new heads and four new handles and doesn't work at all anymore.

The 1901 Constitution was NOT originally designed to let
Federal Governments pork-barrel State Elections
 
We will never get better government until we have a whole new constitution that provides for a truly democratic process, spells out the contract between people and government, protects the rights of the people, and ensures people have a real voice.

Is a new constitution even possible? Yes. Support for it won't develop overnight, but with enough support it is possible.

Maybe we could start by looking at what we do want, and getting stuck a little less on what we don’t want. Like choices between policies that aren't all the same.


 

Here are just a few things I do want

·         I want to know who I am voting for when I vote.

·         I want to take away the power of the Prime Minister to embroil us in military action without any real checks and balances.

·         I want Politicians to stop talking about voters as if we are scum.

·         I want all Australians to have more influence over what happens anywhere in Australia – not just their own state. I might live in Victoria, but the Barrier Reef is as much mine as any other Australian’s.

·         I want whistleblowers protected by a law that can’t be changed too easily.

·         I want politicians to be more accountable. A LOT more accountable.

·         I want politicians to not be able to vote against a tax they have outstanding.

·         I want people to get hip replacements in a reasonable amount of time – not have to wait 5 years [during which they receive benefits instead of working and paying taxes]

·         I want to NOT subsidise religious instruction.

·         I want companies that trade in Australia – using Australia’s infrastructure – to pay taxes in Australia

Stuff like that.    A HEAP of stuff like that.

A lot of this would change if we had a decent constitution. 

What would YOU like, that would make Australia a better democracy?

Jane