Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A charter of rights and aspirations: relevance to modern Australia

By Robert McClelland - posted Wednesday, 15 November 2000


Again, it would be entirely counter-productive to thrust upon the Australian people a Bill of Rights created solely by politicians without their input. In other words, the Charter of rights should include principles desired by the overwhelming majority Australian people.

This would, I imagine, result in a Conservative document and probably one that would protect a relatively narrow span of rights. Nevertheless, the alternative of including an extensive and detailed list of rights would have several dangers.

Previous attempts to enact a Bill of Rights met with strong opposition from those who either argued for or against the inclusion of a right to life and, specifically, whether the right should be extended to unborn babies.

Advertisement

If the focus was on a relatively narrow span of widely accepted rights expressed with broad language there is no need to enter into the minutiae of those controversial and destructive debates.

The inclusion of a statement of Aspirations

I am particularly attracted to the inclusion of a statement of aspirations in a second and discreet Part of the Charter of Rights that would not be reviewable in a court of law.

I would envisage that such a statement of aspirations would nonetheless be something requiring the attention of the Joint Standing Committee on the Charter of Rights or other properly designated Committee.

A precedent for the inclusion of such aspirations is the South African Bill of Rights which, for instance, contains a reference to the separate aspirations of equitable access to natural resources, housing, health care, food, water, Social Security and education.

Should a Charter of Rights and Aspirations Bind the States and Territories?

The defence of States’ rights was a significant reason for the failure of previous attempts to introduce a Bill of Rights. The concern is that, being a Statute of the Commonwealth Parliament, a Federal Charter of Rights could be expressed to prevail over state legislation.

In the context of legislative action concerns for State and Territory rights could be addressed by specifically acknowledging the right of the States and Territories to legislate inconsistently with the Charter provided they use the mechanism of a "notwithstanding clause". This would itself provide some disincentive to departing from the terms of the Charter and, at least, would have the effect of ensuring that the impact on human rights would become part of the debate.

Advertisement

Given that the main thrust of the emphasis I am proposing is one of developing a consensus for a national standard I am inclined to the view that a Federal Charter of Rights should apply only to Federal rather than State or Territory executive action.

That is not to say that the Charter should not be developed as a model that could be voluntarily applied throughout Australia to all legislative and executive action. Change of this sort should move with broader community acceptance and success of an effectively working Federal model would be the best endorsement for application at a State and Territory level.

Summation and Conclusion

Based on history alone one could not be criticised for a lack of optimism in pursuit of the long-standing policy commitment to an Australian Bill of Rights. However, history has moved on and we have seen New Zealand, Canada and, most recently Great Britain, all common law countries, introducing Bills of Rights for their citizens.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

This is an edited extract from a speech given to the University of Technology Law School Alumni Dinner at the Sydney Casino on 2nd June 2000.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Robert McClelland MP is Shadow Minister for Defence and Federal Member for Barton (NSW). Previous ministerial positions include Shadow Attorney-General, Shadow Minister for Justice and Community Security and Shadow Minister for Homeland Security.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Robert McClelland
Related Links
Robert McClelland's Home Page
Photo of Robert McClelland
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy