Australian Republic Constitution
Australian Flag News Get Involved! Events Resources
Main Menu
ACM Home
About ACM
ACM News
Anthems
Afghan Court Martial
Book Reviews
The Commonwealth
Contact ACM
Convenor's Column
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Cost of Republicanism to the Taxpayer
Crowned Republic
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Event News
Federalism and the Mining Tax
Fiji
Flag: Keep The Flag
Governor of New South Wales
Head of State
Keating-Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
Knights & Dames
Latest News and Opinions
Links
Mate for a Head of State
Media and monarchy
Nile Inquiry
Opinion Polling
Orthodoxy and Monarchy
People's Republic?
Plebiscites
Prince Andrew
Prince Charles
Prince Harry
Prince Philip
Prince William & Catherine
Prince William In Australia
Prince William: The Early Years
Racist Republic?
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Resources
Return the Governor
Royal Commissions
Royal Finances
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
The Succession
2020 Summit
Join our Mailing List
See our selection of videos from across the world:-
ACM Videos
AussieCrownTV - ACM's own TV channel:
Aussie Crown TV
Follow ACM on Facebook:
Facebook
Self Funded Monarchy
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Finances
Royal Finances
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Head of State
Prince Philip
Prince Philip
Special Caribbean Report: Crown & Commonwealth

      Crown

The Commonwealth
The Commonwealth
Prince Harry
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Prince Andrew
Knights & Dames
Knights & Dames
The King's Speech: read the book, see the film.

The King's Speech

Watch the 2010 Neville Bonner Oration: Tony Abbott.
Tony Abbott
Nile Inquiry
Royal Commissions
Royal Commissions
Opinion Polls

 

Plebiscites
Plebiscites
2020 Summit
2020 Summit
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Afghan Court Martial
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Mate for a Head of State
Mate for a Head of State
Racist Republic?
Racist Republic
A People's Republic?
A People's republic?
Keating Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
The Keating Turnbull Republic
Crowned Republic
Crowned Republic
Polls
Republicans' Best Asset?
Is David Flint ( National Convenor since 1998) the republicans best asset, as some claim?
ACM Home arrow Convenor's Column arrow A double dissolution is not a guarantee

A double dissolution is not a guarantee Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Wednesday, 14 October 2009
Even if the government secures and wins a double dissolution election on the ETS ( the emissions trading scheme or as the government prefers the carbon pollution reduction scheme) and a joint sitting passes the legislation, there are potential constitutional problems.

In 1975, the High Court ruled that one of the bills passed by our one and only joint sitting in 1974, the Petroleum and Minerals Authority Act, should not have been submitted to the sitting. The Court found that the Senate had not failed to pass the bill as the Constitution requires. 

Image
[ Our only joint sitting, in 1974: National Archives of Australia]


Former judge, attorney-general and solicitor-general  Robert Ellicott QC points out (
The Australian 10/10) that in that case, Sir Ninian Stephen said:

"Assume that in relation to any bill coming before it the Senate may be seen to have engaged in those customary processes of debate, consideration and, in appropriate cases, inquiry by select committee and the like, which are the familiar practices of parliamentary democracy according to the Westminster model ...

".... assume also that examination does not reveal that in the particular instance there has been such an excessive indulgence in these processes, having regard to all the circumstances, including the importance, complexity and, perhaps, novelty of the measure in question, as will itself indicate that the law-making function has been abandoned in favour of mere dilatory evasion of that function.

" In such a case it cannot, in my view, be said that there has occurred any failure to pass.".

"If advantage be taken of those same processes, designed for the proper consideration by legislators of the propriety and wisdom of measures, for ulterior purposes, for delaying, rather than considering and then passing or rejecting, a proposed law, the Senate will then, in terms of section 57, have failed to pass the proposed law."

Mr. Ellicott asks what then would be the case if the Senate decided, for example, to set up a select committee to examine, make recommendations about and report to the Senate on the proceedings at the Copenhagen climate meeting in December and decided to postpone any further debate until the next session next year.

He believes it would be debatable whether the Senate had failed to pass the legislation and thus justified a double dissolution.



...precedents...



In 1951, the then Governor-General and former NSW Labor Premier, Sir William McKell accepted advice that the reference of a bill by the Senate to a select committee represented a failure to pass. He granted Sir Robert Menzies a double dissolution.

In 1974 the Governor General, Sir Paul Hasluck, granted Mr Whitlam a double dissolution on the basis of six bills including the  Petroleum and Minerals Authority Bill. Later that year, after Mr. Whitlam won the election, the new Governor- General, Sir John Kerr, agreed to all bills being determined by a joint sitting.




...and in 2009, who can advise the Governor-General?...


 

This year, 2009,  the Governor-General may be asked to grant a double dissolution because it is said the  Senate has failed to pass the ETS legislation.

The question may arise as to whether Her Excellency would be entitled to seek opinions as to whether the constitutional provision has been fulfilled?

Mr. Ellicott believes Her Excellency would be entitled to seek the opinion of outside constitutional experts. Mr. Whitlam thought the Governor-General was restricted to requesting advice provided by the ministers.  Sir John Kerr thought otherwise and precedent supports this. As the exercise of the reserve powers is a matter for her discretion, why should she be only advised by the ministers?

It is unlikely that the High Court would entertain an attempt to block the holding of an election or even the submission of a bill to a joint sitting. The exercise of these powers by the representative of the Australian Crown is thought to be non-justiciable; that is beyond the powers of the Court.

But the validity of an Act which has been given the Royal Assent after being approved at a joint sitting can always be challenged.

Finally of course, a government controlling both houses would not have to worry. But if the government did not control the Senate, and if the ETS were validly passed, the crucial regulations could still be disallowed.
     

  

 

 
< Prev   Next >
ROYAL VISIT 2014

Image

The Book Depository
Image
Image
Prince William: The Early Years
Prince Charles

Prince Charles

Constitutional Monarchies & Republics Compared

Image


Defend the Constitution and Flag
Australian Election Watch

10th Anniversary Neville Bonner Oration

11th Anniversary and Appeal

Crowned Republic 

   Keep The Australian Flag
Return the Governor to Government House
The Succession
The Succession
The Governor of New South Wales
Governor of New South Wales
Fiji
Fijian soldier
Media and Monarchy
Media and Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
Royal Yacht Britannia
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Events
December 2017 January 2018
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 48 1 2
Week 49 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Week 50 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Week 51 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Week 52 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Week 53 31
Latest ACM News: -