Is the Constitution in need of change?

What are some of the key arguments that is not in need of change? The Australian Constitution works well and there is no need to change any of it. Critically assess this statement.

Strengths
total concept of Federalism Judicial review is a key tenet of the federal system and another direct copy from America. High Court..Rule of Law... Strengths seen in section 72 The British monarchy providing a stable force for government Separation of powers

Strengths
Although the powers of the Queen and the Governor-General have since become ambiguous, their offices are respected institutions of Australia. The Australian Constitution is written There is the chance to change the Constitution

Strengths
The conventions of responsible government, adopted from Britains Westminster system, can be seen as a strength, as it allows ministers to be held accountable for their actions, even though the Constitution does contain such law.

Strengths
The writers envisaged some situations that could cause trouble and provided answers eg Double Dissolution [6] and Joint Sittings [1] Bicameral parliament Served Australia well for over a centuryone of the oldest continuous democracies in the world Stable democracy responsive to and representative of the people

Is the Constitution in need of change?

What are some of the key arguments that is in need of change? Weaknesses?

Weaknesses
1975 Constitutional Crisis Section 53 Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government

Bill of Rights
s 41 the right to vote; s 51(xxxi) the right not to have the Commonwealth acquire property, except on just terms; s 80 the right to trial by jury; s 116 the right to freedom of religion;

1996 Albert Langer imprisoned for 10 weeks for distributing leaflets encouraging voters to put the candidates of the ALP and the Coalition equal last Stolen Generation ..In 1997 The Bringing them Home Commission reported that as many as 1 in 3 aboriginal children were forcibly removed from their homes in the period 1910 to 1970

Ambiguous wording in some sections

Section 62 There shall be a Federal Executive Council to advise the Governor-General in the Government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure

Out of touch
Established by men of property and no representation of women nor indigenous people and thus out of touch in todays C 21 society It is totally in the language of the late nineteenth century

Referenda
Include a responsible method by which the people can propose amendments to the Constitution and amend it by referendum Too hard to pass a referenda question..s128 Citizens Initiated Referenda as a possible answer

Specific problems
Section 44 ss 4 again and indeed it can be a good point for analysis......any person who ...holds an office of profit under the crown .....shall be incapable of being chosen or sitting as a senator or member of the house of representatives

Another way of thinking

Consider the alternative as exists in America with a different definition of separation of powers

Outdated?
Section 51 part 6 is to some people symptomatic of the antiquated nature of the total document.....refers to the navy and military defence of the Commonwealth.... and not the air force Some would see section 68 as outdated as see and typical of the document.......the command of the naval and military forces is vested in the Governor General

 Under section 53 of the Constitution, the Senate does not have the power to initiate or amend a supply bill, yet nor does it have the obligation to pass such a Bill ..this is seen as a key part of the 1975 Constitutional Crisis.

No mention of.
No mention of neither the Prime Minister nor political parties No mention of local government..did try this one in the 1988 referenda..it got about 35% support

One argument runs that the Con.

Needs some reference to indigenous peoples in the preamble a matter for a future referenda.perhaps the near future

The Act is incomplete.[WA\.

..whereas the people of New South Wales, V, S, Q and T ..have agrees to unite..