My name is Bret Busby, and I have lived in Armadale, WA, for about 22 years (as at September 2015).
The state parliament of Western Australia, and, the federal parliament of Australia, do not provide democratic government, and the members of those parliaments, are not selected by democratic elections.
The only truly democratic (and, it also happens to be the simplest and most efficient) way of selecting members of parliaments, is for all members of each house of each parliament, to be selected by elections using only first past the post voting.
At present (as at September 2015), the method for selection of members of the lower house of each of these two parliaments, is by a corrupt and designed to be excessively complicated and excessively inefficient method of "election", where the winner is not the candidate who gets the most votes for the candidate, but is instead, the candidate who gets the least votes against the candidate. The method of "voting", in "elections", involves voting against people, rather than voting for people.
The way of selecting the members of the upper house of each of the state and federal parliaments, is simply too complicated to easily explain, and, too complicated for most people to understand. It is designed to prevent understanding, by the common people, so that the selection method can be rigged to install whoever the people in power, want installed, with the voting public, simply not understanding what is happening (apart from when thousands of ballot papers, get lost, then, when that is reported, we know that that has happened, and that yet another bodgy "election", has occurred).
And, of particular note, regarding the federal parliament of Australia, is the declaration by the then Chief Judge of the High Court Of Australia, Murray Gleeson, at The Ninth Lucinda Lecture, Monash University, 24 July 2001, "The Shape of Representative Democracy", where he said, of the Australian Constitution that the Constitution does not provide any right "that all voters can please themselves whether to vote and whom to vote for". So, as stated by the then Chief Judge of the High Court, the Australian people do not get to choose the members of the federal parliament of Australia. We do not get to elect them. We are prevented from having a democratically elected government.
And, as acknowledged by that Chief Judge of the High Court of Australia, regarding the "referendum" that gave "approval" for the Australian federal Constitution, women and Aborigines did not have suffrage - "bearing in mind the context in which the Constitution was framed. Most Australian women were not entitled to vote. No one was compelled to vote. Aboriginal Australians were not counted."
So, the Australian federal Constitution was not approved by a majority of the Australian people, by way of a referendum of all Australian people.
This, then, raises an interesting point.
Is the Australian Constitution legally valid?
A fundamental principle of law, applicable in Australia and in England, and, in the USA (upon the ideas of which, the Australian federal Constitution is claimed to be based), and, in many countries of the world, is the principle of natural justice, known as "audi alteram partem", which dates back over two thousand years, to a line in Seneca's Medea, which, translated, roughly means "If a decision is made, without hearing all of the parties to be affected by the decision, then, while the decision may have been right, the making of the decision, will not have been right", and, that principle has been applied, for hundreds of years, in courts in many countries, including constitutional courts, to rule decisions invalid in law.
So, as, clearly, the majority of the Australian people who would be affected by the Constitution, were not allowed to be heard (to vote either for or against), in the making of the decision as to whether the Constitution should be approved, the question arises; was the Australian federal Constitution, validly approved, and, therefore, is the Australian federal Constitution, legally valid?
If the legal validity of the Australian federal Constitution, is based on the premise that it was approved by a referendum of the Australian people, and, it was in fact, not approved by a majority of the Australian people, by a majority vote of the Australian people, then, the legal validity of the Australian federal Constitution, is questionable.
To be democratic, a parliament should comprise of a single chamber (or "house"), with only one member of that chamber, per electorate.
Therefore, neither the state parliament of Western Australia, nor the federal parliament of Australia, are democratic, nor are the members of each parliament, selected by democratic elections.
Neither can the voters sack either the member(s) of each parliament,
that are supposed to represent the constituencies of the voters, or,
the whole of each parliament, as is provided elsewhere, by means of Recall Elections (see
" A recall election (also called a recall referendum or representative recall) is a procedure by which voters can remove an elected official from office through a direct vote before his or her term has ended. Recalls, which are initiated when sufficient voters sign a petition, have a history dating back to the ancient Athenian democracy and are a feature of several contemporary constitutions. "
Neither do either the state parliament of the state of Western Australia, or, the federal parliament of the federation of Australia, via the respective constitutions, provide for Citizen Initiated Referenda, also known as Direct Citizens Initiatives. See
" In political science, an initiative (also known as a popular or citizens' initiative) is a means by which a petition signed by a certain minimum number of registered voters can force a public vote (plebiscite). The initiative may take the form of a direct initiative or an indirect initiative. In a direct initiative, a measure is put directly to a vote after being submitted by a petition. In an indirect initiative, a measure is first referred to the legislature, and then put to a popular vote only if not enacted by the legislature. The vote may be on a proposed statute, constitutional amendment, charter amendment or local ordinance, or to simply oblige the executive or legislature to consider the subject by submitting it to the order of the day. It is a form of direct democracy. "
The state parliament of Western Australia, does not have a state constitution that is subject to, and, can only be changed by a constitutional referendum of, the voters of the state, unlike the federal constitution of Australia, which can only be changed by a constitutional referendum of the voters of the federation of Australia.
That means that the parliament of the state of Western Australia, can change the constitution of the state of Western Australia, to benefit the members of the state parliament of the state of Western Australia, with the voters of the state of Western Australia, being excluded from having any say in either the constitution of the state, or, in any changes to the constitution of the state. So, the state of Western Australia, is governed by a dictatorship, and, not by a democracy.
A good example of this, is where the state parliament of Western Australia amended the constitution of the state of Western Australia, so that the parliament could increase the number of members of the upper house of the state parliament, as it wants, in its looting of the state, but, to reduce the number of members of the corrupt upper house of the state parliament, a referendum of all of the voters of the state, is required to approve the reduction, and, to overturn that corrupt change to the Western Australian state constitution, a referendum of the voters of the state of Western Australia, is required to approve the overturning of that provision.
And, as the Western Australian state constitution does not provide for Citizen Initiated Referenda, we, the people, can not call for referenda to reduce the number of seats in the upper house of the Western Australian state parliament - only the crooked members of the state parliament, who would not reduce their numbers, anyway, have the power to call for a state referendum to reduce the number of their members. So, it is the proverb "Power corrupts, and, absolute power corrupts absolutely", and, the more power the state parliament gives itself, the more corrupt, it makes itself.
So, the corrupt state parliament of Western Australia, has given itself yet another absolute power, in that, even if the people of Western Australia, by way of referendum, reduce the number of members of the upper house of the state parliament, the state parliament can then, overturn the referendum outcome, and, again, increase the number of members of the upper house of the state parliament, so as to give more overpaid jobs to their friends.
The Western Australian state parliament is a house of corruption. And, that is apart from the bribes paid, to secure legislation from the members of the parliament, who are paid the bribes. And, they all protect each other, so, the bribery is simply a Standard Operating Procedure on the Western Australian state parliament.
Neither the state parliament of the state of Western Australia, nor the federal parliament of the federation of Australia, allow the people of Western Australia, to have human rights. The state parliament of the state of Western Australia, does not provide legislation providing human rights to the people of the state of Western Australia, and, the federal parliament of the federation of Australia, decided that all people living in Australia and its territories, are sub-human, and are prohibited from having human rights. See my web page about this, at http://www.armadale-wa.net/politics/HumanRights.html .
Further to all of this, the federal parliament of the federation of Australia, has decided that the people of Australia, should not be given a say, as to whether Australia should become a self-governing, autonomous, republic, or, whether Australia should remain as a colony of the British Empire. Now, this issue involves two separate questions - the first, being "should Australia have its own head of state, or, should Australia have a foreign power, as its head of state?", and, the second question, is "should Australia continue to be a colony of the British Empire, or, should Australia become an autonomous, independent, self-governing country?". The federal parliament of the federation of Australia, through electoral fraud, has prevented the voters of Australia, from making those decisions.
So, the state parliament of Western Australia, and, the federal parliament of the federation of Australia, have acted in contempt of the people of Australia.
So, what can we, the people, do about all of this? Not much. We are subject to a tyrannical dictatorship, at each of the state level, and, the federal level.
All that we can do, is, at each parliamentary "election", and "by-election", at both the state and federal levels, since the method of "voting", in each, involves voting against candidates, rather than voting for candidates, is this.
1. In the lower house of the parliament;
1).Where a candidate is seeking re-election (where the candidate is the incumbent, and, wants to be re-elected to continue to hold the seat), put that candidate last in your preferences; vote against that candidate.
2) Where a seat has been held by a particular party, and the sitting member is being replaced as a candidate, with a new candidate to represent that party, vote against the candidate for the party that has been holding the seat.
3) Where a new seat has been created, if a candidate for the existing government, is standing, vote against that candidate. If the list of candidates does not include a candidate for the government, vote against the other major party.
2. In the upper house of the parliament;
1) Mark the government candidates in the order that they are listed, with the highest preference number, going to the first on the list, so that the candidate that the government wants most to get elected, goes to the "bottom" of your preferences.
2) For the government coalition partner party (for the Liberal Party, it is the National Party; for the ALP, it is the "Greens"), mark the candidate that is at the top of the list for that party, second bottom of your list of preferences.
3) For the next-dominant non-government party, mark the candidate that is at the top of the list for that party, next bottom of your list of preferences.
4) Go to the next candidate down the list, for each of the parties, in the preceding three steps, marking the candidate that is next at the top of the list for that party, next bottom of your list of preferences. Do this, until you have eliminated all of the candidates who are members of the major parties in the upper house.
5) Similarly, next mark all of the sitting members for the minor parties in the upper house, next at the bottom of your list of preferences.
6) Then, with the remaining candidates, if you have one or more candidates that you would like to see elected to the parliament, put them in your order of preference, from the top of your preferences, down.
7) Then, with the remaining candidates, put them in your order of preferences, in reverse order, so that the highest on the list, for any group, goes to the bottom of your list of preferences, for that group, and, keep doing this, until you have used up all of your preferences.
You may need to get a printed list of the candidates, as they will appear on the ballot paper, before you actually cast your vote, to practice this, to make sure that you get the numbering right, and do not miss any numbers, or, duplicate numbers. "Voting" in upper house elections, is designed to be as difficult, as complicated, as messy, and, as expensive (in the counting, etc), as possible.
For far too long, the members of the parliaments, have held the attitude that the voting public are stupid, and will vote for the members of the parliament, as the members of the parliaments want the voters to vote, regardless of how badly the members of the parliaments, treat the voters, and, without the voters considering how the voters should vote and why the voters should vote the way that the voters vote.
This should change, and the members of the parliaments, should be made to sit up and take notice of the voters, and, made to start to act in the interests of the voters, rather than the members of the parliaments, simply acting to benefit themselves.
Voters should vote as suggested above, to cause upsets in the parliaments, at each election and by-election, until the following conditions are met:
1. For the state of Western Australia, a constitution is approved by a referendum of the voters of the state, which constitution can thereafter, only be changed by a constitutional referendum of the voters of the state.
2. Each particular parliament has its constitution changed, so as to
1) Abolish the upper house of the parliament,
2) Require all members of the parliament, to be selected by elections involving only first past the post voting,
3) Require all electorates to have no more than 10% more voters than any other electorate,
4) Provide for recall elections whereby a petition signed by at least 5% of the applicable voters, calling for it, would require a new election for either an electorate or for the whole of the parliament,
5) Provide for Direct Citizen Initiatives, or, Citizen Initiated Referenda, whereby a petition signed by at least 5% of the eligible voters for the jurisdiction (for state or federal) requires an issue to be put to a binding referendum,
6) Make all current and future legislation, including the constitution, subject to a binding Human Rights Act including at least the rights as defined by the proposed modified Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, as mentioned on the above human rights web page.
3. For the state of Western Australia, and, for the federation of Australia, a binding referendum to be held, to determine whether each should have a head of state, from the particular jurisdiction, and, representing the people of the jurisdiction, or, the head of state to continue being a representative of the monarch of England.
4. A federal constitutional referendum to determine the question as to whether Australia should continue to be a colony of the British Empire, in being a member of the "British Commonwealth", or, whether Australia should become an independent, autonomous, self-governing country.
If enough of the voting public, vote as I have suggested, until such time as those conditions are met, then we may achieve those conditions, and, it is the only peaceful way, that we are likely to achieve those conditions. Then, and, only then, can we have relatively democratic government, in the state of Western Australia, and, in the federation of Australia.
I can be contacted by email by clicking on my name at the end of this sentence - Bret .
This web page is authorised and printed by Bret Busby, 2 Pelham Street Armadale.
(Whilst the web page may be printed by someone else, I am advised that the wording in the above sentence, is required by the legislation governing the election.)
This web page was last updated on 25 April 2018