TOPIC:

While the bludgers know they don't have to agree to any change the threat to secede needs to become reality to drag those bastards kicking and screaming to the table when they realize the consequences. But we either need a political leader with the balls to put the states interests first and not their own personal preservation or we need someone to enter the fray from left field.

Twiggy has already led the call from the big boys in town. Forget the Western Force Twiggy there are bigger fish to fry.

Collier was personally against leaving the Commonwealth.

ArkRoyal wrote: jack -- that is true mate; but the UK does have the Act of Union of 1707, which actually specifies that the union will never be broken -- ie. an Act relating directly to Scotland's constitutional status. In other words the whole referendum in Scotland could have been illegal. I am not sure what happened in this regard. It is possible that they may have revised the 1707 Act to make the referendum legal

Yep, I would agree with you 100 per cent on our Aussie Constitution. I guess Norman Morre could argue that it does not actually prohibit secession?

The Act of Union only needs to be unilaterally repealed in Scotland for it to lose effect, regardless the agreement was that should the referendum get up both houses would repeal it at the same time.
Ireland unilaterally repealed the union with the UK after independence in 1922, the British never repealed it in the UK as the remnant on its possession remained Northern Ireland, it remains in place today as the same Act even though it refers to Ireland and not Northern Ireland, it of course has no legal force in the Republic of Ireland.

BC wrote: jack ....this issue transcends politics but also think it's a nonsense and will never happen mainly because there's no legislative or constitutional trigger to let it happen. for mine it's a thought bubble from the Libs in WA trying to stay relevant.

Although I have always liked the idea and am more in favour of it now than ever, for the same reasons I think its both legally and constitutionally impossible for it to ever happen, an Australia wide ref would never get up allowing us to leave, so its basically dead in the water save a unilateral declaration of independence Rhodesia style with all the problems that would bring. So its basically dead in the water for mine.

You do not need a federal referndum to change the constitution. The precedent was set with the 1986 Acts which were not put to a referendum.

ArkRoyal wrote: You do not need a federal referndum to change the constitution. The precedent was set with the 1986 Acts which were not put to a referendum.

The only way it can be changed is pursuant to Section 128 and that requires a referendum.

In other words, the 1986 Acts -- federal and imperial

changed the Commonwealth's constitution
changed WA's realtionship with the the crown and the UK

without a referendum

remembering that there is no power in the fderal constition to interfer with the states in anyway, especially in relation to their respective constitutions.

ArkRoyal wrote: In other words, the 1986 Acts -- federal and imperial

changed the Commonwealth's constitution
changed WA's realtionship with the the crown and the UK

without a referendum

remembering that there is no power in the fderal constition to interfer with the states in anyway, especially in relation to their respective constitutions.

The Australia Acts didn't change a single word of the Australian Constitution, all they did was remove the UKs Parliaments Power to legislate in Australia, in terms of the State Parliaments which have nothing to do with the Australian Constitution.

I am against secessio, but if I was premier the 1986 Act as it applies Western Australia would go -- the rest of them can please themselves. It was only forced through by Burke and Hawke.

The thing is Baz that the 1986 Act might not have actually changed the federal Constitutuon, but that is hardly the point. What it did do, was give the Commonwelath powers over states, particularly in relation to the position of the Crown in each state, something it was never givei in 1901.

The appropriate thing to do would have been to have a referendum Weatern Australia on the act.

It was a power grab by Canberra dressed up with Australian nationalism and too many people got sucked in by the ALP.