DOCSLIB.ORG

Unit 1 – Constitution P

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Unit 1 – Constitution P UNIT 1 – CONSTITUTION P. KAPITANIAK PREAMBLE This course aims at introducing you to the political institutions and legal system of the British people. Before we start, we would like to ask you whether you understand the different names the British use for their country: the United Kingdom, Britain, Great Britain, England, the British Isles. What do all these different names indicate? • The United Kingdom (the U.K.) means the same as Britain. • Britain comprises Great-Britain and Northern Ireland. • Great Britain comprises England, Wales and Scotland. For many people, England is the leading country. The capital of the U.K., London, is in England. The Queen, the Government and Parliament work in London. English is the official language spoken in England. The geographical term 'British Isles' is used for all the islands composing the archipelago (Great Britain, Ireland and the smaller islands). To sum up, Britain comprises Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland) and Northern Ireland, and is a member state of the European Union. Its full name is: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. THE CONSTITUTION AND CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY The United Kingdom of Great Britain is divided into four countries with three distinct jurisdictions, each having its own court system and legal profession. 1+2. England and Wales have a common legislature and court system. English lawyers can practise in courts located in Wales and vice versa. 3. Scotland with a devolved legislature on some matters and a separate court system and judiciary. Scots law is technically as foreign to English law as the law of France. 4. Northern Ireland with a devolved legislature on some matters and a separate court system and judiciary closely modelled on the English system. English lawyers do not practise in Northern Ireland and vice versa. These pages are written from an English viewpoint and so we will deal mainly with England and Wales. 1 UNIT 1 – CONSTITUTION P. KAPITANIAK Like all member countries of the European Union, the United Kingdom is a democracy, but its major feature is that it is one of the oldest constitutional monarchies in the world. This means that the United Kingdom is a monarchy... with a constitution. The concept dates back to the 17th century when the Stuart kings stepped outside the limits of their power. The English monarchy was absolute then. There had been parliaments in the kingdom since 1295, but they had a roughly consultative function. Gradually they demanded more power. There was a Civil War from 1642 to 1648 between partisans of King Charles I and those of Parliament, at the end of which the king was beheaded. Those familiar with Alexandre Dumas’s Vingt ans après may remember this tragic episode. A troubled period followed after which another king, James II, was forced to abdicate in 1688. When James’s daughter, Mary, and her husband, William of Orange were invited to take the throne, Parliament imposed limits on their power in the Bill of Rights of 1689 which was the first constitutional rule after the Magna Carta (1215). A constitutional monarchy replaced the absolute monarchy. For the first time, the supremacy of Parliament was recognized and the nation acquired the right to change a monarch it could no longer bear for a better one. Thenceforth, Parliament had much more power than the sovereign and became the principal source of authority in the country. Gradually, rules have been made in order to refine, amend, correct the way the country is to be governed. The result is that people talk about the British Constitution because there are constitutional rules, but there is no single written document you could refer to as such. In contrast with most other countries, it is not possible to point to one text and say “this is our constitution”, nor is there any doctrine of the supremacy of the constitution over other legislation as in the United States, nor any constitutional court, nor any formal doctrine of separation of powers. I. THE CONSTITUTION There are five different elements which compose the constitution of the United Kingdom. Since they are not codified in one single document, as in most countries, they must be consulted separately. 1. Parliamentary legislation, also called “Statute Law” Traditionally, the most important source of the constitution comes from Parliament itself, when it legislates on a matter concerning political organization or the 2 UNIT 1 – CONSTITUTION P. KAPITANIAK guarantees of the rights and freedoms of individuals. Among the most significant Acts of Parliament, also called statutes, there are: - the Magna Carta (1215) providing the first charter of individual liberties, including the right of trial by jury, habeas corpus (the right for a person to know the charge brought against him) and the principle of no taxation without representation - the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701) which limit the power of the monarchy - the Reform Bill (1832) and the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, modifying the power and structure of Parliament - the European Community Act of 1972 and the Single European Act of 1987 making Britain a member of the European Union. Many other laws organize the distribution and exercise of power among the organs of the state. The body of all the Acts of Parliament passed in the British Parliament is called Statute Law. Statute Law is thus that part of English law which is composed of legislation, in other words, all the laws or all the statutes. 2. Constitutional matters decided in a court of law by judges. When judges make decisions in court their decisions are called judgments or pronouncements. Their decisions have the weight of law which will be explained in more detail later on. These judicial pronouncements are part of an immense body of law called “Case Law” and sometimes “Common Law”. Certain basic principles are derived from these decisions such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and of association. 3. E.U. Law Regulations of the European Union create individual rights and duties directly enforceable in the British Courts. European directives are not directly applicable, but Parliament is required to implement them through national legislation. The constitutional provisions, found in these sources, all have the force of law and consequently judges recognise and enforce them in court. There are two other sources of British constitutional law, but they concern the organisation and workings of government more than the lives of individual citizens. 3 UNIT 1 – CONSTITUTION P. KAPITANIAK 4. Parliamentary Privilege This is the body of law that relates to the operation of Parliament and the status of its members. The most important rule concerns freedom of speech in Parliament. What is said during debates cannot be questioned in any court or place outside. Another important privilege is the right of the House of Commons to control its composition and proceedings. The House enforces these rules itself. It can discipline its own members and take measures in cases of serious breaches of Parliamentary Privilege. 5. Constitutional Conventions This fifth source of constitutional law is made of conventions which are traditions, or customs, followed over generations; they help organize how government operates. These rules are not written in any formal document, and some are not written down at all. Judges cannot enforce them. However, these conventions are respected by everybody although they are not drafted in any specific document. The most well- known conventions are: - the convention that Parliament must meet at least once a year - the convention that the sovereign does not attend Cabinet meetings - the convention that ministers who lose the confidence of the House of Commons on a major issue must resign - the convention that the Queen does not refuse to give her Royal Assent to a law which has been passed by Parliament (The Royal Assent is the monarch’s signature symbolizing approval of a law) - the convention that the leader of the party which has won the general elections in the House of Commons automatically becomes the Prime Minister - the principle of Parliamentary Supremacy - the principle of government responsibility to Parliament. This means that ministers in the Government are collectively responsible to Parliament for their actions. It is surprising to notice that of all the constitutional rules, it is the conventions which are the most respected. These conventions are based on trust and mutual respect, and it is understandable that they make it easier to deal with some major issues and avoid potential problems. Since these rules are not formally recorded anywhere, they are not entrenched and can be amended or changed very easily by Parliament. 4 UNIT 1 – CONSTITUTION P. KAPITANIAK Judges, lawyers, and law professors also contribute to the body of legal theory known as jurisprudence. Two constitutional experts, Walter Bageot and A.V. Dicey, also contributed to the sources of British constitutional law. They emphasized two basic principles of the British Constitution: The Supremacy of Parliament and the Rule of Law. We are already familiar with the concept of parliamentary supremacy which will be further developed below. The Rule of Law establishes the absolute predominance of regular law, so that the government has no arbitrary authority over any citizen. Everybody, including every official, is subject to the ordinary law administered by the ordinary courts. A citizen’s personal freedoms are formulated and protected by the ordinary law rather than by abstract constitutional declarations. This will be developed in more detail in the chapters devoted to English law. In order to come to terms with European criteria, Tony Blair’s Government launched a series of constitutional reforms which aimed at overhauling the British political institutions. One of the reforms proposed was to draft a written constitution but the question remains in debate and nothing concrete has yet been done about it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Columbia Law Review
    COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW VOL. 99 DECEMBER 1999 NO. 8 GLOBALISM AND THE CONSTITUTION: TREATIES, NON-SELF-EXECUTION, AND THE ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING John C. Yoo* As the globalization of society and the economy accelerates, treaties will come to assume a significant role in the regulation of domestic affairs. This Article considers whether the Constitution, as originally understood, permits treaties to directly regulate the conduct of private parties without legislative implementation. It examines the relationship between the treaty power and the legislative power during the colonial, revolutionary, Framing, and early nationalperiods to reconstruct the Framers' understandings. It concludes that the Framers believed that treaties could not exercise domestic legislative power without the consent of Congress, because of the Constitution'screation of a nationallegislature that could independently execute treaty obligations. The Framers also anticipatedthat Congress's control over treaty implementa- tion through legislation would constitute an importantcheck on the executive branch'spower in foreign affairs. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................... 1956 I. Treaties, Non-Self-Execution, and the Internationalist View ..................................................... 1962 A. The Constitutional Text ................................ 1962 B. Globalization and the PoliticalBranches: Non-Self- Execution ............................................. 1967 C. Self-Execution: The InternationalistView ................
    [Show full text]
  • Canada's Evolving Crown: from a British Crown to A
    Canada’s Evolving Crown 108 DOI: 10.1515/abcsj-2014-0030 Canada’s Evolving Crown: From a British Crown to a “Crown of Maples” SCOTT NICHOLAS ROMANIUK University of Trento and JOSHUA K. WASYLCIW University of Calgary Abstract This article examines how instruments have changed the Crown of Canada from 1867 through to the present, how this change has been effected, and the extent to which the Canadian Crown is distinct from the British Crown. The main part of this article focuses on the manner in which law, politics, and policy (both Canadian and non-Canadian) have evolved a British Imperial institution since the process by which the federal Dominion of Canada was formed nearly 150 years ago through to a nation uniquely Canadian as it exists today. The evolution of the Canadian Crown has taken place through approximately fifteen discrete events since the time of Canadian confederation on July 1, 1867. These fifteen events are loosely categorized into three discrete periods: The Imperial Crown (1867-1930), A Shared Crown (1931-1981), and The Canadian Crown (1982-present). Keywords: Imperial, the London Conference, the Nickle Resolution, the British North America Act, Queen Victoria, Sovereignty, the Statute of Westminster 109 Canada’s Evolving Crown Introduction Of Canadian legal and governmental institutions, the Crown sits atop all, unifying them by means of a single institution. This Crown has remained both a symbol of strength and a connection to Canada’s historical roots. The roots of the Crown run deep and can be traced as far back as the sixteenth century, when the kings of France first established the Crown in Canada in Nouvelle-France.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Nash, the Removal of Judges Under the Act of Settlement
    PLEASE NOTE This is a draft paper only and should not be cited without the author’s express permission The Removal of Judges under the Act of Settlement (1701) Michael Nash This paper will consider the operation of the Act, the processes adopted, and the consequential outcomes. It is perhaps worth considering for a moment how important in consequence the Act was. And yet how little enthusiasm there was for it at the time, and how its passing was, in the words of Wellington later, “a damn near thing”. The Act only passed Parliament narrowly. It is said that it was carried by one vote only in Committee in the House of Commons. It is certain that the Act itself passed in the House of Commons “nemine contradicente” on May 14, 1701, but the Bill was but languidly supported. Many of the members, never more than 50 or 60 (out of a full house of 513) appear to have felt that the calling of a stranger to the throne was detestable, but the lesser of two evils. So the Bill was passed by 10% of the members. The passing of the Act is surrounded by myth, and records were then imperfectly kept, but Sir John Bowles, who introduced the Bill, was described as “a member of very little weight and authority”, who was even then thought to be disordered in his mind, and who eventually died mad! (1) Some of the great constitutional documents have been considered in a similar light: for example, the Second Reform Act in 1867. Smith, in a history of this Act, concludes that the bill survived “because a majority of the members of both Houses…dared not throw it out.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eighteenth Century
    Aula 5 THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY META Compreender o século XVII como um momento de transição na literatura inglesa, caracterizado, em sua primeira metade, pelo Neoclassicismo, e na segunda pelas primeiras manifestações do Romantismo. OBJETIVOS Ao final desta aula, o aluno deverá: Identificar e analisar as características da poesia inglesa do século XVIII, sobretudo em sua primeira metade. Familiarizar o estudante com a poesia neoclássica de Alexander Pope. PRÉ-REQUISITOS História da literatura inglesa até o século XVII. Luiz Eduardo Oliveira Literatura de Língua Inglesa II INTRODUÇÃO During the 18th century, the Enlightenment culminated in the French and American revolutions. Philosophy and science increased in promi- nence. Philosophers dreamed of a brighter age. This dream turned into a reality with the French Revolution, although it was later compromised by the excesses of the Reign of Terror of Maximilien Robespierre. At first, the monarchies of Europe embraced Enlightenment ideals, but with the French Revolution they feared losing their power and formed broad co- alitions for the counter-revolution. The Ottoman Empire experienced an unprecedented period of peace and economic expansion, taking part in no European wars from 1740 to 1768. As a consequence the empire did not share in Europe's military improvements during the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763), causing its military to fall behind and suffer defeats against Russia in the second half of the century. Fonte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18th_century DESENVOLVIMENTO As Charles II had no legitimate children, his brother James (1633-1701), who was the first in the line of succession, ascended the throne and became James II and VII from 1685 until the Glorious Revolution of 1688.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration Period Historical Overview
    Restoration period: A Historical Overview • Charles II’s accession in 1660 ending the period known in Latin as ‘Interregnum’ • The arrival of Kingship ended two decades of Civil Wars across Britain • Profound hope was restored among people that peace shall be established. • Yet conflicts in minor measure continued between three kingdoms. • Radical differences in religious and political affiliations continued. • It was also a period of colonial expansion. More facts on Restoration • In the Declaration of Breda(1660) Charles II promised “liberty to tender consciences” (religious toleration) • Act of Uniformity (1662): it required that ministers agree to an Episcopalian form of church government, with Bishops running the Church as opposed to a Presbyterian form run by the congregations’ membership. It excluded both the radical Protestants and Roman Catholics. Charles II tried to overturn this act, but Parliament made it a law in 1663. Those who refused to accept the act came to be called ‘Dissenters’ • The conflicting religious affiliations of these two groups were compounded by the differences between the three kingdoms. • Ireland had a majority of Roman Catholic population; Scotland had a Presbytarian church structure; and England had an Episcopalian church structure. • The Treaty of Dove: A secret alliance Charles II made with Louis IV, the Catholic King of France, for religious toleration and accommodation of Roman Catholics. It sparked off further controversies and conflicts as those that ended his father’s reign and life. Other developments • Glorious Revolution (1688)/(The Blood-less Revolution): The overthrow of the Catholic king, James II, who was replaced by his Protestant daughter Mary and her Dutch husband, William.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review in Kingdom and Dominions the Historical Foundations of Judicial Review in the U.K., Canada, and New Zealand
    University of Pennsylvania Judicial Review in Kingdom and Dominions The Historical Foundations of Judicial Review in the U.K., Canada, and New Zealand Abstract: Judicial review, whatever else it may be, provides a mechanism by which the judiciary can affect the implementation, contours, and the formulation of policy. As such, it provides a possible avenue of access to a variable ‘open’ state. Westminster democracies have historically avoided judicial review in order to concentrate policymaking authority in the legislature and responsible executive. In recent years a number of Westminster polities have incorporated and expanded judicial review. This paper explores how this occurred in three Westminster states, arguing that long-run processes shaped the conceptions of judges of their role in the constitutional order, affecting their willingness to assert powers of review. Importantly, structures of imperialism and federalism provided varying opportunities for the judiciary to assert this power. A full account of the emergence of judicial review needs to take account of these structural/institutional factors— the available resources of judges to assert a power to invalidate legislation and their institutionally shaped willingness to do so. I conclude with a discussion of how the different constructions of judicial review at the different moments in each state’s history affected the mobilization strategies of indigenous peoples, and the varying imposition of control by the state. David Bateman Doctoral Fellow – Penn Program in Ethnic Conflict
    [Show full text]
  • Bill C-53: Succession to the Throne Act, 2013
    Bill C-53: Succession to the Throne Act, 2013 Publication No. 41-1-C53-E 30 August 2013 Michel Bédard Legal and Social Affairs Division Parliamentary Information and Research Service Library of Parliament Legislative Summaries summarize government bills currently before Parliament and provide background about them in an objective and impartial manner. They are prepared by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service, which carries out research for and provides information and analysis to parliamentarians and Senate and House of Commons committees and parliamentary associations. Legislative Summaries are revised as needed to reflect amendments made to bills as they move through the legislative process. Notice: For clarity of exposition, the legislative proposals set out in the bill described in this Legislative Summary are stated as if they had already been adopted or were in force. It is important to note, however, that bills may be amended during their consideration by the House of Commons and Senate, and have no force or effect unless and until they are passed by both houses of Parliament, receive Royal Assent, and come into force. Any substantive changes in this Legislative Summary that have been made since the preceding issue are indicated in bold print. © Library of Parliament, Ottawa, Canada, 2013 Legislative Summary of Bill C-53 (Legislative Summary) Publication No. 41-1-C53-E Ce document est également publié en français. CONTENTS 1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • THE ILLUSTRIOUS HOUSE of HANOVER Ann Lyon
    Plymouth Law and Criminal Justice Review (2015) 1 THE ILLUSTRIOUS HOUSE OF HANOVER Ann Lyon1 The illustrious House of Hanover, And Protestant succession To them obedience do I swear While they can hold possession And in my faith and loyalty, I never more will falter And George my lawful king shall be! Until the times do alter. Anon. The Vicar of Bray, eighteenth-century satirical song Abstract The Hanoverian kings have attracted none of the affection the popular imagination accords to the Tudors and Stuarts, still less the romanticism. They are dismissed as a boorish bunch of Germans, with the possible exception of George III, who went mad and lost America, and perhaps George IV, who left the Brighton Pavilion as a monument to extravagance and had a decidedly colourful matrimonial history. When a reporter described the Queen as a 'scowly, jowlly Hanoverian', he was not being complimentary, and even Diana Princess of Wales once attributed many of her problems to marrying into a ‘German’ family. The truth is, as usual, more complex and infinitely more interesting, but, regrettably, little official notice is being taken of the 300th anniversary of the Hanoverian succession this year. This article seeks to redress the balance a little. Keywords: House of Hanover, royal succession, constitutional history, Act of Settlement Introduction Apart from a diversion through the female line in the person of Queen Victoria, and a change of name to Windsor, the House of Hanover has remained in place since 1714, to become the most enduring dynasty to
    [Show full text]
  • Amendments to the Constitution of the United States: a Commentary George Anastaplo Prof
    Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 23 Article 3 Issue 4 Summer 1992 1992 Amendments to the Constitution of the United States: A Commentary George Anastaplo Prof. of Law, Loyola University Chicago, School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation George Anastaplo, Amendments to the Constitution of the United States: A Commentary, 23 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 631 (1992). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol23/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Amendments to the Constitution of the United States: A Commentary* George Anastaplo** Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, "Amend your ways and your doings, and I will let you dwell in this place. Do not trust in these deceptive words: 'This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.' For if you truly amend your ways and your doings, if you truly execute jus- tice one with another, if you do not oppress the alien, the father- less or the widow, or shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not go after other gods to your own hurt, then I will let you dwell in this place, in the land that I gave of old to your fathers for ever." Jeremiah 7:3-7 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Wednesday, 22 October 2014] P7755d-7765A Mr John Quigley; Ms Margaret Quirk; Mrs Glenys Godfrey; Mr Dave Kelly; Mr Chris Tallentire
    Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Wednesday, 22 October 2014] p7755d-7765a Mr John Quigley; Ms Margaret Quirk; Mrs Glenys Godfrey; Mr Dave Kelly; Mr Chris Tallentire SUCCESSION TO THE CROWN BILL 2014 Second Reading Resumed from 25 February. MR J.R. QUIGLEY (Butler) [2.38 pm]: I rise to indicate the Labor Party’s concurrence with and support of the Succession to the Crown Bill 2014, which in essence seeks to effect three things: firstly, to remove the rule of male preference over females in the line of royal succession; secondly, to remove the rule disqualifying a person from succeeding to the Crown or from being a sovereign due to their marriage to a Roman Catholic; and, thirdly, to repeal the Royal Marriages Act 1772 and replace it with a requirement that the first six persons in the line of succession obtain the consent of the sovereign before marrying and to validate certain other marriages made void under the Royal Marriages Act. The bill also flows from an agreement at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting of 2011 in which the Australian states, the Australian government and other dominions of the commonwealth agreed to amend legislation in this jurisdiction to reflect and give effect to the Succession of Crown Act 2013, an act of the United Kingdom. That legislation does not have an immediate flow-on effect in Australia because of the Australia Act 1986. The Parliament of the United Kingdom has seen fit to change the rules about royal succession. To give effect to those rules throughout the commonwealth, legislation needs to be passed in each of the jurisdictions in which Her Majesty and the Crown, or the alternative following Her Majesty—the future king or queen of England—hold that office.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty of Union, 17071 When James VI of Scotland Also Became
    41 The Treaty of Union, 17071 When James VI of Scotland also became sovereign of England as James I in 1603 he made an unsuccessful attempt at establishing closer links between his two countries. Over a century later, in the 1650s, Oliver Cromwell forced a union on England and Scotland but it was an unpopular arrangement imposed on a reluctant Scottish population.2 Towards the end of the reign of William III, who died in 1702, it became apparent that the two separate kingdoms needed to enter into a more comprehensive partnership as the only solution to the problems of theAnglo-Scottish relationship. William III, however, never succeeded in effecting the Union during his reign, the king's reputation in Scotland having plummeted in the late seventeenth century, particularly following the Glencoe massacre (1692) and the Darien disaster (1698-99). Ultimately, the more comprehensive partnership was worked out during the reign of Queen Anne. "We shall esteem it as the greatest glory of our reign" was the queen's message to the Scottish Parliament on 3 October 1706.3 By the time Anne came to the throne (1702) her last surviving child (William, duke of Gloucester) had died in 1700, and the Westminster parliament had already passed the Act of Settlement (1701) by which the succession to the English crown after Anne was settled upon the grand­ daughter of James VI and I, Sophia and her husband George, Elector of Hanover, and their issue. Sophia, however, died in 1714 not long before Queen Anne, nevertheless, the German-speaking George was crowned king of Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Succession to the Crown Bill 2014
    THIRTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT REPORT 88 STANDING COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM LEGISLATION AND STATUTES REVIEW SUCCESSION TO THE CROWN BILL 2014 Presented by Hon Kate Doust MLC (Chair) February 2015 STANDING COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM LEGISLATION AND STATUTES REVIEW Date first appointed: 17 August 2005 Terms of Reference: The following is an extract from Schedule 1 of the Legislative Council Standing Orders: “6. Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review Committee 6.1 A Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review Committee is established. 6.2 The Committee consists of 4 Members. 6.3 The functions of the Committee are – (a) to consider and report on Bills referred under Standing Order 126; (b) on reference from the Council, to consider or review the development and formulation of any proposal or agreement whose implementation would require the enactment of legislation made subject to Standing Order 126; (c) to examine the provisions of any treaty that the Commonwealth has entered into or presented to the Commonwealth Parliament, and determine whether the treaty may impact upon the sovereignty and law-making powers of the Parliament of Western Australia; (d) to review the form and content of the statute book; and (e) to consider and report on any matter referred by the Council. 6.4 In relation to function 6.3(a) and (b), the Committee is to confine any inquiry and report to an investigation as to whether a Bill or proposal may impact upon the sovereignty and law-making powers of the Parliament of Western Australia.” Members as at the time of this inquiry: Hon Kate Doust MLC (Chair) Hon Brian Ellis MLC (Deputy Chair) Hon Mark Lewis MLC Hon Amber-Jade Sanderson MLC Staff as at the time of this inquiry: Alex Hickman (Advisory Officer (Legal)) Samantha Parsons (Committee Clerk) Address: Parliament House, Perth WA 6000, Telephone (08) 9222 7222 [email protected] Website: http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au ISBN 978-1-925149-08-1 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................
    [Show full text]