Conscience Votes During the Howard Government 1996–2007

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Conscience Votes During the Howard Government 1996–2007 Parliament of Australia Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library Information, analysis and advice for the Parliament RESEARCH PAPER www.aph.gov.au/library 2 February 2009, no. 20, 2008–09, ISSN 1834-9854 Conscience votes during the Howard Government 1996–2007 Deirdre McKeown and Rob Lundie Politics and Public Administration Section Executive summary • During the Howard Government‘s time in office five bills attracted a conscience vote. These bills were: Euthanasia Laws Bill 1996, Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002, Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002, Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial Responsibility for Approval of RU486) Bill 2005 and Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction and the Regulation of Human Embryo Research Amendment Bill 2006. • This paper considers aspects of these votes and tracks patterns that emerged. Aspects considered include the voting patterns of party leaders, the party vote, the vote of women, the media and conscience votes and the dilemmas facing members of parliament in these votes. • A list of conscience votes in the federal parliament from 1950 to 2007 is included in an appendix. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Cathy Madden, Sarah Miskin, Matthew Thomas and John Warhurst for their assistance in preparing this research paper. Contents Executive summary ...................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................... 1 Background ........................................................... 1 Definition ........................................................... 1 Issues attracting a conscience vote ......................................... 2 Reasons for calling for a conscience vote .................................... 3 Frequency of conscience votes ........................................... 3 The Howard government and conscience votes .................................. 4 Who introduced the legislation ........................................... 5 Votes of the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition on conscience bills ......... 6 Backbench pressure ................................................. 9 Voting patterns ....................................................... 9 Chamber voting ................................................... 10 Party voting ...................................................... 10 Gender voting .................................................... 10 Behaviour in the RU486 and therapeutic cloning debates ..................... 12 Call for more conscience votes .......................................... 14 The media and conscience votes ......................................... 17 Dilemmas facing MPs in conscience votes .................................. 18 Conclusion ........................................................... 20 Appendix 1: Voting by party and gender on conscience vote bills during the Howard Government (1996–2007) ............................................... 21 Appendix 2: Dates of stages of conscience vote bills debated during the Howard Government (1996–2007) ............................................... 23 Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002 ................................... 23 Appendix 3: Conscience votes in the federal parliament 1950–2007 ................. 25 Conscience votes during the Howard Government 1996–2007 Introduction In August 2002 the Parliamentary Library published a paper on conscience votes in federal, state and some overseas parliaments.1 In compiling the list of conscience votes in the federal parliament reliance was made on references in House of Representatives Practice. Since 2002, additional conscience votes on bills and procedural issues have been found and some other votes included in the original list have been reclassified. A full list of conscience votes in the federal parliament since 1950 is included at Appendix 3. In this paper we consider aspects of conscience votes during the Howard Government (1996 to 2007). We do not attempt to draw conclusions on the basis of our analyses but rather to track patterns in the votes that occurred. The aspects considered include voting patterns of party leaders and the party vote, the vote of women, the media and conscience votes and dilemmas facing MPs in these votes. An earlier version of this paper was presented to the Australasian Study of Parliament Group Conference in August 2007.2 At the time of writing the Rudd Government has not initiated any conscience votes but two issues which traditionally attract a conscience vote, euthanasia and abortion, have been raised by senators.3 Background Definition The term ‗free vote‘ or ‗conscience vote‘ is defined as ‗the rare vote in parliament, in which members are not obliged by the parties to follow a party line, but vote according to their own moral, political, religious or social beliefs‘.4 1. D. McKeown and R. Lundie, ‗Free votes in Australian and some overseas parliaments‘, Current Issues Brief, no. 1, 2002–03, Parliamentary Library, Canberra. This publication provides more information on conscience votes including the major parties‘ attitudes to these votes and the practice in other Westminster parliaments and the United States Congress. 2. See D. McKeown and R. Lundie with G. Woods, ‗Conscience votes in the federal parliament since 1996‘, Australasian Parliamentary Review, vol. 23, no. 1, 2008, pp. 172–194. 3. On 17 September 2008 Senator Bob Brown (Australian Greens, Tas) introduced the Restoring Territory Rights (Voluntary Euthanasia Legislation) Bill 2008 into the Senate. The Bill repealed the Euthanasia Laws Act 1997. Debate was adjourned after Senator Brown‘s second reading speech on the same day. On 18 June 2008 Senator Guy Barnett (Liberal, Tas) gave notice of his intention to move the disallowance of funding for a Medicare item which would mean the withdrawal of funding for late term abortions. The issue was referred to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee. Senator Barnett withdrew his disallowance motion. The Committee reported on 13 November 2008 and made two recommendations ‗aimed at improving the collection of perinatal and neonatal data‘ in Australia. Senator Barnett has indicated that he will wait for the Government‘s response to the report before deciding whether to reintroduce his disallowance motion. 1 Conscience votes during the Howard Government 1996–2007 The term ‗conscience vote‘ is most commonly used in Australia to describe votes on moral and social issues such as abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment—the life and death issues in which senators and members are not obliged to vote along party lines. In Australia the term may also include issues on which the parties do not always have a formal policy such as parliamentary procedure and parliamentary privilege. The term ‗free vote‘ is more commonly used in other Westminster parliaments. In Australian state and federal parliaments the decision to allow a conscience vote is a political one usually made by the party leader and is not a subject on which the Speaker can be asked to rule.5 The conscience vote can apply to one party, more than one party or all parties represented in the parliament. Issues attracting a conscience vote Conscience votes have been allowed on: • ‗life and death‘ issues, such as abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment • human reproductive and scientific research issues, such as in vitro fertilisation, stem cell research and therapeutic cloning • social or moral issues, such as family law, homosexuality, drug reform, war crimes and gambling and • parliamentary procedure and privilege issues and standing orders. Conscience votes are not usually allowed on economic issues or issues that have a significant impact on the budget, although 'until 1936 tariff proposals were free votes in both Houses in the Australian Parliament'.6 Conscience votes are generally not allowed when a party has a definite policy on an issue. For example, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) does not allow its members a conscience vote on capital punishment because the party has already adopted an anti death penalty policy. One exception to this approach is the ALP‘s attitude to abortion. In this case the party has a policy but also allows a conscience vote on the issue. The ALP National Platform states that Labor will: … support the rights of women to determine their own reproductive lives, particularly the right to choose appropriate fertility control and abortion.7 4. The Penguin Macquarie Dictionary of Australian Politics, Penguin Books, Ringwood, Victoria, 1988, p. 86. 5. Joe de Bruyn, National Secretary of the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association and member of the Australian Labor Party national executive has argued that the national executive should be involved in these decisions. See, for example: A. Ramsey, ‗Whitlam‘s sharp tongue can still leave its mark‘, Sydney Morning Herald, 13 September 2000, M. Grattan, ‗IVF–who is minding the ALP shop?‘, Sydney Morning Herald, 18 August 2000, L. Tingle, ‗Moral vote to move with the times‘, Sydney Morning Herald, 23 March 2002. 6. J.R. Odgers, Australian Senate Practice, sixth ed., 1991, p. 420. 2 Conscience votes during the Howard Government 1996–2007 The ALP National Constitution records the 1984 National Conference decision on abortion: Conference resolves that the matter of abortion can be freely debated at any State or federal forum of the Australian Labor Party, but any decision reached is not binding on any member of the Party.8 Reasons
Recommended publications
  • Journal Is: (2009) 7 NZJPIL (Page)
    © New Zealand Centre for Public Law and contributors Faculty of Law Victoria University of Wellington PO Box 600 Wellington New Zealand June 2009 The mode of citation of this journal is: (2009) 7 NZJPIL (page) The previous issue of this journal is volume 6 number 2, December 2008 ISSN 1176­3930 Printed by Geon, Brebner Print, Palmerston North Cover photo: Robert Cross, VUW ITS Image Services CONTENTS SPECIAL CONFERENCE ISSUE: MMP AND THE CONSTITUTION Foreword Dean R Knight...........................................................................................................................vii "Who's the Boss?": Executive–Legislature Relations in New Zealand under MMP Ryan Malone............................................................................................................................... 1 The Legal Status of Political Parties under MMP Andrew Geddis.......................................................................................................................... 21 Experiments in Executive Government under MMP in New Zealand: Contrasting Approaches to Multi­Party Governance Jonathan Boston and David Bullock........................................................................................... 39 MMP, Minority Governments and Parliamentary Opposition André Kaiser............................................................................................................................. 77 Public Attitudes towards MMP and Coalition Government Raymond Miller and Jack Vowles..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Abortion, Homosexuality and the Slippery Slope: Legislating ‘Moral’ Behaviour in South Australia
    Abortion, Homosexuality and the Slippery Slope: Legislating ‘Moral’ Behaviour in South Australia Clare Parker BMusSt, BA(Hons) A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Discipline of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Adelaide. August 2013 ii Contents Contents ii Abstract iv Declaration vi Acknowledgements vii List of Abbreviations ix List of Figures x A Note on Terms xi Introduction 1 Chapter 1: ‘The Practice of Sound Morality’ 21 Policing Abortion and Homosexuality 24 Public Conversation 36 The Wowser State 44 Chapter 2: A Path to Abortion Law Reform 56 The 1930s: Doctors, Court Cases and Activism 57 World War II 65 The Effects of Thalidomide 70 Reform in Britain: A Seven Month Catalyst for South Australia 79 Chapter 3: The Abortion Debates 87 The Medical Profession 90 The Churches 94 Activism 102 Public Opinion and the Media 112 The Parliamentary Debates 118 Voting Patterns 129 iii Chapter 4: A Path to Homosexual Law Reform 139 Professional Publications and Prohibited Literature 140 Homosexual Visibility in Australia 150 The Death of Dr Duncan 160 Chapter 5: The Homosexuality Debates 166 Activism 167 The Churches and the Medical Profession 179 The Media and Public Opinion 185 The Parliamentary Debates 190 1973 to 1975 206 Conclusion 211 Moral Law Reform and the Public Interest 211 Progressive Reform in South Australia 220 The Slippery Slope 230 Bibliography 232 iv Abstract This thesis examines the circumstances that permitted South Australia’s pioneering legalisation of abortion and male homosexual acts in 1969 and 1972. It asks how and why, at that time in South Australian history, the state’s parliament was willing and able to relax controls over behaviours that were traditionally considered immoral.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Overview
    ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL OVERVIEW PHOTO: PAUL LOVELACE PHOTOGRAPHY Professor Ken Wiltshire AO Professor Ken Wiltshire is the JD Story Professor of Public Administration at the University of Queensland Business School. He is a Political long-time contributor to CEDA’s research and an honorary trustee. overview As Australia enters an election year in 2007, Ken Wiltshire examines the prospects for a long-established Coalition and an Opposition that has again rolled the leadership dice. 18 australian chief executive RETROSPECT 2006 Prime Minister and Costello as Treasurer. Opinion Politically, 2006 was a very curious and topsy-turvy polls and backbencher sentiment at the time vindi- … [Howard] became year. There was a phase where the driving forces cated his judgement. more pragmatic appeared to be the price of bananas and the depre- From this moment the Australian political than usual … dations of the orange-bellied parrot, and for a dynamic changed perceptibly. Howard had effec- nation that has never experienced a civil war there tively started the election campaign, and in the “ were plenty of domestic skirmishes, including same breath had put himself on notice that he culture, literacy, and history wars. By the end of the would have to win the election. Almost immedi- year both the government and the Opposition had ately he became even more pragmatic than usual, ” changed their policy stances on a wide range of and more flexible in policy considerations, espe- issues. cially in relation to issues that could divide his own Coalition. The defining moment For Kim Beazley and the ALP, Howard’s decision The defining moment in Australian politics was clearly not what they had wanted, despite their occurred on 31 July 2006 when Prime Minister claims to the contrary, but at least they now knew John Howard, in response to yet another effort to the lay of the battleground and could design appro- revive a transition of leadership to his Deputy Peter priate tactics.
    [Show full text]
  • Report X Terminology Xi Acknowledgments Xii
    Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee Consideration of Legislation Referred to the Committee Euthanasia Laws Bill 1996 March 1997 The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee Consideration of Legislation Referred to the Committee Euthanasia Laws Bill 1996 March 1997 © Commonwealth of Australia 1997 ISSN 1326-9364 This document was produced from camera-ready copy prepared by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee, and printed by the Senate Printing Unit, Department of the Senate, Parliament House, Canberra. Members of the Legislation Committee Members Senator E Abetz, Tasmania, Chair (Chair from 3 March 1997) Senator J McKiernan, Western Australia, Deputy Chair Senator the Hon N Bolkus, South Australia Senator H Coonan, New South Wales (from 26 February 1997: previously a Participating Member) Senator V Bourne, New South Wales (to 3 March 1997) Senator A Murray, Western Australia (from 3 March 1997) Senator W O’Chee, Queensland Participating Members All members of the Opposition: and Senator B Brown, Tasmania Senator M Colston, Queensland Senator the Hon C Ellison, Western Australia (from 26 February 1997: previously the Chair) Senator J Ferris, South Australia Senator B Harradine, Tasmania Senator W Heffernan, New South Wales Senator D Margetts, Western Australia Senator J McGauran, Victoria Senator the Hon N Minchin, South Australia Senator the Hon G Tambling, Northern Territory Senator J Woodley, Queensland Secretariat Mr Neil Bessell (Secretary
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage Equality and the Civil Union
    Maddalena Arnfield http://www.flickr.com/photos/lasandri/5932352747 http://www.flickr.com/photos/doxiehaus/3568405719/ Marriage Equality and the Civil Union ‘solution’ ‘ Any ‘alternative’ to marriage, in my opinion, simply offers the insult of formal equivalency without the promise of substantive equality.’ Harry Laforme, Former Justice of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice1 Court of Conscience | 35 ocial media is humming with campaigns for marriage equality. Social Justice SCampaigners such as Get Up, and minority parties including the Socialist Alliance have leant their support, while lobby groups such as Australian Marriage Equality have been established to fight for change. Parliament is debating the pros and cons of various Marriage Amendment bills and the Federal Labor government have recently changed their party policy to endorse gay marriage. Support for removal of discrimination against same-sex couples is gaining momentum. Some are even predicting that the privileged space which homophobia currently occupies will soon be nothing more than a shameful part of our history, akin to life before the women’s liberation or civil rights movements of the sec- http://www.flickr.com/photos/monopache/7439352654/ ond half of the twentieth century. –––––––– A global movement … New Zealand This is not a local initiative; the marriage equality movement is global. In 2001, the Netherlands is set to have a made history as the first nation in the world to recognise gay marriage. Belgium followed in conscience vote 2003. Against all odds, in 2005, the pre- dominantly Catholic Spain legalised same-sex before the year marriage and a few short weeks later Canada is through with enacted the Civil Marriage Act2 providing a gender neutral definition of marriage.
    [Show full text]
  • Larry Anthony
    All in the family: Nationals still moving with times LARRY ANTHONY Cartoon: Eric Lobbecke 12:00AM MARCH 13, 2020 One hundred years is an amazing record and what better way to tell the story of the Nationals than through the eyes of one family that has been involved from the start, the Anthonys. My family’s parliamentary representation spans 56 years, but our party connections are much older. I want to take you back to some of the great moments of our history and the characters of those times. Our party’s history was shaped during and after the Great War. My grandfather, Hubert Lawrence Anthony, was 18 years old and recovering from war wounds received in Gallipoli when he was visited by prime minister Billy Hughes in London. This left a lasting impression, and was to plant the seeds of his political ambition. HL Anthony was elected to parliament as the member for Richmond, NSW, in October 1937 and entered the ministry in 1940. His wife, my father Doug’s mother, died unexpectedly in 1941 when Doug was 12. The boy was sent to boarding school and spent many school holidays living with his father at the Kurrajong Hotel in Canberra and with the run of Parliament House. “That was my playground — the parliament,’’ he’d tell us. “I used to rollerskate around the lower floors of Parliament House and could virtually go anywhere in the building … I could go up to the prime minister’s office, where I knew the staff, many of them living in the Kurrajong Hotel.” It was a handy grounding.
    [Show full text]
  • Faith, Conscience and Legislation
    FAITH, CONSCIENCE AND LEGISLATION DR DARRYN JENSEN* I INTRODUCTION Conscience votes are, depending upon whom one talks to, either an example of our democratic processes at their best or a blight on our liberal democratic polity. Former Prime Minister of New Zealand, David Lange, held the latter point of view. Lange described the outcome of conscience votes as ‘a shambles, a kind of legislative lottery in which consistency is the first casualty’.1 One can understand why politicians in Westminster democracies, being concerned first and foremost with their ability to implement their party platforms when in office, would take this attitude. One can also understand why some in the wider community, believing that they voted for a candidate on the basis of that candidate’s identification with a particular party platform, object to conscience votes on the basis that a legislator is free to bring religious and other personal convictions to bear upon the matter before Parliament. While these objections are understandable, they reveal a number of potentially controversial assumptions about the nature of Anglo-Australian parliamentary democracy. The objections assume that members of Parliament are elected to represent the concrete will of those who voted for them, so as to implement a particular basket of measures. Furthermore, the understanding of a conscience vote as a rare exception to the general principle that legislators should follow the ‘party line’ assumes that the program of government is largely fixed by the results of elections and that parliamentary procedures are merely a formality in the implementation of the government’s election promises.
    [Show full text]
  • Mckeown and Rob Lundie, with Guy Woods *
    Conscience Votes in the Federal Parliament since 1996 # Deirdre McKeown and Rob Lundie, with Guy Woods * Introduction In August 2002 we published a Parliamentary Library paper on conscience votes in federal, state and some overseas parliaments. 1 Conscience votes, like instances of crossing the floor, are difficult to find in Hansard, particularly before 1981 when we are forced to rely on hardcopy. In compiling the list of conscience votes we relied on references in House of Representatives Practice . We intend to publish an updated version of our paper when the 41 st parliament ends. Since 2002 we have found some additional procedural conscience votes and have revised some votes included in the original list in House of Representatives Practice . In this paper we consider aspects of conscience votes in the period since 1996. We do not attempt to draw conclusions but rather to track patterns in these votes that have occurred under the Howard government. The aspects considered include voting patterns of party leaders and the party vote, the vote of women, the media and conscience votes and dilemmas facing MPs in these votes. Definitions In our original paper we used the term ‘free vote’ to describe ‘the rare vote in parliament, in which members are not obliged by the parties to follow a party line, but vote according to their own moral, political, religious or social beliefs’.2 # This article has been double blind refereed to academic standards. * Politics and Public Administration Section, Parliamentary Library; Tables prepared by Guy Woods, Statistics and Mapping Section, Parliamentary Library 1 Deirdre McKeown and Rob Lundie, ‘Free votes in Australian and some overseas parliaments’, Current Issues Brief , No.
    [Show full text]
  • NINTH ASSEMBLY 16Th October 2001 to 5 May 2005 INDEX MINUTES
    Index to Minutes of Proceedings - 16th October 2001 to 5 May 2005 Ninth Assembly LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY NINTH ASSEMBLY 16th October 2001 to 5 May 2005 INDEX TO MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS AND PAPERS TABLED Consolidated Index to Minutes of Proceedings 16 October 2001 to 5 May 2005 Index Reference Summary by Sitting Day and Minutes Page Minutes Day Date Bound Volume Page 1 - 16 1 16 October 2001 LXIII 17 - 22 2 17 October 2001 LXIII 23 – 29 3 18 October 2001 LXIII 31 – 34 4 23October 2001 LXIII 35 – 39 5 24 October 2001 LXIII 41 - 46 6 25 October 2001 LXIII 47 - 54 7 27 November 2001 LXIII 55 - 61 8 28 November 2001 LXIII 63 - 68 9 29 November 2001 LXIII 69 – 77 10 26 February 2002 LXIV 79 - 88 11 27 February 2002 LXIV 89 – 94 12 28 February 2002 LXIV 95 – 101 13 5 March 2002 LXIV 103 – 108 14 6 March 2002 LXIV 109 - 113 15 7 March 2002 LXIV 115 – 120 16 14 May 2002 LXIV 121 – 125 17 15 May 2002 LXIV 127 – 130 18 16 May 2002 LXIV 131 - 134 19 21 May 2002 LXIV 135 - 139 20 22 May 2002 LXIV 141 - 152 21 23 May 2002 LXIV 153 - 160 22 18 June 2002 LXV 161 - 167 23 19 June 2002 LXV 169 - 178 24 20 June 2002 LXV 179 – 182 25 13 August 2002 LXV 183 – 187 26 14 August 2002 LXV 189 – 193 27 15 August 2002 LXV 195 – 204 28 20 August 2002 LXV 205 – 208 29 21 August 2002 LXV 209 – 212 30 22 August 2002 LXV 213 – 216 31 17 September 2002 LXV 217 - 220 32 19 September 2002 LXV 221 – 228 33 8 October 2002 LXVI 229 – 237 34 9 October 2002 LXVI 239 – 245 35 10 October 2002 LXVI 247 – 249 36 15 October 2002 LXVI 251 – 254 37 16 October
    [Show full text]
  • Vocational Education & Training
    VOCATIONAL EDUCATION & TRAINING The Northern Territory’s history of public philanthropy VOCATIONAL EDUCATION & TRAINING The Northern Territory’s history of public philanthropy DON ZOELLNER Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Creator: Zoellner, Don, author. Title: Vocational education and training : the Northern Territory’s history of public philanthropy / Don Zoellner. ISBN: 9781760460990 (paperback) 9781760461003 (ebook) Subjects: Vocational education--Government policy--Northern Territory. Vocational education--Northern Territory--History. Occupational training--Government policy--Northern Territory. Occupational training--Northern Territory--History. Aboriginal Australians--Vocational education--Northern Territory. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press. Cover photograph: ‘Northern Territory Parliament House main entrance’ by Patrick Nelson. This edition © 2017 ANU Press Contents List of figures . vii Foreword . xi Acknowledgements . xiii 1 . Setting the scene . 1 2 . Philanthropic behaviour . 11 3 . Prior to 1911: European discovery and South Australian administration of the Northern Territory . 35 4 . Early Commonwealth control, 1911–46 . 45 5 . The post–World War Two period to 1978 . 57 6. TAFE in the era of self‑government, 1978–92 . 99 7. Vocational education and training in the era of self‑government, 1992–2014 . 161 8. Late 2015 and September 2016 postscript . 229 References . 243 List of figures Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Reference
    Submission to the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Reference Committee Inquiry into the matter of a popular vote on the matter of marriage Submission from James Allan, Garrick Professor of Law, University of Queensland. September 4th, 2015 Thank you for the invitation to make a submission to this Committee. I will be brief. I am strongly in favour of the plebiscite option for the reasons I give below. I leave the question of the actual wording of any plebiscite to others, though in my view the question put to electors ought to be as unambiguous as possible. My comments are premised on the deeply held belief that social policy issues, including issues that divide the electors more-or-less down the middle, ought to be resolved by means of a democratic process. Such processes have the great advantage of counting all electors as equal, so that a plumber or secretary’s moral views count for as much as a lawyer’s or someone working for some United Nations’ agency. This, in my view, is the appropriate way of resolving all divisive social policy issues, even if they have been translated into the language of rights or of human rights. On issues such as euthanasia, abortion, same-sex marriage and the rest there is no special expertise that a law degree and a decade working at the Bar provides to someone. Nor does employment with the United Nations or expertise in the finer points of international law make one’s preferences and opinions somehow superior. Nor is there any persuasive reason for thinking that Australians need to follow the dictats of the European Court of Human Rights or any other committee of unelected ex- lawyers.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2016 • Issiue 2 Would Aboriginal Land Rights Be
    April 2016 • issiue 2 www.nlc.org.au As we look to celebrate the 40th Adam Giles. by the NLC with them, and with the future of Darwin for generations to Belyuen Group and Larrakia families. come. It also provides the family groups anniversary of the Aboriginal Land A formal hand-back ceremony was involved with real benefits. These Rights (Northern Territory) Act, final expected to be arranged within the Mr Bush-Blanasi said he acknowledged benefits will open up new economic coming months. that not all Larrakia families have settlement has been reached over the opportunities as well as preserving their approved the settlement, and that some Kenbi land claim. In a battle that has Over its tortuous history the claim was cultural ties with the land. continue to disagree with the Land been going on for nearly as long as the subject of two extensive hearings, Commissioner’s findings regarding “I think the settlement that has been the existence of the Land Rights Act three Federal Court reviews and two traditional Aboriginal ownership. accepted is extremely innovative as itself, the Kenbi claim has been the High Court appeals before the then provides a combination of Territory Aboriginal Land Commissioner Peter “I accept that for some Larrakia focus of numerous court cases and freehold land as well as granting of Gray delivered his report in December this whole process has caused much claim hearings, and hostility from a claimed land under the Land Rights 2000. distress. However, this claim has hung succession of CLP governments. Act.” over us all for far too long.
    [Show full text]