1937 Australian referendum (Aviation)

Last updated

1937 Australian Aviation referendum
Flag of Australia (converted).svg
6 March 1937 (1937-03-06)

Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled —
"Constitution Alteration (Aviation) 1936" ?
Voting system
  • A simple majority of voters nationwide.
  • A majority in 4 out of the 6 states.
OutcomeProposal rejected due to gaining a majority in only 2 of the 6 states.

1937 Australian Aviation referendum - State majorities.svg
Majority in each state.

The Constitution Alteration (Aviation) Bill 1936, [1] was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to extend the Commonwealth legislative power in respect to air navigation and aircraft. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 6 March 1937.

Contents

Question

Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'Constitution Alteration (Aviation) 1936'?

The proposal was to alter section 51 of the Constitution by adding

(vi.A.) Air navigation and aircraft. [1]

Background

Aviation was a subject that did not exist when the Constitution was drafted at the end of the 19th century. In 1919, Australia had entered into the Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation, [2] and parliament enacted the Aircraft Navigation Act 1920, which authorised the Governor-General to make regulations to give effect to the Convention. [3] Mr Henry was convicted of flying without a license, having flown around, over and under the Sydney Harbour Bridge. The Commonwealth relied upon 3 sources of constitutional power, interstate trade and commerce, foreign affairs and territories. The High Court held in R v Burgess; Ex parte Henry that the parliament has no general control over the subject matter of civil aviation and that implementation of the convention did not require the Commonwealth to control civil aviation. The court rejected an argument that the interstate trade and commerce power extended to activities that were commingled with interstate activities. The regulations were invalid as they went further than was necessary to carry out and give effect to the convention. [4] [5] [6] [7] The regulations were amended so they implemented the convention for aviation within a state. [5]

A 22 page booklet was prepared setting out the arguments in favour of the proposal and those against that were endorsed by a majority of members of parliament who voted for and against the proposal. [8]

Yes case

The argument in favor of the amendments was prepared by the Attorney-General Robert Menzies. The Sun summarised the yes case as follows:

The object is to amend the Constitution to confer upon the Commonwealth Parliament the power to make laws regarding air navigation and aircraft— to enable what is obviously a national problem to be dealt with by the National Parliament.

Under existing powers the Commonwealth may control interstate but not intra-State aerial transport.

It is ludicrous that an instrument of transport so flexible and so incapable of being kept within narrow geographical limits should still be subject in many ways to six different sets of State laws, also the Commonwealth laws.

The view that an aeroplane competes with State railways, and there fore should be under State control, in the interests of transport co-ordination, becomes less tenable each year.

The real question is whether the people desire divided or uniform control. [9]

No case

The case in opposition to the aviation referendum was prepared by New South Wales Labor members and some other members who opposed the Referendum Bill. The Sun summarised the no case as follows:

In 1934. Mr. Menzies. as Acting Premier of Victoria, opposed a proposal similar to that he is now putting to the people.

The Lyons Government plans to hand over air transport to the Imperial Airways Trust. A "Yes" vote will mean dearer freights and fares for the people of every State.

The present proposal is designed to make the Imperial Air Trust, with privately subscribed capital, a serious rival of the State railway services. This same Imperial Air Trust has already begun a sinister influence in the political life of Australia.

A "Yes" vote will wreck State railway systems, in which the electors have £311,486,688 invested, and in which 79,145 are employed. A "Yes" vote would bankrupt country towns, mean dearer freights, and dearer food, and would pave the way for an Imperial Air Trust.

The Lyons Government has no case for a referendum, and since the Goya Henry case has introduced new regulations, which are working satisfactorily. [9]

Results

Result [10]
StateElectoral rollBallots issuedForAgainstInformal
Vote %Vote %
New South Wales1,550,9471,461,860664,58947.25741,82152.7555,450
Victoria1,128,4921,074,278675,48165.10362,11234.9036,685
Queensland562,240519,933310,35261.87191,25138.1318,330
South Australia358,069341,444128,58240.13191,83159.8721,031
Western Australia247,536221,832100,32647.58110,52952.4210,977
Tasmania133,444125,01645,61638.9471,51861.067,882
Total for Commonwealth3,980,7283,744,3631,924,94653.561,669,06246.44150,355
ResultsObtained majority in two states and an overall majority of 255,884 votes.Not carried

Discussion

For a referendum to approve an amendment of the constitution, it must ordinarily achieve a double majority : approved by a majority of states (i.e., four of the six states) as well as a majority of those voting nationwide. [11] This was the first of five referendums (as of October 2021) to achieve an overall majority, but fail the requirement of a majority of states. [12]

The uniform regulation of air navigation was achieved by uniform state laws which applied the Commonwealth regulations, [5] [13] and the High Court subsequently upheld the validity of those regulations. [5] [14]

See also

Related Research Articles

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

Australian constitutional law is the area of the law of Australia relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Australia. Legal cases regarding Australian constitutional law are often handled by the High Court of Australia, the highest court in the Australian judicial system. Several major doctrines of Australian constitutional law have developed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1967 Australian referendum (Aboriginals)</span> 1967 constitutional referendum on the legal status of Indigenous Australians

The second question of the 1967 Australian referendum of 27 May 1967, called by the Holt government, related to Indigenous Australians. Voters were asked whether to give the Federal Government the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether in population counts for constitutional purposes to include all Indigenous Australians. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question.

In Australia, referendums are public votes held on important issues where the electorate may approve or reject a certain proposal. The term is commonly used in reference to a constitutional referendum which is legally required to make a change to the Constitution of Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1999 Australian republic referendum</span> Referendum on making Australia a republic

The Australian republic referendum held on 6 November 1999 was a two-question referendum to amend the Constitution of Australia. The first question asked whether Australia should become a republic with a President appointed by Parliament following a bi-partisan appointment model which had been approved by a half-elected, half-appointed Constitutional Convention held in Canberra in February 1998. The second question, generally deemed to be far less important politically, asked whether Australia should alter the Constitution to insert a preamble acknowledging indigenous ownership prior to European arrival. For some years opinion polls had suggested that a majority of the electorate favoured a republic. Nonetheless, the republic referendum was defeated, in large part due to division among republicans on the method proposed for selection of the president.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1947, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth power to make laws with respect to rents and prices. It was put to voters for approval in an Australian referendum held on 29 May 1948.

The Constitution Alteration (Referendums) Bill 1977 was an Australian referendum held in 1977 in which electors approved an amendment to the Australian constitution to allow electors in the Australian territories to vote at referendums. Electors in the territories were to be counted towards the national total, but would not be counted toward any state total.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1946, was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth power over a range of social services. The question was put to a referendum in the 1946 Australian referendum with two other (unrelated) questions. It was carried and inserted into section 51 of the Australian Constitution.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1912, was an unsuccessful referendum held in 1913 that sought to alter the Australian Constitution to extend Commonwealth legislative power in respect to trade and commerce.

The Constitution Alteration (Marketing) Bill 1936, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to ensure that the Commonwealth could continue legislative schemes for the marketing of agricultural produce such as the quota for dried fruits. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 6 March 1937.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1946, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth power to make laws regulating employment in industry. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 28 September 1946. The proposals was narrowly rejected, with a minority of 1.80% in the fourth state, South Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1946 Australian referendum (Marketing)</span>

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1946, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth explicit power to make laws for the organised marketing of primary products and to exempt it from the freedom of interstate trade requirement of section 92 of the constitution. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 28 September 1946.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1974, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to make it easier to amend the constitution and give voters in the Australian territories the right to vote in referendums. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 18 May 1974.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1977 Australian referendum (Simultaneous Elections)</span>

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1977, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to enable simultaneous elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977.

<i>R v Burgess; Ex parte Henry</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

R v Burgess; Ex parte Henry, is a High Court of Australia case where the majority took a broad view of the external affairs power in the Constitution but held that the interstate trade and commerce power delineated trade and commerce within a state, rejecting an argument that the power extended to activities that were commingled with interstate activities. The court set aside a conviction for breach of the regulations as they went further than was necessary to carry out and give effect to the convention.

<i>Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2)</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales , was a High Court of Australia case about the validity of Commonwealth regulations about intrastate air navigation. Although the Commonwealth has the power to regulate interstate air navigation under s 51(i) of the Constitution, it can only regulate intrastate air navigation under the implied incidental power attached to that head of power. It was held that intrastate air navigation can be regulated to the extent that it provides for the safety of, or prevention of physical interference with, interstate or foreign air navigation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Australia</span> Federal constitution of 1900

The Constitution of Australia is a constitutional document that is supreme law in Australia. It establishes Australia as a federation under a constitutional monarchy and outlines the structure and powers of the Australian government's three constituent parts: the executive, legislature, and judiciary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia</span>

Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia, as far as is still relevant today is:

... trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.

Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia is a provision of the Constitution of Australia headed "Provision as to races disqualified from voting" and providing that "For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted."

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1988, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to enshrine various civil rights, namely freedom of religion, rights in relation to trials, and rights regarding the compulsory acquisition of property. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 3 September 1988.

References

  1. 1 2 "Constitution Alteration (Aviation) Bill" . Retrieved 16 October 2021 via legislation.gov.au.
  2. "Convention relating to the regulation of Aerial Navigation". League of Nations Treaty Series. 13 October 1919. Retrieved 16 October 2021 via WorldLII.
  3. Aircraft Navigation Act 1920 (Cth).
  4. R v Burgess; Ex parte Henry [1936] HCA 52 , (1936) 55 CLR 608 (10 November 1936), High Court.
  5. 1 2 3 4 Richardson, J E, Aviation Law in Australia (1965) 1(2) Federal Law Review 242 Retrieved 16 October 2021.
  6. Aroney, N; Gerangelos, P; Murray, S & Stellios, J (2015). The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia: History, Principle and Interpretation. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp.  185-186. ISBN   9780521759182 . Retrieved 17 October 2021.
  7. Sawer, Geoffrey (1955), "Execution of Treaties by Legislation in the Commonwealth of Australia", University of Queensland Law Journal (1955) 2(4) University of Queensland Law Journal 297 Retrieved 16 October 2021.
  8. "Alteration of Constitution : Federal referendums, the case for and against". Commonwealth Electoral Office (Australia). 1937. Retrieved 17 October 2021 via Trove.
  9. 1 2 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: "4,000,000 booklets for electors". The Sun . 11 January 1937. p. 11. Retrieved 17 October 2021 via Trove.
  10. Handbook of the 44th Parliament (2014) "Part 5 - Referendums and Plebiscites - Referendum results". Parliamentary Library of Australia.
  11. Constitution (Cth) s 128 Mode of altering the Constitution.
  12. Handbook of the 44th Parliament (2014) "Part 5 - Referendums and Plebiscites - Constitutional referendums". Parliamentary Library of Australia.
  13. eg Air Navigation Act 1937 (WA)
  14. R v Poole; Ex parte Henry [1939] HCA 19 , (1939) 61 CLR 634 (19 May 1939), High Court

Further reading