1946 Australian referendum (Social Services)

Last updated

1946 Australian Commonwealth Power in Social Affairs referendum
Flag of Australia (converted).svg
28 September 1946 (1946-09-28)

Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled —

"Constitution Alteration (Social Services) 1946" ?
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes2,297,93454.39%
Light brown x.svgNo1,927,14845.61%
Valid votes4,225,08294.86%
Invalid or blank votes228,8595.14%
Total votes4,453,941100.00%
Registered voters/turnout4,739,85393.97%

The Constitution Alteration (Social Services) Bill 1946, [1] 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.

Contents

Question

Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'Constitution Alteration (Social Services) 1946'?

Section 51 of the Australian Constitution grants the commonwealth legislative power. Prior to this amendment the only social services provision was s51(xxiii) that gave power to legislate for invalid and old-age pensions. The proposal was to introduce s51(xxiiiA), which reads: [1]

(xxiiiA) the provision of maternity allowances, widows' pensions, child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances;

Background

Federal legislation already existed on a number of these issues despite the lack of a clear constitutional basis: child endowment payments were introduced in 1941, widow's pensions in 1942, and unemployment benefits in 1945. These payments were based on the spending power (s81). However, in the first Pharmaceutical Benefits Case constitutional questions were raised about the validity of Commonwealth social security legislation based on s81. The High Court held that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1944, which sought to introduce a scheme of subsidised medications, was unconstitutional because it was not supported by a section 51 head of power and could not be supported by s81. [2] [3]

The amendment was therefore intended to clarify and enshrine the existence of a power that was already being exercised and received bipartisan support. This perhaps explains why this amendment was carried, given that it was already accepted as an area of Commonwealth activity. In addition, a "no" vote could have ended welfare programs from which voters were benefiting.

Civil conscription

Compulsory military service had existed in Australia since the passage of the Defence Act 1903, however this was restricted to times of war and to service within Australia. [4] Thus the proposal in the 1916 and 1917 conscription referendums were that the parliament exercise the power to conscript civilians for military service outside Australia. [5]

In 1920 the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed the Emergency Powers Act 1920 which stated that the regulations could not impose "any form of compulsory military service or industrial conscription". [6] The exclusion of "industrial conscription" was picked up in Australia in the Public Safety Preservation Act 1923 (Vic), [7] the Section 5 of the National Security Act 1939 (Cth) [8] and the National Emergency Act 1941 (NSW). [9]

The exclusion of conscription was not part of the government bill, unlike the Constitution Alteration (Industrial Employment) Bill which excluded "any form of industrial conscription". [10] The Leader of the Opposition, Robert Menzies, criticised the social services proposal as including the power to nationalize the medical and dental professions "by making all doctors and dentists members of one government service which had a monopoly of medical and dental treatment". [11] 4 days later Menzies proposed that the words "(but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription)" be added to the bill, stating that he had borrowed the form of words from the Industrial Employment Bill, and the amendment was accepted by the government as protecting the medical and dental professions from conscription. [12]

Results

Result [13]
StateElectoral rollBallots issuedForAgainstInformal
Vote %Vote %
New South Wales1,858,7491,757,150897,88754.00764,72346.0094,540
Victoria1,345,5371,261,374671,96755.98528,45244.0260,955
Queensland660,316612,170299,20551.26284,46548.7428,500
South Australia420,361399,301197,39551.73184,17248.2717,734
Western Australia300,337279,066164,01762.2699,41237.7415,637
Tasmania154,553144,88067,46350.5865,92449.4211,493
Armed forces [lower-alpha 1]  37,02122,824 13,211 986
Total for Commonwealth4,739,8534,453,9412,297,93454.391,927,14845.61228,859
ResultsObtained majority in six states and an overall majority of 370,786 votes.Carried
  1. Armed forces totals are also included in their respective states.

Discussion

This was the fourth of eight referendum questions which have been passed as of October 2021. [13]

After the amendment the Social Services Consolidation Act 1947 was passed. In addition the Pharmaceutical Benefits scheme, held unconstitutional in the Pharmaceutical Benefits case, was reintroduced and passed as the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1947. [14]

Subsequent consideration

The meaning of the exception of "civil conscription" was considered by the High Court in General Practitioners Society v Commonwealth where Justice Gibbs took a narrow view of the exception, holding that civil conscription, in the context of medical and dental services, "refers to any sort of compulsion to engage in practice as a doctor or a dentist or to perform particular medical or dental services" and distinguished that from the permissible "regulation of the manner in which a service is performed" if the benefit is to be obtained". [15]

The High Court conducted an extensive review of what amounts to civil conscription in Wong v Commonwealth, holding that the Medicare system did not amount to civil conscription of doctors "because doctors do not compulsorily provide service for the Commonwealth, or for other bodies on the Commonwealth’s behalf. The Act does not force doctors to treat or not treat particular patients. Doctors are free to choose where and when they practise". [16]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australia Act 1986</span> Legislation by the UK and Australian Parliaments

The Australia Act 1986 is the short title of each of a pair of separate but related pieces of legislation: one an Act of the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia, the other an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. In Australia they are referred to, respectively, as the Australia Act 1986 (Cth) and the Australia Act 1986 (UK). These nearly identical Acts were passed by the two parliaments, because of uncertainty as to whether the Commonwealth Parliament alone had the ultimate authority to do so. They were enacted using legislative powers conferred by enabling Acts passed by the parliaments of every Australian state. The Acts came into effect simultaneously, on 3 March 1986.

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 Indigenous Australians should be included in official population counts for constitutional purposes. 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.

The Australian referendum of 12 December 1906 approved an amendment to the Australian constitution related to the terms of office of federal senators. Technically it was a vote on the Constitution Alteration Bill 1906, which after being approved in the referendum received the royal assent on 3 April 1907. The amendment moved the date of the beginning of the term of members of the Senate from 1 January to 1 July so that elections to the federal House of Representatives and the Senate could occur simultaneously.

The 1913 Australian referendum was held on 31 May 1913. It contained six referendum questions and was held in conjunction with the 1913 federal election.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1951 Australian Communist Party ban referendum</span> Australian communist ban referendum

On 22 September 1951, a referendum was held in Australia which sought approval to alter the Australian Constitution to give Parliament the power to make laws regarding communism and communists, so that the Parliament would be empowered to instate a law similar to the Communist Party Dissolution Act of 1950. It was not carried.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1910, was put to voters for approval in a referendum held in the 1911 referendums. The bill sought to alter the Australian Constitution to extend the Commonwealth power in respect of trade and commerce, the control of corporations, labour and employment and combinations and monopolies. All of the proposed changes were contained within the one question.

The Constitution Alteration (Corporations) Bill 1912, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to extend the Commonwealth legislative power in respect to corporations that was put to voters for approval in a referendum held in 1913.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1937 Australian referendum (Aviation)</span>

The Constitution Alteration (Aviation) Bill 1936, 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.

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.

Section 51(xxxvii) of the Constitution of Australia is a provision in the Australian Constitution which empowers the Australian Parliament to legislate on matters referred to it by any state. As Australia is a federation, both states and the Commonwealth have legislative power, and the Australian Constitution limits Commonwealth power. Section 51(xxxvii) allows for a degree of flexibility in the allocation of legislative powers.

<i>Australian Communist Party v Commonwealth</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Australian Communist Party v The Commonwealth, also known as the Communist Party Case, was a legal case in the High Court of Australia in 1951 in which the court declared the Communist Party Dissolution Act 1950 unconstitutional and invalid as being beyond the power of the Parliament. Notable Australian academic George Winterton described the case as "undoubtedly one of the High Court's most important decisions".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Australia</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Constitution of Australia is the supreme law of Australia. It is a written constitution that sets down the political structure of 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.

<i>Attorney-General (Vic) ex rel Dale v Commonwealth</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Attorney-General (Vic); Ex rel Dale v Commonwealth, commonly known as the "First Pharmaceutical Benefits case", was a High Court of Australia decision. The case dealt with limits of the powers of the Australian Federal Government under section 81 of the Constitution of Australia, to take and spend money by legislation, in this case to fund reduced prices for prescription medicines.

<i>Federated Amalgamated Government Railway & Tramway Service Association v NSW Rail Traffic Employees Association</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Federated Amalgamated Government Railway & Tramway Service Association v NSW Rail Traffic Employees Association, known as the Railway Servants Case, is an early High Court of Australia case that held that employees of State railways could not be part of an interstate industrial dispute under the conciliation and arbitration power, applying the doctrine of "implied inter-governmental immunities". The doctrine was emphatically rejected by the High Court in the 1920 Engineers' Case, and in 1930 the High Court upheld the validity of an award binding on state railway authorities.

<i>SS Kalibia v Wilson</i>

SS Kalibia v Wilson, was the first decision of the High Court of Australia on the extent of the power of the Australian Parliament to make laws about shipping and navigation, including the Admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court. The High Court held that the power was limited to overseas and interstate trade and commerce. There was no separate power about navigation and shipping.

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 (Social Services) 1946 (Cth).
  2. Attorney-General (Vic) ex rel Dale v Commonwealth (First Pharmaceutical Benefits) [1945] HCA 30 , (1945) 71 CLR 237.
  3. Zines, Leslie (1976). "The Australian Constitution 1951-1976". Federal Law Review. 7 (2): 89–144. doi:10.1177/0067205X7600700201. S2CID   159179429. (1976) 7(2) Federal Law Review 89.
  4. Defence Act 1903 (Cth) sections 59-61.
  5. "Conscription referendums, 1916 and 1917 – Fact sheet 161". National Archives of Australia. Archived from the original on 5 July 2016.
  6. "Emergency Powers Acts 1920 and 1964 and Civil Protection in Peacetime Act 1986". Statewatch News online. Retrieved 20 October 2021.
  7. Public Safety Preservation Act 1923 (Vic) section 7.
  8. "National Security Act 1939 (Cth)" . Retrieved 20 October 2021 via legislation.gov.au. section 5.
  9. National Emergency Act 1941 (NSW) section 8.
  10. Constitution Alteration (Industrial Employment) Bill 1946 (Cth).
  11. Robert Menzies, Leader of the Opposition (3 April 1946). "Constitution Alteration (Social Services) Bill 1946: Second Reading" (PDF). Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . Commonwealth of Australia: House of Representatives. p. 900.
  12. Robert Menzies, Leader of the Opposition (10 April 1946). "Constitution Alteration (Social Services) Bill 1946: Second Reading" (PDF). Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . Commonwealth of Australia: House of Representatives. pp. 1215–1216.
  13. 1 2 Handbook of the 44th Parliament (2014) "Part 5 - Referendums and Plebiscites - Referendum results". Parliamentary Library of Australia.
  14. Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1947 (Cth).
  15. General Practitioners Society v Commonwealth [1980] HCA 30 , (1980) 145 CLR 532 at p. 557.
  16. Wong v Commonwealth [2009] HCA 3 , (2009) 236 CLR 573 "Judgment summary" (PDF). High Court. 2 February 2009. Retrieved 20 October 2021.

Further reading

 

Amendments to the Constitution of Australia
3rd amendment (1928) Social services amendment
1928
5th amendment
(1967)