 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled — "Constitution Alteration (Rents and Prices) 1947" ? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Results | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
The Constitution Alteration (Rents and Prices) Bill 1947, [1] 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.
Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'Constitution Alteration (Rents and Prices) 1947'?
The proposal was to insert into section 51 that the Parliament have power to make laws with respect to:
(xivA.) Rents and prices (including charges) ; [1]
Control over prices was one of the 14 post-war powers that had been rejected in the 1944 referendum. [2] The proposal was put forward and supported by the Chifley Labor government and was opposed by the Liberal/Country coalition.
The Prime Minister Ben Chifley summed up his arguments for the proposal in the Sydney Morning Herald on 28 May 1948 as:
First, because rising prices threaten the value of wages or salaries, and of savings, and undermine the stability of the economy.
Secondly, because price control by six controlling authorities in the States will not work - the choice is Commonwealth control or no control.
Thirdly, because the Government can be relied on to administer price control sanely, to decentralise as much as possible, and to remove controls as supplies become adequate.
Fourthly, because a stable Australia will be a maximum help to Britain and to a world struggling back to economic health. [3]
The Leader of the Opposition, Robert Menzies summed up his arguments against the proposal as:
First is that the Federal Government's campaign of fear, with its predictions of chaos and of soaring rents and prices if the referendum is defeated, has been thoroughly and rightly discounted from one end of Australia to another.
Secondly, the State Governments, including, of course, the Governments in those States which still have Labour Administrations, have all acknowledged that the powers of the States are ample, and have declared their willingness to undertake control, if necessary, when the Commonwealth retires from the price and rent fixing field.
The third point, now generally recognised, is that this is in no sense a referendum on the desirability or otherwise of controls. ... This is a referendum simply to determine whether the controls involved should eventually revert to the Slates or whether they should be given to Canberra for ever. ... everyone in the Commonwealth is doubtless aware now that whatever the result of Saturday's vote, the present Federal controls will continue for some considerable period. [4]
| State | Electoral roll | Ballots issued | For | Against | Informal | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vote | % | Vote | % | |||||
| New South Wales | 1,880,779 | 1,762,091 | 723,183 | 41.66 | 1,012,639 | 58.34 | 26,269 | |
| Victoria | 1,351,853 | 1,270,037 | 559,361 | 44.63 | 693,937 | 55.37 | 16,739 | |
| Queensland | 669,555 | 617,678 | 187,955 | 30.80 | 422,236 | 69.20 | 7,487 | |
| South Australia | 422,809 | 402,778 | 167,171 | 42.15 | 229,438 | 57.85 | 6,169 | |
| Western Australia | 301,223 | 278,282 | 105,605 | 38.59 | 168,088 | 61.41 | 4,589 | |
| Tasmania | 157,668 | 145,135 | 50,437 | 35.45 | 91,845 | 64.55 | 2,853 | |
| Armed forces [lower-alpha 1] | 11,905 | 6,557 | 5,213 | 135 | ||||
| Total for Commonwealth | 4,783,887 | 4,476,001 | 1,793,712 | 40.66 | 2,618,183 | 59.34 | 64,106 | |
| Results | Obtained majority in no state and an overall minority of 824,471 votes.Not carried | |||||||
This was the second of 11 referendums (as of October 2021 [update] ) that failed to achieve a majority in any state. Power to control prices was sought for a third time in the 1973 referendum. [2]
Joseph Benedict Chifley was an Australian politician, trade unionist and train driver who served as the 16th prime minister of Australia, from 1945 to 1949, holding office as the leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP). He is credited for his ambitious post-war nation building schemes, including the expansion of the wellfare state, the establishment of new national universities and the amendment of the Australian constitution to extend the power of the federal government to legislate on social services.
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 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. 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 1928, was approved by referendum on 17 November 1928. The amendment to the Australian constitution concerned financial relations between the Commonwealth of Australia and the Australian states. It became law on 13 February 1929.
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 1944 was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth an additional 14 powers for a period of five years, with Prime Minister John Curtin saying that maintaining wartime controls was necessary for Australia to re-adjust to peacetime conditions. It was put to voters for approval in an Australian referendum held on 19 August 1944.
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 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 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 Bill 1926, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to extend the Commonwealth legislative power in respect to corporations, and to give it the power to make laws with respect to trusts and combinations in restraint of trade, trade unions and employer associations. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 4 September 1926.
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 (Prices) 1973 was a bill proposing amendments to section 51 of the Australian Constitution which would give the Commonwealth legislative power over prices. The proposed changes to the constitution were not upheld, with Australians voting against the constitutional alteration.
The Constitution Alteration (Incomes) 1973 was a referendum proposed by the Australian Labor Party in December 1973 which sought to alter section 51 of the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth legislative power over incomes. The Whitlam government's most prominent reason for posing this amendment was the issue of inflation, as they argued that with government power over incomes, inflation would be better managed.
The reserved powers doctrine was a principle used by the inaugural High Court of Australia in the interpretation of the Constitution of Australia, that emphasised the context of the Constitution, drawing on principles of federalism, what the Court saw as the compact between the newly formed Commonwealth and the former colonies, particularly the compromises that informed the text of the constitution. The doctrine involved a restrictive approach to the interpretation of the specific powers of the Federal Parliament to preserve the powers that were intended to be left to the States. The doctrine was challenged by the new appointments to the Court in 1906 and was ultimately abandoned by the High Court in 1920 in the Engineers' Case, replaced by an approach to interpretation that emphasised the text rather than the context of the Constitution.
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."
Section 116 of the Constitution of Australia precludes the Commonwealth of Australia from making laws for establishing any religion, imposing any religious observance, or prohibiting the free exercise of any religion. Section 116 also provides that no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. The product of a compromise in the pre-Federation constitutional conventions, Section 116 is based on similar provisions in the United States Constitution. However, Section 116 is more narrowly drafted than its US counterpart, and does not preclude the states of Australia from making such laws.
Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead is a leading decision by the High Court of Australia that dealt with two issues under the Australian Constitution, the identification and extent of judicial power that is vested in the courts and the corporations power of the Parliament. The Court unanimously held that the inquiry provisions of the Australian Industries Preservation Act 1906 were not an exercise of judicial power. The judgement of Griffith CJ in particular continues to be cited in relation to its examination of the identification and extent of judicial power. The court, however, divided on the proper approach to the corporations power. The majority, Griffith CJ, Barton & O'Connor JJ, strongly influenced by the now discredited doctrine of reserved State powers, held that the corporations power was to be construed narrowly because the trade and commerce power did not include intrastate trade and commerce. While the reserved powers doctrine was unambiguously rejected by the High Court in 1920, Huddart, Parker was not formally overruled by the High Court until Strickland v Rocla Concrete Pipes Ltd (1971).
The Constitution Alteration Bill 1988, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to recognise local government. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 3 September 1988. The structure of the Constitution recognises government at federal and state levels, but makes no mention of local government.
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.
