Budget papers reveal that revenue from fines will almost double from $295 million in 2008-09 to $570 million in 2011-12.

“Fine revenue is estimated to increase by $137 million during 2010-11, with a mobile speed camera program and a five per cent increase in speeding fines,” the Budget says.

Drivers will not be warned before driving into the mobile speed camera’s zone. A small sign on the vehicle reads: “Safe speed check”. Another sign placed at the roadside will inform motorists: “Your speed has been checked.”

Enough said.

Source:
http://www.news.com.au/national/new-speed-cameras-deliver-a-fast-buck/story-e6frfkwi-1225890292548

Why are Petitions Ineffective ?

When a group of people share a common opinion in regards to an issue they feel strongly about, they will usually put a petition together, in the hope that positive change can be made when enough people put their signatures onto a piece of paper. Petitions are useful in some situations, they are often used within Parliament, and can sometimes be effective when enough public awareness and public pressure is focused upon the issue at hand.

In the legal sense, only the first signature in a petition has any weight. For example, if a number of people signed a petition to stop the government from doing an unfavourable action (such as introduce smart electricity meters that they want us to pay for just so they can increase their rates,  increase fines to boost revenue, privatise energy retailers, and the list goes on), the receiving body would only formally respond to the first signature in the petition, and is in no way obligated to do anything about it.

Compare the two dictionary definitions below.

Petition

–noun
1. a formally drawn request, often bearing the names of a number of those making the request, that is addressed to a person or group of persons in authority or power, soliciting some favor, right, mercy, or other benefit: a petition for clemency; a petition for the repeal of an unfair law.
2. a request made for something desired, esp. a respectful or humble request, as to a superior or to one of those in authority;

–verb (used with object)
5. to beg for or request

Mandate

–noun
1. a command or authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative: The president had a clear mandate to end the war.
2. a command from a superior court or official to a lower one.
3. an authoritative order or command: a royal mandate.

–verb  (used  with  object)
10. to authorize or decree (a particular action), as by the enactment of law.
11. to order or require; make mandatory: to mandate sweeping changes in the election process.

Dictionary Sources
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petition
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mandate

Can you notice the stark difference ?
To someone that doesn’t realise the ultimate power and authority in a democracy lies with the people. The people in government are our elected representatives, a lot of people tend to forget that. It’s no wonder though, and isn’t it interesting that they word the laws they introduce as being “in force”, and they generally label themselves as the “authority”. Things are changing though, eg, The Road Traffic Authority is now known as Vic Roads.

If the government wants to introduce a new policy, then they should be petitioning the people, not the other way around!

What is a Peoples’ Mandate ?
If you desire a change from the government, then the proper process is to express Your Will. When enough people express their will, 51% of the affected people in any given location (eg, your local shire, state or across the country), then it becomes a Peoples’ Mandate. A democratic government cannot ignore a Peoples’ Mandate, plain and simple, as the people are the authority, and when the people express their will in the correct manner, our elected representatives must obey, as they are public servants after all.

An Organised Committee is the best way to put forward a Peoples’ Mandate

The best way to get a Peoples’ Mandate in action is to have an organised committee of people, each with their own respective roles. By working as a team your message can be delivered more effectively with the support you need. There are some online resources that can assist with finding like minded people, here are some examples. Note that most groups simply use petitions, which you now know are not effective. Enlighten them on the right way to go about it with a Peoples’ Mandate!

Can Do Better

Get Up Australia

Recommended Books

All of these can be bought from the Australian League of Rights bookshop.

Your Will Be Done (download as PDF) – contains sample letters on how to express Your Will.

I’m only one – what can I do? by Bruce Chapman
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1342903

Your Will Be Done by Arthur A. Chresby
http://isbndb.com/d/book/your_will_be_done_a01.html
http://isbndb.com/d/book/your_will_be_done.html
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2830439
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1596682

Towards Better Government by Arthur A. Chresby
http://isbndb.com/d/book/towards_better_government.html

How to get what you want : elements of organization, strategy and tactics by Arthur A. Chresby
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/183542

Some activists are urging people to oppose the proposed Planning Amendment VC67 which will rezone residential boundaries across Melbourne allowing for aggressive development & construction, that will cause some problems for land owners who will be forced to sell/lose their land to make way for the sweeping developments.

The text below is from CanDoBetter.org – Amendment VC67: Urgent Appeal to all Victorian activist groups

Planning Backlash is joining Protectors of Public Lands and Green Wedge Coalition to oppose Amendment VC67, which is being brought to Parliament by Justin Madden (Minister for Planning) on June 22.

This amendment must not be passed.

Please join the rally 1 – 2 PM

June 22

On the steps of Victorian Parliament, Melbourne.

Details from Protectors of Public Lands:

Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. has joined with the Green Wedges Coalition Inc. and Planning Backlash to hold a protest SAY NO TO VC67 PLANNING AMENDMENT – STOP URBAN SPRAWL, GREEN WEDGES DESTRUCTION AND HIGH
RISE ON TRAM/BUS ROUTES. It is not exaggerating to say that, if ratified by Parliament, this amendment could signify a catastrophe for Melbourne – the face and fabric of our city will be changed irrevocably forever. We are, therefore, inviting member groups, friends and supporters to our protest:

Rationale for Rally:

It is expected that, at this next sitting of Parliament commencing on 22 June 2010, Planning Minister Madden will be putting a resolution to the Upper House for ratification of VC 67 Planning Amendment. This is to approve extension of Melbourne’s urban growth boundary involving alienation of Green Wedges and will also increase density (Government lingo for high
rise) of residential development, including along tram and bus routes.

We need you to write to Coalition (Liberals and Nationals) Members of Parliament plus the DLP Member Peter Kavanagh urging them to take a last stand and vote no on VC 67. It would be helpful if you wrote to the Greens commending the Members for their stand opposing VC67. (I will send email addresses in my next communication. Also some extracts of VC 67.)

The maps showing the new Urban Growth Boundary and affected shires were only made available by the Department of Sustainability at the request of MPs late on 9 June.

Amendment VC67 information from DSE

Why UGB expansion plans are seriously flawed: analysis by Jenni Bundy

Topher is back with a vengence as he uncovers the Magic Solution to Melbournes Water Crisis which successive governments have tried to hide and ignore. Topher cuts through the PR spin with his customary cynicism backed by his thorough research and finds a simple, compelling truth.

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT

CLAUSE 5 – Operation of the Constitution and laws [see Note 3]

This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State; and the laws of the Commonwealth shall be in force on all British ships, the Queen’s ships of war excepted, whose first port of clearance and whose port of destination are in the Commonwealth.

SECT 61 – Executive power

The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor General as the Queen’s representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth.

SECT 71 – Judicial power and Courts

The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Supreme Court, to be called the High Court of Australia, and in such other federal courts as the Parliament creates, and in such other courts as it invests with federal jurisdiction. The High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice, and so many other Justices, not less than two, as the Parliament prescribes.

SECT 79 – Number of judges

The federal jurisdiction of any court may be exercised by such number of judges as the Parliament prescribes.

SECT 80 – Trial by jury

The trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury, and every such trial shall be held in the State where the offence was committed, and if the offence was not committed within any State the trial shall be held at such place or places as the Parliament prescribes.

SECT 92 – Trade within the Commonwealth to be free

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

But notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, goods imported before the imposition of uniform duties of customs into any State, or into any Colony which, whilst the goods remain therein, becomes a State, shall, on thence passing into another State within two years after the imposition of such duties, be liable to any duty chargeable on the importation of such goods into the Commonwealth, less any duty paid in respect of the goods on their importation.

SECT 109 – Inconsistency of laws

When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.

SECT 114 – States may not raise forces. Taxation of property of Commonwealth or State

A State shall not, without the consent of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, raise or maintain any naval or military force, or impose any tax on property of any kind belonging to the Commonwealth, nor shall the Commonwealth impose any tax on property of any kind belonging to a State.

SECT 128 – Mode of altering the Constitution [see Note 1]

This Constitution shall not be altered except in the following manner:

The proposed law for the alteration thereof must be passed by an absolute majority of each House of the Parliament, and not less than two nor more than six months after its passage through both Houses the proposed law shall be submitted in each State and Territory to the electors qualified to vote for the election of members of the House of Representatives.

But if either House passes any such proposed law by an absolute majority, and the other House rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with any amendment to which the first mentioned House will not agree, and if after an interval of three months the first mentioned House in the same or the next session again passes the proposed law by an absolute majority with or without any amendment which has been made or agreed to by the other House, and such other House rejects or fails to pass it or passes it with any amendment to which the first mentioned House will not agree, the Governor General may submit the proposed law as last proposed by the first mentioned House, and either with or without any amendments subsequently agreed to by both Houses, to the electors in each State and Territory qualified to vote for the election of the House of Representatives.

When a proposed law is submitted to the electors the vote shall be taken in such manner as the Parliament prescribes. But until the qualification of electors of members of the House of Representatives becomes uniform throughout the Commonwealth, only one half the electors voting for and against the proposed law shall be counted in any State in which adult suffrage prevails.

And if in a majority of the States a majority of the electors voting approve the proposed law, and if a majority of all the electors voting also approve the proposed law, it shall be presented to the Governor General for the Queen’s assent.

No alteration diminishing the proportionate representation of any State in either House of the Parliament, or the minimum number of representatives of a State in the House of Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or otherwise altering the limits of the State, or in any manner affecting the provisions of the Constitution in relation thereto, shall become law unless the majority of the electors voting in that State approve the proposed law.

In this section, Territory means any territory referred to in section one hundred and twenty-two of this Constitution in respect of which there is in force a law allowing its representation in the House of Representatives.

Legislation Link

http://www.lawalert.info/au/legislation/cth-consolidated-acts-commonwealth-of-australia-constitution-act

Referendum Dates and Results

http://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/referendums/Referendum_Dates_and_Results.htm

Download this page in PDF format

commonwealth-of-australia-constitution-act