This paper will discuss the options that may be available for Rick Mitterbrand in relation to the registration of a new political party under the desired name, in which he is the President and registered officer, under the Commonwealth Electoral Act (“CEA”) and whether he can avoid investigation by ASIO.
Firstly, we will examine the requirements for registration of political parties under part XI of the CEA, the procedure for dealing with an application for registration when it is lodged with the Electoral Commission and the review of certain decisions under this part of the CEA. We will then consider judicial review from a statutory perspective and whether this option may be available to Mr Mitterbrand. We will also look at merits review
…show more content…
An application for the registration of an eligible political party may be made to the Electoral Commission by, 10 members of the party, in the case of a political party, of whom one is the secretary of the party.
For the purposes of the CEA, an eligible political party, means a political party that has at least 500 members and is established on the basis of a written constitution that sets out the aims of the party. In relation to a political party, secretary means the person who holds the office and performs the duties which involve responsibility for the carrying out of the administration, and for the conduct of the correspondence, of the party.
Applications are required to be in writing, signed by the applicant or applicants and the registered officer of the party. The application must set out the name of the party, set out the name and address of the registered officer of the party. An application must include a list of the 500 names of the people who are members of the party which is to be relied on for purposes of registration. The application must state whether or the party wishes to receive funding under division 3 part XX and set out the name and address of the applicants and capacity in which they make the application. A copy of the constitution of the party must be provided along with the application fee of five hundred
…show more content…
This provides that if an application for registration is lodged with the Electoral Commission and the Commission does not give notice under subsection 131(1), where the Electoral Commission is of the opinion that it is required to refuse the application, the Electoral Commissioner must publish a notice of the application in a newspaper that is in circulation generally in each State and Territory and on the Electoral Commission's website. The Electoral Commissioner may publish the notice in any other way the Electoral Commissioner considers
I Introduction In McCloy v New South Wales, the High Court upheld the validity of provisions in the Electoral Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) that imposes caps on political donations, prohibits donations from property developers and restricts indirect campaign contributions in New South Wales. The majority did so on the grounds that whilst each of the provisions burdened the implied freedom of political communication, they had been enacted for legitimate purposes and hence, did not impermissibly infringe upon the implications within the Commonwealth Constitution.
In Unions NSW v New South Walese the argument was about the rational connection between the challenged provisions (EFED act) and the legitimate end. McCloy case however was more focused on political donations and preventing undue influence and corruption of the government. The most significant implication of the McCloy case is about re-writing of the test in Lange v Australian Broadcasting Commission
There is a small voters turn out for the ANC elections, not because the D.C constituent are not going out to vote during election time, but it due to the fact that ANC candidates do not have a lot media coverage. This is not negative thing for a few reasons, one being a small group is making decisions for the group. Next, due to the lack of media coverage constituent do not know who their Commissioners are. It is true that the constituent should find out who their Commissioner is on their own and there is a website that the constituents can go on and see who their Commissioner is; however more should be done so that constituents know who their Commissioner is. Also the constituents do not know who to blame when things are successful and things fail; this allows horrible Commissioners to keep getting elected.
Political donations play an important role within the Australian Legal System. There are many cons and pros about this particular issue and debate about how it affects the Australian democratic system and if the law on it should be altered. A political donation is a donation of money to benefit candidates, political parties, member of Parliament to help with the funding of elections, political and community activities. Parliament of Australia (2012) has claimed that it’s “Establishing a funding scheme that ensures fairness and openness requires a legislative system that promotes an equitable distribution of resources among political parties and candidates and the timely disclosure of political donations and electoral expenditure”.
The substantial controversy enveloping the many accomplishments of the Gillard governments (2010-2013) has resulted in the establishment of a highly criticised legacy which, when assessed, is acknowledged as both positive and negative in Australian political history. Within a brief term, Gillard attained many considerable successes regarding legislative achievements (Curtin, 2015, pp.193) and established a global, feminist legacy. There has been, however, a negative impact on these achievements and ultimately the Gillard government’s legacy from a parliamentary democratic perspective. Julia Gillard’s contentious rise and fall in prime ministership has produced a negative legacy in Australia history, which overshadows the successes of this
The Electoral Commision should altogether be abolished or if the chance came, modified, because of the following reasons,
“My father, with tears in his eyes, tried to smile as one friend after another grasped his hand in a last farewell. Mama was overcome with grief. At last we were all in the wagons. The drivers cracked their whips. The oxen moved slowly forward and the long journey had begun.”
The populist party also call “Papulists” existed from 1891 to 1919. The main purpose of this party was that people should given power until nation fix itself. This party was established when farmers alliance and labor union joined together and fight for their rights. Firstly they tried to make changes in the finances.
In modern America, rumors of government shutdown, debt, and the seeming inefficiency of the government to make decisive changes has given more credibility to the anti-federalist argument. It seems like so many different opinions and desires makes the successful governing of a large diverse country unrealistic under a republic. Were the anti-federalists right? While it is true that competing interests can lead to inefficient government, it is the purpose of the constitution to reign in these interests and create an effective republic. Through the compromise that arises from party politics in a republic, and ironically through the conflict of interests itself, a republic is actually able successfully govern and provide both stability and liberty for as large amount of people.
Thomas Jefferson once said. “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties”. The reason he said this was because he feared a strong central government. Then for some Americans, fears of a strong central government taking advantage came true. This is when the two political parties split.
The Populist Party otherwise called the People’s Party was founded before the Civil War, the party consists of farmers, laborers, and socialists, where most of the populist came from the South and the West. The party adopted a system to change the debt-stricken way how the farmers, support the laborers and the shortening of workdays for the industrial workers and a few types of reforms, for example the right to referendums, recall and female suffrage, which many farmers and workers believed that the Populist Party was a voice for their anger and a gross for inequality and injustice in the American society. In the meantime, Labor 's efforts to organize and collectively bargain with the trusts were systematically suppressed. All these things
There is a need for a review of the entitlements system of Members of Parliament. There needs to be an independent review into the extravagant and full-of-flaw entitlements system. Members of Parliament should not abuse their privilege as the representatives and servants of the Australian people in the Australian Parliament. The review must suggest and try to enforce changes to the system such as: reducing the salary of parliamentarians, reducing the extravagance of entitlements in general to be within the public expectations, limiting the number of flights MPs are entitled to and downgrade the flights to economy class, making changes in other areas of travel expenses, reducing the pension of former MPs to an acceptable level, and scrapping the Life Gold Pass. The politicians who have misused the entitlement system and ripped off Australian taxpayers of millions of dollars must be prosecuted and punished in the manner appropriate for fraudsters.
The rise and fall of the Populist party all started when farmers from all over the nation gathered together and addressed some common problems that they were facing. Farmers were stuck in a bad economic cycle. Prices for their crops were falling, and unfortunately farmers often had to mortgage their farms so that they could buy more land and produce more crops in order to “flourish”. There was very little suitable land to farm and cultivate and banks were foreclosing on the mortgages of farmers who could not make the payments on their loans. Moreover, the railroads were being taken advantage of farmers by charging excessive prices for shipping and storage.
Australia is a Democracy Never before have there been so many democracies in the world or so many competitive elections conducted at national, subnational and region levels. Democracy is now prescribed as inseparable from good governance and an antidote to corruption. The key aspects of what makes Australia a democracy being the electoral role, Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), referendumsm, the rule of law The separate colonies of Australia gained self-government during the nineteenth century and less than half a century later Australia became the first nation to vote itself into existence through popular referendum. How does Australia’s democracy in today’s modern age stack up on those early days of a fledgling democracy.
Emily Alcantar Independent The American Independent party is a far right political party that the United States established in 1967 by Bill Shearer. The independent American party believes in free enterprise economy and upholding laws and regulations set forth in the U.S. Constitution. They include religious foundation in Christianity. They also contain members nationwide.