WITHOUT PREJUDICE 5 Mr Tony Abbott MP Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.

au Tony, as a CONSTITUTIONALIST I hold it very important that those elected to the Federal Parliament understand the division between Federal and State legislative powers and so also what can be done or not be done within this. Obviously, there appears to be a lack of anyone in the current Parliament to understand this perhaps a Liberal Senator of Victoria ought to vacate his seat and then I take his seat so I can so to say knock some sense into the Parliament. Lets look at Australian Post. The Framers of the Constitution held that it was more appropriate that the Commonwealth of Australia would deal with the national interest of citizens in regard of telecommunication and postal services. Hence s69 of the constitution providing for the transfer of these Colonial department to the newly created Commonwealth of Australia. The Framers of the Constitution also provided for separate insurance legislative powers one for State and one for Federal insurances. As such any encroachment would be unconstitutional. The same with State and Federal banking. What this means is that any insurance and banking being purely State issues should be left with the States and anything otherwise is within the federal level. Any notion, for example, that by the Commonwealth having taken over the State Bank of Victoria then the State of Victoria no longer can have a State Bank would be absurd, because the constitution specifically provide for this legislative power. A State and the Commonwealth cannot interfere or undermine with the application of the constitution! While banking of a State must remain within the State environment and as such a State bank (where it were to exist) cannot set up branches in another State or territory, there is no obstacle for a customer of the bank to transfer monies from a State bank to another bank for payment of goods, etc. The same with insurances. State insurance companies should only be able to insure those residing within the relevant State and not beyond it. Hence, home and/or content insurance would be a State matter that cannot be exercised by an insurance company of a federal level. Likewise, State motor vehicle insurance must be limited to vehicles that are registered within its state borders. It doesnt mean a motor vehicle driven beyond state borders cannot if involved in an accident have any payments made, if appropriate, to another vehicle owner registered in another State but that the insurance can only be taken out by a State citizens in the State in which the vehicle is registered. Today, I received so called junk mail (meaning mail that is not showing the name and address of the property owner and/or the tenant) from Australian Post regarding Gold Comprehensive Car Insurance. In my view this violates the separation of state and Commonwealth powers. Australian Post Car insurance cannot be deemed incidental to its ordinary function of postal and telecommunication services.
.

2-4-2014

Ref: 20140402-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Federal issues - Senate

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-They do not require to get authority from home, for this reason: That the local Constitutions empower the colonies separately to make laws for the peace, order, and good government p1 2-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

of the community, and that is without restriction, except such small restrictions as are imposed by the Constitutions themselves, and, of course, the necessary restriction that they can only legislate for their own territory. The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given. END QUOTE

Quite frankly I find it sickening how the Commonwealth has franchised or otherwise provided private individuals to run Australian post offices. While the Commonwealth has certain constitutional privileges such as it cannot be taxes by a State without its consent, we now have 10 post offices which are all but in name private operations and yet those employed under the banner of Australian Post are in fact mainly merely subcontractors, not at all employed by Australian Post. The encroachment upon State powers in my view must be condemned and must be immediately corrected.
.

15 I used to get Australian Post junk mail in my Australian Post Only letterbox, and I pointed out to the postman that any Australian Post article that doesnt bear any name and address of the relevant owner/tenant is junk mail and should be placed in the JUNK MAIL letterbox. I also explained that any election material during an election period, at least within the State of Victoria is not junk mail regardless if it doesnt bear any name and address of the owner/tenant as it is 20 excluded by legislation as such to be regarded junk mail. Because when I used to stand as a candidate in political elections I was often confronted by people unaware that how-to-vote cards/material were not junk mail and as such legitimately could be placed in a letterbox despite the sign of NO JUNK MAIL. Australian Post really is no longer the kind of postal services an ordinary person should be able 25 to expect. The post mistress called me to let me know there were articles for me to collect at the post office. Just that I had no cards for this to collect and finally the postman delivered the cards that no one was found at home and so I could collect the parcels from the post office the next day. Moment, the parcels never left the Post Office in the first place. I was later given the understanding by the post mistress that the parcels were deemed to heavy and so they were left at 30 the Post Office for collection. The sender of the parcel (items I had purchased) however in its Terms and Conditions state that the parcel is deemed to be delivered when an attempt was made for delivery. As such, even so the Australian Post never really attempted a delivery, the fact that it merely so to say dropped of the card claiming to have tried this then for the company who sent the parcel to me the parcel 35 was deemed delivered and legal conditions associated with this then applies. Would it not really be much better if Australian Post stuck to its principle core obligation to provide delivery of postal items and do so appropriately rather than venture out embarking on other business activities when it cant even handle its core obligations? While Australian Post may hold it less problematic to manage staff having it outsourced to 40 private contractors and sub-contractors, in the end it should be accountable for this.
Hansard 17-4-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS: It is just as important that the Federal Government shall have the care and management of the vehicles which carry human beings and their goods as that it should have the care and [start page 769] management of the vehicles or ways which carry letters and telegrams. END QUOTE

45

(Notice that they even refer to management of the vehicles not just legislative powers) 50 Hansard 17-4-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS: If you give over the telegraph and postal business you thereby hand to the custody of the Federal Government all the local appointments-the appointing of the postmasters, clerks, and other officers, who do not do national, but the purest local business; and you at once raise up a large army of civil servants , the influence of which we want to dissociate from our national life p2 2-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

55

END QUOTE

(Writers note: Notice they refer to appointments of officers, etc and large army of civil servants clearly this relates to Commonwealth Management, not some private company) Just ask yourself how many Ministers have bothered about the management of vehicles in Australian Post and Telecommunication? The truth is that they are merely interested in photo opportunities and not about managing the postal services. While the Framers of the Constitution specifically made clear that postal services and telecommunication should remain in Commonwealth of Australia hands and not like in the USA in the hands of private companies, we see however that there is a plethora of private companies operating in postal and telecommunication services. And then it is argued that Australian Post is not profitable enough! Blame the Federal government for having allowed this unconstitutional system to operate! The Commonwealth of Australia was provided with (constitutional) legislative powers regarding postal and telecommunication services because of that it would take over from the colonies (now States) the postal and telecommunication services. Hence, the Commonwealth cannot override s69 and sell of the postal or telecommunication services. Albeit it purportedly was done with Telecom/Telstra it doesnt make it constitutionally valid. The problem ordinary citizens are faced with is that if politicians elected to represent the constituents act in direct conflict to the true meaning and application of the constitution then why should citizens be bound to respect those politicians doing so? The Commonwealth of Australia so to say must present itself as a model citizen by adhering to the true meaning and application of the constitution and this clearly is fails to do. I see no issue with the Commonwealth to provide motor vehicle insurances for vehicles registered within Commonwealth of Australia territories. That to me is the only appropriate area anyone can engage in taking out motor vehicle insurance with the Commonwealth of Australia. Australian Post however cannot conduct this kind of insurance for and on behalf of any insurance company nor do so for itself, because the cost of doing so would not be within its tax exempted operations as a Commonwealth entity. If with all Liberal Senators not s single one can understand/comprehend this then surely you ought to be able to get one in Victoria (where I reside) to make way for me to be appointed instead so finally we can get someone into the Parliament who has a much better understanding/perception as to what is constitutionally permissible.
.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

HANSARD 14-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. REID: If it appeared on the face of the Bill, we have to assume first that the Government would bring in a Bill which on the face of it was illegal, and that there would not be one pure soul in the House to call attention to it, and that even the immaculate Senate would not contain an angelic mind that would do its duty to the Constitution. Heaven help the Constitution if it is to be run on these lines! The Upper House will not allow its rights to be violated if they are put in the Constitution, and the object of the amendment is simply to prevent an unfortunate accident, which would happen over and over again in Acts of Parliament, from rendering an Act after it has received the Royal assent, and which might be, perhaps, the deliberate policy of the country, accepted by vast majorities in both Houses, invalid. I would not have proposed this amendment in face of the serious debate it has provoked. I proposed, if no member of the Convention has a previous amendment: END QUOTE Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HOLDER.Surely there would be at least one representative out of the whole Senate and one member of the House of Representatives, who would have individuality enough, and strength enough, to get up and challenge the order of any particular measure which might be disorderly under this clause of the Constitution. p3 2-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

55

Mr. ISAACS.-They would not all sit on the same side of the House. Mr. HOLDER.-I should think not. They would not all be Ministerialists, or all members of the Opposition, or all members of any particular party; and I cannot believe that any Bill which contained anything objectionable at all could pass through both Houses of the Federal Legislature without finding some one member of either of the two Houses who would rise to a point of order , and have such a Bill laid aside of necessity as being out of order under this provision. END QUOTE Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

10 QUOTE
Mr. CARRUTHERS (New South Wales).-It is worth while considering the stages that a proposed law has to go through, and the opportunity afforded to a member of either House or a member of the Executive to call attention to any infraction or infringement of the Constitution. It does not require a majority of the members of the House of Representatives to insist that the Constitution shall be obeyed in the matter of procedure; it only requires one solitary member to rise to a point of order , and the Speaker has to give a legal interpretation of the rules of procedure. It only requires one member of the Senate to call the attention of the President to the fact that a Bill is introduced contrary to the Constitution for that proposed law to be ruled out of order. It does not require a majority of the states to insist that the Constitu tion shall be obeyed, because a majority of the states cannot by resolution infringe the Constitution. Neither House could pass the standing order which would give the majority power to dissent from the Speaker's or President's ruling. The standing orders only confer certain explicit power. They give no power to either House to pass an order which would enable its members to amend the Constitution. END QUOTE QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-I did not say that it took place under this clause, and the honorable member is quite right in saying that it took place under the next clause; but I am trying to point out that laws would be valid if they had one motive, while they would be invalid if they had another motive. END QUOTE Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power? Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry. END QUOTE

15

20

25 HANSARD 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

30

35

40

And, the Framers of the Constitution did indicate that by placing postal services and communication into the hands of the commonwealth of Australia then there would be one postal rate APPLYING THROUGHOUT the Commonwealth of Australia. Well, it seems to me that 45 other than ordinary letters this really is not complied with! Why not? I look forwards to your detailed reply! Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

50

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(

Our name is our motto!)

p4 2-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati