by Alison Ryan
To quote Kim Beasley in federal parliament “the United Nations has given the federal government a mandate of ownership for housing, property, farms and business to government control once the republic has been proclaimed”.
To quote Bob Hawke “the Fabian Society acknowledges the principal tenet of Marxism, the abolition of private property, in this case to own land”.
https://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/2351307/democracy-or-un-communism/
Despite these two quotes, we still have the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act in force, albeit the latest version.
In 2014 former PM Tony Abbott started the Federation White Paper process but it fizzled out. https://www.themandarin.com.au/64341-happened-federalism-white-paper/
Why? The “feds gave up when they realised it would probably miss the original deadline of late 2015 and may not be finished before the election”, “federal reform was treated as something that concerns a very small range of stakeholders — governments and bureaucracies,” and “There was no consideration that this is something that affects the lives and wellbeings of all Australians”.
Indeed, there was no response to the average Aussie when enquiring on its progress.
Interestingly though, the Mandarian (in 2016) says, “work on the federation will continue through the Council of Australian Government”.
The expert panel for the Fed. White Paper consisted of Prof Greg Craven, Cheryl Edwardes AM, Dr Doug McTaggart, Alan Stockdale, Ms Jennifer Westacott, Dr John Bannon (dec) and key areas of reform were health, education and housing, homelessness.
Of note the Terms of Reference stated: ‘Within the constitutional framework, consideration will be given to:
– the practicalities of limiting Commonwealth policies and funding to core national interest
matters, as typified by the matters in section 51 of the Constitution;
– reducing or, if appropriate, eliminating overlap between Local, State and Commonwealth
responsibility…;
– achieving agreement between State and Commonwealth governments about their distinct and mutually exclusive responsibilities and subsequent funding sources for associated programmes; and
– achieving equity and sustainability in the funding of any programmes that are deemed to be the responsibility of more than one level of government (emphasis added).
We should watch NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet who is saying “Australia needs a federal review informed by the past two years of combating the pandemic”. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/pandemic-lessons-for-nought-without-federation-reform/news-story/52e81cdebf2aca1c45eb3c9f59cf15a6
The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act protects against acquisition of property on unjust terms Section 51 (xxxi), and cannot authorize any form of civil conscription re medical services Section (xxiiiA).
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2013Q00005
I am really confused as to how section 51 relates to property rights at all. The exclusionary clause was included here to allow states to basically discriminate based on race (i.e. have specific laws for indig differ in each state). It seems like a bit of a stretch.
The ALGA (Australian Local Government Association) uses the same logo (https://alga.asn.au/about-alga/) that Marilyn Ferguson used on her New Age book, The Aquarian Conspiracy: Personal and Social Transformation in Our Time.
Marilyn Ferguson (dec) and former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General Robert Muller (dec) were birds of a feather and she featured as a keynote speaker at the United Nations.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
AGLA – New Age – United Nations
Roger: the link to the W A rating powers article and its statement about there being “…no obstacle in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act to prevent State Parliaments from legislating to create, empower and regulate local government…” may be misleading. My information is that, as regards the Constitution, what is not granted is denied. Some of the learned colleagues here might like to comment? The Australian Local Government Association, an un-elected body, a few years ago, held a jamboree with all local governments in Australia represented, with a view to seeking a referendum on constitutional recognition of local government. They did not proceed, because if they failed, that would be their last chance-sort of a three strikes and you’re out deal. Might this WA Government statement just be a red herring?
Yep it has been said many times simply do not roll up to vote. Stay at home, after all everyone is used to being locked up in their homes are they not? Ed
It would be great if everyone DID NOT VOTE. That would be interesting to see, indeed.
What a shame the WA ‘Government’ has no lawful standing. Like all other state corporations posing as a government. Ed
As for local government, this from WA sums it up.
https://www.dlgsc.wa.gov.au/department/publications/publication/local-governments-and-rating-powers
PS: we found (2) switched on local city councilors did get a matter corrected for us – their antennas sensed that the council employee lied in the Council Meeting, so did some investigation.
Developing Regionalism is something to look out for.
In October 2021 the Govt set up the Regional Banking Taskforce. https://treasury.gov.au/review/regional-banking-taskforce
Regional Development Australia (RDA) was established in 2012 by the Gillard Government as a network of 55 (now 52) RDA Committees across the country, bringing together all levels of government, the private sector and community groups to support the development of Australia’s regions.
“Regional governance amongst nations works in tandem with regionalism within nations, such as with Councils of Governments in the U.S. Both are purposely designed to destroy the Nation-state, making way for Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy.” “The Global Elite say Regionalism Is the Only Path To New World Order.”
https://www.technocracy.news/global-elite-regionalism-is-only-path-to-new-world-order/
We had the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) in Australia. However during the plandemic Scott Morrison replaced COAG with the National Federation Reform Council (NFRC).
https://www.pmc.gov.au/news-centre/government/coag-becomes-national-cabinet
Wanted a republic ?? Then you can tinkle with the Constitution ?
Find out how the Snowy Mountain Scheme was “financed” & how was it possible ?
Then you may get the answer …
In the 1988 Referendum in Victoria,, we voted a resounding, NO NO NO..That result was simply ignored. So who takes notice of the law in this country ? Certainly not the Politicians and the corporate entities, posing as public servants. It is only we, the phlebs, who are supposed to obey the whims of our very own dictators.
If anyone believes voting for Labor would be better than Morrison,I have to say, it would be a faster ride on the same slippery slope.
These politicians ,plus the greens are all following corporate law, This is treason as far as I can tell. People need to get together to fight these traitors. As for waiting for the elections, do you believe we will get the truth out of them ? My guess is ,.. The results may well be rigged
. What a terrible thought. But then , we have had two years of confusion , Lies propaganda, What about if , state law disagrees with Federal law. Federal law rules..It is not working is it. These people disobey the law daily , and only obey their masters , and that ain;t us .
Who likes the fact they have stolen the land we paid for, and now we have to pay the new owners rates on their land. Have you thought about that ? Not true ? Check it out..When is enough enough ? I do know people who say , ” Oh well , we are still here ,”
Comeinspinner
I have a friend who is looking at taking $100k off the local council, via the liability claim process detailed in my video, the information in it coming from the insurer of all councils in Victoria.
The friend has spent some $70k at VCAT and it looks like the Magistrate hearing the matter later this month will be looking at sending it back to VCAT, which looks to me lie obstruction, as the claim has already been proven.
But the Madge might not want to order the council to pay, as this might set a precedent.
And if it goes to the insurer, Dun and Bradstreet will be having a look at it, because the insurer previously paid out around $8.5 million on another matter, details of which I will be sending to the the Editor later.
This particular council, if another insurance payment is made, will be viewed by D&B as a liability, which is not good, as far as D&B would be concerned.
maybe that council just need to lift its game and stop doing dodgy things as a matter of course?
When I say the 1988 referendum to make councils the third tier of government failed, THAT IS FEDERAL LAW.
I speak now, only of Queensland. The Queensland Public Service Act 2008. asks, at section 4, division 4, para.2 ” what is NOT (my emphasis) a government entity” and the first answer is “Local government”. However Qld. Gov. has, I imagine like all other state govs.; state law conferring on local councils, government capabilities.
The fly in their ointment is section 109 of the 1901, in that the state law offends the federal referendum outcome,…Federal Law, that renders the state law invalid.
Yes sue the CEO for fraud, malfeasance of treason, soliciting for business to which they are not entitled, blackmail, coercion, the list goes on.
The CEO is the one who needs to receive all complaints. He/she is the Power at council.
And you write to the man/woman acting in the official office.
Under the Victorian Local Government Act the CEO, when a complaint has been received, has to take the complaint to the next council meeting.
The councilors can’t do much, because they are just, effectively, Members of the Board of the Corporation, which is what councils are-private trading entities.
A council is a business-that is it, and is why they claim “commercial-in-confidence”
when you ask sticky questions of them.
My local council even has a quiet little operation called Capital Projects.
I wonder what that is all about (I actually know, but ain’t saying, just now)?
Or the CEO’s. Ed
What needs to be tackled here is local government, which is not recognised in the Constitution, and so has no authority whatsoever. But they are implementing UN Agenda 21/30 programs, but are outside the Constitution, and so no charges of “allegiance to a foreign power” can be brought against your council.
However, council CEOs are enabled and authorised by the state government, so perhaps the charge needs to be made against the state governments?