By Alison Ryan
The big party players in Australia want national, regional and local governance and this is the way for international governance. We should look at their plans, decide on who respects the way of constitutional democracy, and vote out the treasonous parties.
Go to the websites of the parties and read their Media Releases. Are any espousing Federalism? Is it according to the Australian Commonwealth Constitution enacted in 1901 at Federation? Is their Federalism a “grass roots” democracy preaching Local Government and Regionalism = Nationalism? Or does their democracy rely on the powers of a parliament conforming in its structure to the Australian Commonwealth Constitution of 1901? Are any parties wanting to cut out State Government? What will this then be replaced with?
Whilst Australians have been getting on with their busy lives, our MPs have been outsourcing power of governance to non- elected “experts”, and to anyone who wants to get into the political system via Local Government and Regionalism streams.
There are several hundred Local Government organisations in Australia. All Local Governments are established by acts of the State Parliaments. Right now, Local Government advocacy groups and Regional Australia advocacy groups are doing an end-run around the Australian Commonwealth Constitution. There is no Local Government nor Regional Government jurisdiction in the Australian Commonwealth Constitution, reinforced by the 1988 referendum when the people said ‘no’ to Local Government.
The Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government (ACELG) at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) was formed under former Labor PM Kevin Rudd. The ACELG is a Consortium of five – the Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG), the Centre for Local Government at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), University of Canberra, Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA) and the Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia. LGMA changed its name in 2015 to Local Government Professionals Australia.
ACELG has hosted an international roundtable on metropolitan governance with the “Forum of Federations, the global network on federalism and devolved governance”; (Link: About The Forum – Forum of Federations (forumfed.org)) and the Major Cities Unit of Infrastructure Australia. Former Labor Senator Margaret Reynolds said ACELG made impressive progress in achieving its vision of Worldclass local government. Link: ACELG Annual Report – 2009 (uts.edu.au)
UTS says that the Australian Classification of Local Governments (ACLG) divides Australia into urban, regional and rural classifications. Link: future_proofing.pdf (uts.edu.au)
Regional Australia Institute (RAI) says it’s at the forefront of a powerful national movement and it is pushing the Regionalisation of our nation. They held the Regions Rising National Summit, 17-18 August 2022 in Canberra. It aims to “Rebalance the Nation” through its National Regionalisation Framework. The RAI Board consists of former Leader of the National Party Mark Vaile, former S.A. Liberal Premier Rob Kerin, and other influential people. RAI calls itself an independent “think tank”. Link: Board (regionalaustralia.org.au). Link: Who we are (regionalaustralia.org.au)
UCLG, UCLG-ASPAC, ICLEI, CLGF are members of the Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments. The Global Taskforce convenes the World Assembly of Local and Regional Governments, the joint voice of local and regional leaders from around the world. Link: Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments – Habitat III (habitat3.org)
Link: World Assembly of Local and Regional Governments | Global Taskforce (global-taskforce.org)
Regional Development Australia (RDA), formerly the Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government was a Labor Government department under Simon Crean who was the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government. This department existed between September 2010 and December 2011. Within this department an Administrative Arrangements Order took hold of the Jervis Bay Territory, the Territory of Cocos (Keeling) Islands, the Territory of Christmas Island, the Coral Sea Islands Territory, the Territory of Ashmore and Cartier Islands, Commonwealth responsibilities on Norfolk Island, Constitutional development of the Northern Territory and the ACT, Planning and Land Management in the ACT, Regional Development, Matters relating to Local Government, Regional Australia policy and co-ordination, and Support for Ministers and Parliamentary secretaries with regional responsibilities. There you have it. The Fabian PM Julia Gillard and her government undermining the Australian Commonwealth Constitution for the future federation of socialists. See Link: Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government – Wikipedia
The $1 billion Regional Development Australia Fund was set up following Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s signed commitment with Federal Independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott.
About the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations –
These amendments would give:
1. WHO unilateral authority to declare Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC)…
2. Regional Directors of the WHO the ability to declare Public Health Emergencies of Regional Concern (PHERC)…
… without the possibility of appeal by the sovereign nation.
“This international pandemic treaty would foster an all-of-government and all-of-society approach, strengthening national, regional and global capacities and resilience to future pandemics.”
Regionalism is also a tool of the UN for integrating economies. The 5 UN Regional Commissions – United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC), United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (UNESCWA) work like underground moles at the subregional and regional levels to make an end-run around national sovereignty.
@crisscross767 – In a nutshell, theoretically, higher interest rates suck more money from the consumers back to the banks, lessening consumer spending power and demand for goods. That supposedly puts a brake on or lessens the price of goods sold.
Money is pretty much no longer “printed” by the Grubbernment, it’s created out of thin air by the banks by way of credit entries on computers as per the fractional reserve permission GRANTED to private banks by the Grubbernment.
In other words, the PRIVATE BANKS control our national money supply, just like Nathan Rothschild always dreamed it.
What is the mechanism by which raising interest rates lowers inflation?
The Protocols of the Learned
Elders of Zion
POVERTY OUR WEAPON
All people are chained down to heavy toil by poverty more firmly than ever. They were chained by slavery and serfdom; from these, one way and another, they might free themselves. These could be settled with, but from want they will never get away. We have included in the constitution such rights as to the masses appear fictitious and not actual rights. All these so-called “Peoples Rights” can exist only in idea, an idea which can never be realized in practical life. What is it to the proletariat laborer, bowed double over his heavy toil, crushed by his lot in life, if talkers get the right to babble, if journalists get the right to scribble any nonsense side by side with good stuff, once the proletariat has no other profit out of the constitution save only those pitiful crumbs which we fling them from our table in return for their voting in favor of what we dictate, in favor of the men we place in power, the servants of our AGENTUR … Republican rights for a poor man are no more than a bitter piece of irony, for the necessity he is under of toiling almost all day gives him no present use of them, but the other hand robs him of all guarantee of regular and certain earnings by making him dependent on strikes by his comrades or lockouts by his masters.
Quite an interesting co-incidence:
Expert Advisory Panel for the White Paper on Reform of the Federation 2014 were:
• Professor Greg Craven Chair> Holy See / Great Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St Gregory the Great (KGCSGG) (2015) [First Class (GCSG)] /recognition of personal service to the Holy See & RC Church, through their unusual labors, their support of the Holy See, and their excellent examples set forth in their communities and their countries.
• The Hon Cheryl Edwardes The Hon Cheryl Edwardes > http://signalboost.com.au/sites/edconnect/about-us/our-board/. School community learning/Law/ policy for public participation in politics, Civic Educators Network > https://www.constitutionalcentre.wa.gov.au/AboutUs/Pages/AdvisoryBoard.aspx [links to Major General Advisory Group Members
• Dr Doug McTaggart> speaker at Crawford School of Public Policy ANU College of Asia & the Pacific/ANU Council Member
• The Hon Alan Stockdale>Treasurer and Minister for IT and Multimedia in the Victorian Kennett Government between 1992 and 1999/extensive experience working with governments, government agencies, small businesses and some of Australia’s largest companies
• Ms Jennifer Westacott>Chief Executive of the Business Council of Australia since 2011, bringing extensive policy experience in both the public and private sectors
• The Hon Dr John Bannon AO> involved in research of federation, the Australian Constitution and federal-state relations in Australia. ((7 May 1943 – 13 December 2015)
In 2022 Professor Greg Craven and Professor Cheryl Saunders were appointed to the Constitutional Expert Group for the Voice Referendum.
(Sorry links for 2014 probably won’t work; try: Wayback Machine >
http://wahousinghub.org.au/display/NEWS/2016/03/02/Reform%2Bof%2Bthe%2BFederation%2BForum )
Editor, cairnsnews – ” Actually created by corporate state governments as another branch of the bureaucracy, ie, another department.”
Explained in one well worded sentence.
Actually created by corporate state governments as another branch of the bureaucracy, ie, another department. The state has total control over local government and electing councilors and mayors is just another smoke and mirrors trick compliments of deep state. The CEO and his council bureaucrats have all the power. Elected members have none. There is no Constitutional recognition of local government as such. That is why we had a referendum in 1988. Ed
Federal and State Governments are definitely Corporations. At best, Local Government is shonky Government.
State (shonky) Governments put the present Local Governments in place.
A shonky mob put in place another shonky mob.
Put up all of the (not shonky) legislation, etc, you like. The shonky system won already. Over time it will all be accepted as 100% legit.
Any person who believes that we can fix the mess we are in, by quoting what “should be” in place, has a lot more reality checking research to do.
The parasites do not care about you or your “proper / real well quoted and referenced Constitution or legislation, laws,,etc.
How about quoting and referencing what they have put in place to have total control over us?
The shonky legislation/laws. regulations. treaties, agreements, etc, etc.
We lost our Governments decades ago.
If we want them back, one way or another we will have to fight for them.
I would rather replace them with community run decision making organizations.
As the corrupt corporate AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT continually is subservient to its globalist US masters it should be stated and emphasised that after the monumental High Court case of Moeliker v Chapman B8/2000 [2000] HCATrans 242 (17 May 2000). This case in the High Court of Australia had “no legal personality”. This is directly supportive of the juristic or juridical name they use to interact with PERSONS. I was threatened by ATO and this entailed them threatening to “hand my case to a debt recovery agency”. Needless to say I responded with a letter and 6 months later got a letter stating in summary “read the tax laws. 🙂 That was three years ago and heard nothing since.
As I stated before the courts argue that this is all nonsense however I have papers from 1935, 1889 and 2015 all describing this fact and from Pennsylvania Law School, Notre Dame and other sources. I have hard copies but the expansive ones are:-
1. 3-1-1935 Analysis of the Notion of Juristic Personality from Notre Dame Law Review
2. Law of Corporations Part 1b 1899 University of Pennsylvania Law Review
3. Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs Read this one first
Volume 4 Issue 1 Seventeenth Biennial Meeting of the International Academy of Commercial and Consumer Law December 2015 The Natural Person, Legal Entity or Juridical Person and Juridical Personality
I have submitted these before and amazing how cases get dropped.
An article about the High Court case.
http://greataustraliandream.net.au/the-australian-tax-office-is-not-a-legal-entity/
I would now like to highlight the fraud or deceitful politicians have brought on us by the bastardization of Section 80 of our Constitution.
80. 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.
Historical Note.—The first part of the clause, as framed and passed in 1891, ran
” The trial of all indictable offences cognizable by any Court established under the
authority of this Act shall be by jury.”
At the Adelaide session, 1897, the clause was introduced almost verbatim as in 1891.
Mr. Higgins opposed the clause, on the ground that the question of trial by jury might safely be left to the Federal Parliament ; but it was agreed to. (Conv. Deb., Adel., pp. 990-1.)At the Melbourne session an amendment suggested by the Legislative Assembly of South Australia, to omit the requirement that trial should be by jury, was supported by Mr. Glynn and Mr. Higgins. Mr. Wise supported the clause, as a necessary safeguard of individual liberty. Mr. Isaacs thought the clause afforded little guarantee, as it might be evaded by a technicality. After further debate, the amendment was negative on division by 17 votes to 8. An amendment by Mr. Higgins, to insert” unless Parliament otherwise provides ” before the words ” be held in the State where,” was negative. Before the first report, the clause was verbally amended by the Drafting
Committee. (Conv. Deb., Melb.. pp. .350-4.) On recommittal after the first report, the words “trial of all indictable offences” were, on Mr. Barton’s motion, altered to ” trial on indictment of any offence.” The object was to allow summary punishment of minor offences and contempts, even though they might be indictable. Mr. Isaacs thought that the clause, in either form, would have little real effect. (Conv. Deb., Melb., pp. 1894-5.)
Compare the unscrupulous ‘judges’ upholding the status quo of crimes when compared to the power of a jury in ‘jury nullification’ which is what saved the Eureka Stockade party from hanging.
This video I saw many years ago from Aaron Russo (RIP) called Freedom to Fascism. It is a fascinating and definitely parallel situation to Australia. The relevant part starts at 43 minute mark and a lady explains how as part of a jury they found someone in a tax case innocent and how it awakened them to the fraud in their own country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNNeVu8wUak
Real democracy in ANY country is upheld by juries of our peers and NOT bewigged thieves for the bankers.
As Darryl rightly says the Quick & Garran commentaries states in the pages the remaining powers retained by the States are:
Residuary Legislative Powers. —The residuary authority left to the Parliament
of each State, after the exclusive and concurrent grants to the Federal Parliament,
embraces a large mass of constitutional, territorial, municipal, and social powers,
including control over :
Agriculture and the cultivation of the soil
:
Banking — banking within the limits of the State :
Borrowing money on the sole credit of the State :
Bounty and aids on mining for gold, silver, or metals :
Charities—establishment and management of asylums :
Constitution of State : amendment, maintenance and execution of
Corporations ix—other than foreign corporations and trading or financial corporations
Court)!—civil and criminal, maintenance and organization for the execution of
the laws of a State :
Departments of State Government — regulation of
Education
Factories
Fisheries within the State :
Forestry
Friendly Societies
Game
Health
Inspection of goods imported or proposed to be exported in order to detect
fraud or prevent the spread of disease :
936 COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION. [Sec. 107.
Insurance – State Insurance within the limits of the State :
Intoxicants—the regulation and prohibition of the manufacture within the State
of fermented, distilled, or intoxicating liquids :
Justice—Courts :
Land—management and sale of public lands within the State :
Licenses—the regulation of the issue of licenses to conduct trade and industrial
operations, within the State, such as liquor licenses and auctioneers’
licenses. Subject however to sec. 92 :
Manufacturers— see factories :
Mines and Mining :
Municipal institutions and local government :
Officers—appointment and payment of public officers of the State :
Police – regulations, social and sanitary :
Prisons— State prisons and reformatories :
Railways—control and construction of railways within the State, subject to^
constitutional limitations (see Restricted Powers) :
Rivers—subject to constitutional limitations (see Restricted Powers) :
Shops—subject to constitutional limitations (see Restricted Powers
Taxation on order to the raising of revenue for State purposes (see Restricted
Powers) :
Trade and Commerce within the State (see Restricted Powers) :
Works—construction and promotion of public works and internal improvements,
subject to the constitutional limitations (see Restricted Powers) :
Now Darryl says as shown “Municipal institutions and local government :” however as I have shown Councils are now considered as trading companies under {as shown above in the excerpt} the High Court ruling and Councils in the days preceding the Constitution primarily volunteer and unpaid positions except for expenses and some did have stipends where appropriate. “Corporations ix—other than foreign corporations and trading or financial corporations”
If we also look at the site below from the AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT an excerpt states quite clearly
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Former_Committees/reffed/reffed/report/c06
Chapter 6
Local government
6.1 Australia’s local governments provide an increasing range of services beyond the ‘roads, rates and rubbish’ functions with which they are traditionally associated. Yet despite their significant responsibilities and close relationship with citizens at the level of suburb, town, city and region, local governments in Australia are relatively poorly funded, lack constitutional recognition, and are vulnerable to cost shifting. I would emphasise “lack constitutional recognition”. Thanks and I hope this clears up the issue.
Sec 107 and 108 of the Constitution do not refer to Councils. They are acknowledgements that the States have the power to enact legislation which does not conflict with Commonwealth legislation or with matters specifically reserved for the Commonwealth.
The NSW Local Government Act 1993 is an example of such a power. The failed Referendum on inserting Councils into the Constitution does not invalidate the NSW legislation.
Local government IS recognised in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 UK. Sections 107 & 108 referenced in the Quick and Garron on pages 935/6. They are regulated by the State Government .
cataclysmic duck, said: “The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission
are entities that have a body corporate status, but are prescribed in enabling legislation as non-corporate Commonwealth entities.?
What we are told and what is the truth is often opposites. The parasites are treating us as simple minded brain dead fools. The sheeple keep proving that they may be right about that.
.
For many years I had to keep up with legislation, codes, rules, advisories, etc, whilst working for a corporate government corporate department
Over a period of 25 years, I noticed that Acts and Regulations, etc, were becoming more involved, more difficult to follow, to easily understand any rely on.
A section of one Act may have a person think that they are on a win, then later on down the track they are shot down with a section of another Act, that is hidden away, hard to find, etc.
One example: I had a long running battle with a person who taught legislation to professional government employees.
I let him hang himself by way of his own brilliant knowledge of the shonky legislation, which included an Act he kept quoting that had not been in force/use for several years, but was still being taught and in use in a large government department.
He did not realize how easy it is to “play” with the legislation to get different results, or how messy and out of control it is..
It is shonky, a mess, often (on purpose) opposite to what is thought it should be.
Example: Health Systems Privacy Act, is there to protect the system, not the people.
A play on the meaning/ interpretation of a section of an Act is just one of their many methods to hide what they are doing to fully control us.
Scotoz, ‘We are at a loss how the definition and meaning of a “government entity” can be defined as “not an entity”?’
Maybe refers to Departments of State and Parliamentary Departments, that are non-corporate Commonwealth entities not prescribed by an Act or the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule.
Another doozy for you.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission
are entities that have a body corporate status, but are prescribed in enabling legislation as non-corporate Commonwealth entities.
For those who want more indepth information I can recommend ‘Australia The Concealed Colony’ which was a submission to the UN. It can be found here.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B21_coIgIYu2SmtYZmpfYTdWNHc/view?pli=1&resourcekey=0-fbiHzLIecud5P6QVVz6V2g This is a long, informative and is around 467 pages so take it in steps.
Another great read is by the late Arthur Chresby’s “Your Will Be Done”
https://ourconstitution.org/your_will.php
OR
https://constitutionwatch.com.au/your-will-be-done/ This ‘book’ is only 37 pages long but very informative in a fight against ‘public servants’. We are the ‘Masters’ and they are the ‘servants’
@SCOTOZ: re Council is not a corporation in NSW
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 – SECT 220
Legal status of a council
220 Legal status of a council
(1) A council is a body politic of the State with perpetual succession and the legal capacity and powers of an individual, both in and outside the State.
**********************************************************
(2) A council is not a body corporate (including a corporation).
***************************************************************
(3) A council does not have the status, privileges and immunities of the Crown (including the State and the Government of the State).
(4) A law of the State applies to and in respect of a council in the same way as it applies to and in respect of a body corporate (including a corporation).
This is an FYI and why so many purported ‘government Statutory bodies’ have ABN numbers dating from 1999 for the most part. Not surprising to me but I suspect surprising to many of you. The reason? TAX LAWS!!!!
If you go to the ABN Lookup site and you click on the definitions of meanings you will find this and they are thinking we are fools.
According to the A New Tax System (Australian Business Number) Act 1999, government entity means:
a Department of State of the Commonwealth; or
1. a Department of the Parliament established under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999; or
2. an Executive Agency, or Statutory Agency, within the meaning of the Public Service Act 1999; or
3. a Department of State of a State or Territory; or
4. an organisation that:
1. is not an entity; and
2. is either established by the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory (whether under a law or not) to carry on an enterprise or established for a public purpose by an Australian law; and
3. can be separately identified by reference to the nature of the activities carried on through the organisation or the location of the organisation;
whether or not the organisation is part of a Department or branch described in paragraph (a), (b), (c) or (d) or of another organisation of the kind described in this paragraph
We are at a loss how the definition and meaning of a “government entity” can be defined as “not an entity”?
After awakening to the scam that has been perpetrated on all Australians around 30 years ago, I have looked at all that has happened and what ‘remedies’ exist in factual terms and how to fight them. I have helped family and friends at no cost and my intent is to help people help themselves and as, in my opinion, things in the world are coming apart, the schedule is quickening. The greatest drawback was the learning curve without a mentor to put me in the right direction. It is in this vein use my knowledge to try to help others to help themselves. I can say that many sites still provide misinformation and disinformation even though I trust the site and the posters but I assume nothing and prove everything to my rigid satisfaction. I have been to court many times in both NSW and SA and it is astounding how the court rules work differently so I learned the hard way.
In this regard I did come across a fellow who apparently did contest the local Council and did quite thorough research in NSW so this argument is State specific but the core is the same under the Constitution. Now I did this for a friend so the Council in this case is NOT the one where they dropped the case in Court. There are other supporting auxiliary documents but this is the core document.
Plain simple English form and plain simple numbering format.
1 CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL trades exclusively under a registered trading name, CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL. They also have a number of registered business names. The accepted activities test would ascertain that a large percentage of their activities are commensurate with their Trading Name status.
2 There is no provision within their enabling act, Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) that allows them to operate under a trading name.
3 Section 358 Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) places restrictions upon the formation of such entities.
4 Section 51, NSW Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) was inserted in 1986, without a referendum.
5 This act of insertion was invalid, and repugnant to the Commonwealth Constitution 1901 (Cwth)
6 Local Government in NSW is, and only can be, a department or agency of the State Government.
7 Local Government in NSW does not have the power of taxation by virtue of Section 220 Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (See ‘24’ below)
8 The enshrined enactments contained within the Imperial Application Act 1969 (NSW) are still valid and in force.
9 CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL is a trading corporation, and therefore comes under commonwealth jurisdiction under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Section 51(xx) as proven in the Queensland Rail case. (See attached)
10 CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL is a cartel, and is therefore subject to the cartel provisions contained within The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) with many Sections contained within this Act such as Section 2BA and Section 4 ‘Interpretation’
“corporation” means a body corporate that:
(a) is a foreign corporation;
(b) is a trading corporation formed within the limits of Australia or is a financial corporation so formed
11 In the application of the NSW Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 with (1623 4) 21 James I c.3 (The Statute of Monopolies) ss. 1 and 6 CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL are directly contravening the provisions as laid down in this Statute which is in ‘force and effect’.
12 As a Trading Corporation, there must be a wet ink contract between parties, signifying mutually beneficial terms that are agreed without resorting to coercion and intimidation.
13 The Queensland Rail Case HCA 2015 is caselaw that ratifies the assertion that CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL is a TRADING CORPORATION
14 The recent activities of the NSW State Government in relation the councils is further proof of our claims.
15 The NSW Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) postdates the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1901 (Cwth)
16 Section 51 Local Government NSW Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) was inserted in 1986.
17 The Australia Act 1986 (Cwth) Section 5b renders Section 51 NSW Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) without force or effect.
18 This act of insertion renders the NSW Constitution Act 1902 repugnant to the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1901 (Cth)
19 The Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) relies on Section 51 NSW Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) for its validity in law.
20 Therefore, The Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) is void ab initio
21 Attorney-General (WA) v Marquet [2003] HCA 67; 217 CLR 545; 202 ALR 233; 78 ALJR 105 (13 November 2003) Justice Kirby states very clearly, between paragraphs 203 – 213 that the purported Australia Act is illegal and void because it purports to alter the Commonwealth Constitution without complying with Section 128, which is that can only happen by way of a referendum.
22 CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL does not have the authority, as a trading company, to issue fines or apply any impositions unless they are deemed to be compliant with all requirements of a Chapter III body and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: –
a) A crime has occurred
b) An injured party can be produced for clarification of the claim and what restitution is being sought
c) Irrefutable and tangible factual material evidence that the alleged offence occurred and there was a resultant ‘injured party’.
23 The Vico v Car Park Pty Ltd (Civil Claims) [2014] VCAT 565 (2 May 2014) case showed the unlawfulness of imposing fines from trading companies.
24 The of Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria v Parking Patrols Vic Pty Ltd & Anor [2012] VSC 137 (13 April 2012) reinforced the fact that a ‘Trading Company’ such as ‘CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL’ is constrained from issuing any fines or penalties and referenced “deceptive and misleading clams” by the Defendant. It must and shall be emphasized that the allegations against the living breathing woman identified as Ellie of the family Abouhard are fatuous, unlawful and readily defensible.
25 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 – SECT 220
Legal status of a council 220 Legal status of a council
A council is a body politic of the State with perpetual succession and the legal capacity and powers of an individual, both in and outside the State.
1) A council is not a body corporate (including a corporation).
2) A council does not have the status, privileges and immunities of the Crown (including the State and the Government of the State).
3) A law of the State applies to and in respect of a council in the same way as it applies to and in respect of a body corporate (including a corporation).
Local Government in NSW is not a body corporate, including a corporation. They are listed as an Unincorporated Entity with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). ASIC has its own Federal legislation where it is also incorporated in NSW legislation through Part 11 Corporations (NSW) Act 1990.
It is also important to note that Sect. 8 of that same act appears to restrict a corporation from imposing a liability upon a private person. A council does not have the status, privileges and immunities of the Crown, including the State and the Government of the State. This subsection appears to give councils no status at all, let alone the status of a taxation authority or the competent jurisdiction of a Chapter III body evidenced by precedents:
a) Lane v Morrison [2009] HCA 29 (26 August 2009)
b) South Australia V Totani [2010] HCA 39 (11 November 2010)
c) Ah Yick v Lehmert [1905] HCA 22; (1905) 2 CLR 593 (7 August 1905)
26 There are other precedents that require the application of the complete adherence to the laws of evidence and the prosecution ensuring the complete and solid application of proving any case without question as to the validity of provided evidence status standing and jurisdiction. One example is In Munday v Gill [1930] HCA 20; (1930) 44 CLR 38 (14 August 1930) – Justice Dixon’s states that officers must prove every aspect of the case, including the lawfulness of the acts referred to.
27 Coram Judice and Jurisdiction In Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte, High Court Justice Dixon clearly stated, and was supported by all other Judges, when he said, “Where there is a disregard of or failure to observe the conditions, whether procedural or otherwise, which attend the exercise of jurisdiction or govern the determination to be made, the judgment or order may be set aside and avoided by proceedings by way of error, certiorari, or appeal. But, if there be want of jurisdiction, then the matter is coram non judice. It is as if there were no judge and the proceedings are as nothing. They are void, not voidable”
28 The NSW Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 is in force and effect and 21 James I c 3 (The Statute of Monopolies) ss 1 and 6 applies to the CITY OF CANADA BAY COUNCIL and therefore contravenes its lawfulness.
1” [I.] All Monopolies, and Grants, &c. thereof, or of Dispensations, and Penalties, declared void. All [X1Monapolies] and all Commissions Graunts Licences Charters and tres patents heretofore made or graunted, or hereafter to be made or graunted to any person or persons Bodies Politique or Corporate whatsoever of or for the sole buyinge sellinge makinge workinge or usinge of any thinge within this Realme or the Dominion of Wales, or of any other Monopolies, or of Power Liberty or Facultie to dispence with any others, . . . F1, are altogether contrary to the Lawes of this Realme, and so are and shal be utterly void and of none effecte, and in noe wise to be putt in ure or execucion.”
29 Further to the previous section ‘28’ it shall be noted that two previous Referendums held to address the question of ‘Monopolies’ were put to the Australian people to alter Section 51 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, one on 1913 and the other in 1919. Both rejected by the Australian people.
• Referendum 1. The Constitution Alteration (Nationalization of Monopolies) Bill 1912, was an unsuccessful referendum held in 1913 that sought to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth legislative power in respect to monopolies.
• Referendum 2. The Constitution Alteration (Nationalization of Monopolies) Bill 1919, was an unsuccessful Australian referendum seeking to alter the Australian Constitution to extend the government’s power to legislate in respect of monopolies. The question was put to a referendum in 1919, held in conjunction with the 1919 federal election.
30 QUI PRIOR EST TEMPORE POTIOR EST JURE
He who is before in time is the better in right. Priority in time gives preference in law. A maxim of very extensive application, both at law and in equity
31 FICTIO JURIS NON-EST UBI VERITAS
Where truth is, fiction of law does not exist.
I hope this hels.
David A, thanks, I was just wondering as there’s nothing I can find in the Constitution regarding Councils.
@daviddd2, I was correlating Wayne Glew’s commentary on this subject. Wayne is an expert on the 1901 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, I am not. You may wish to contact a Constitutional lawyer to answer that question.
Scotoz makes valid points (see the first post), which should make everybody pause and reflect.
Have we learned nothing? Have we not yet learned to recognise the Rothschild/Rockefeller ‘plan of response’ always laid out so conveniently before us?
Those of us who have followed the money trail for a few decades soon discovered that whenever the footprint of the Rothschilds appears, expect complementary strategies; invariably three. Corporatisation of local, regional and national governments has Rothschild fingerprints and footprints all over it. So what is really going down here, and why? Wake up and think!
Our first clue was provided by Australia’s Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Harry Talbot Gibbs when he discovered that Australia is still a colony of the British Empire. He took his finding to London and the best legal minds there concurred. If Harry figured out what was really intended, he never let on. I am quite sure that if he had blown the whistle, he would have met a very prompt accident. This is a boat that nobody dares rock (which he discreetly mentioned).
Allison Ryan and Scotoz have raked the debris clear from the evidence and, if one has a basic understanding of history, and the Rothschild modus operandi, the conclusion is inescapable. We are being led down the garden path. The evidence sprinkled so liberally before us is real enough, it just takes us away from the more pertinent truth, and our survival.
Most of us have now realised that one of the world’s two power centres is the City of London; seat of Rothschild power; one square mile of that large city that even has its own independent police force, The Met. The British Royalty, Parliament, military, everything, is subservient to the City of London. The British Empire was, in all reality, the City of London.
However, the two-hundred-year globalisation plan hit a hiccup. By the end of Queen Victoria’s reign, god bless her, the British Empire had taken on a reality of its own. In the minds of every human being not a Rothschild, The British Empire was as real as the sunrise, and on this reality the sun would never set. The power of the human mind in collective can never be underestimated, as the Ashkenazim Rothschilds well knew, having propagandised this very entity for two full centuries.
So when British colonies were transitioned to self-governing puppet states, it had to be the British Empire that bestowed such power. But the Ashkenazim bankers miscalculated. In their arrogance, they failed to take into account the power of the Magna Carta. Thus, when Australia’s Constitution was scanned and approved, it was not realised that the Magna Carta might one day be invoked to terminate the Globalisation Agenda.
One can imagine the Yiddish curses that curdled the virgin British air when this was first realised. A new plan would have to be devised. The first step of implementation was the installation of the Reserve Bank of Australia, by Nugget Coomb, as employee of the Bank for International Settlement in Basle, Switzerland; Rothschild-owned, of course.
The second was the sacking of the Whitlam Government, Gough having unexpectedly grasped what was going on and was about to expose the CIA component. The 1975 CIA/MI6 coup resulted in the corporatisation of the entire nation.
With the ink barely dry on the Lima Agreement, Coombs was whisked up to Darwin to head off Aboriginal land rights at the pass; meaning he was secretly charged with inverting the traditional consensus protocol-governed tribal land administration (of the soon-to-be Northern Land Council), into a power-pyramidal bureaucracy, with lawyers and anthropologists at the top, urban city part-Aborigines in the middle (to make it look convincingly Aboriginal), and tribal people having access only as elected representatives and no way of knowing what was going on. This ensured that land councils serve mineral interests and were able to assist in the planed extermination of the residents of Aboriginal lands..
Australians may have wondered why it was that the recent Voice referendum ‘Yes” campaign was funded by Riotinto, BHP, Pfizer, and the Northern Land Council. The pattern should now be evident. Believe me, it ain’t all that subtle.
As corporatisation of society, government, industry, and the media ensued, by 2005, word that corporatisation was a dark plot was leaked out, recognised first in South East Queensland via the conduit of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party. It was, probably, John Pasquarelli, on loan to One Nation by Australia First Party, who first twigged. But a Christian leader of the hinterland may also have been first. I will leave that to older Queenslanders to figure out.
Anyway, gradually, the corporatisation process was being strategically exposed, which indeed enabled the entry of corruption into Australia through the United Nations, and Murdoch’s News Corp. These included the Australian Local Government Association and the Policy of Multiculturalism.
But we need to remain mindful that although corporatisation has been incredibly injurious to Australia, its primary role is to hide the inconvenient reality that we are still a colony of the British Empire under international law, and national law, and fully under the protection of the Magna Carta and following four treaties and acts.
Not every Australian was successfully diverted. David Walter of Cairns, has hammered the Queen for decades, demanding recognition of our rights. Being an ex-cop, he never gives up.
So, as the supreme irony of all history, we can invoke the Magna Carta and address every crime and every criminal who has transgressed against the people of Australia. Albo would make a nice start.
As to the current King, I’m afraid Charlie has committed treason and will need to be carted off to the Tower of London, there to await trial and subsequent beheading. Looks like we still must curtsey to Queen Lizzie. And for those whose hatred of monarchy is an obstacle; did you know that Lizzie refused ever to visit Israel because of its treatment of the Palestinians. She actually handed the Israeli Ambassador a list of ten reasons why they were abhorrent to Her. So little of what we know about history is true. It looks like we are finally about to see the sun rise on the British Empire, all over again. If we handle it right this time, the next sunset will be blood red. Somebody else’s.
Sorry Ed. Blame history for being so long.
Alison,
For accuracy purposes note that in NSW according to the Local Government Act1993 councils do NOT have the legal status of corporations!
@Rhonda,
you can download the true Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901 at:
advance-australia.com.au/important-downloads/
After reading The Constitution, I’m sure that you will see how different to this founding document the present system of government is, and that the obvious changes which have been made to it over many years, have been made by traitors to the people of Australia and The Constitution; traitors with other allegiances and oaths, but sitting in the highest places of our governments and institutions and universities, who do not respect the democratic rights due all Australians; these traitors to Australia’s and Australians’ freedoms have worked deceptively, above and below, our true representative system of government; destroying our freedoms and prosperity through false flags (like climate change, covid19), pursuing foreign corporate interests, through international banking, PPPs, and organizations like the UN, WEF, WHO; until the final goal is reached, to which they have been seduced, the unification of all nations and all peoples under a One World Government.
Never give up hope for truth will win the day.
My efforts against my Geelong Council attacked them via their commercial liability, which is something they have never denied, as they accepted everything I claim I made in y Lawful Notices to them-in other words, I achieved acquiescence, something I doubt anyone else has ever done.
What I would suggest is for people to demand to see the signed, wet ink contract between themselves and there local council.
It does not exist, so, as a corporation, your local council cannot claim any jurisdiction over you or your property.
And that goes for your state corporate governments too.
And the Common Law people speak about here is the actual Constitution, which has been confirmed to me as a legally and lawfully binding contract between the people and those who would profess to govern for us.
This confirmation came to me from Simon Ramsay, a former Victorian Upper house Member, when I asked him the question in 2019.
Once again, it goes back to CONTRACT-simple COMMERCE-and if these governments do not deliver on the services they are contracted to provide, they are in Breach of Contract.
Once people understand this they will see that our governments are in breach of contract all over the place-housing, hospitals, ambulance waiting times, etc., etc., etc.
After reading All this Info how can i EVER HELP MY FAMILY TO UNDERSTAND AND STAND UP AGAINST THE CORRUPTION IN AUSTRALIA
A few years ago I researched the A;GA website. One thing I found is their statement that the total take for all local councils i Australia, that year, was $17.4 billion.
And they are always crying poor.
In Geelong we have an overdevelopment problem, with much, much more slated to come.
The city is gridlocked anyway, due to development over the last ten years or so, with no end of this development in sight, especially in my area of Geelong West.
The bet I can think of is for the suburb to vote to secede form the region and run their own show, as per:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-37612083
The city council, due to my Lawful Notices to them, has accepted that they are not lawful government, and are a commercial operation, but continue on as the corporatocracy they really are (my Notices are available on my Facebook page).
Federal Cabinet? Is that meant to be the Governor General governing with the Executive Council members he appoints? Or is it the post election, bastardised, inner sanctum of the parliamentary majority party?
It’s nothing to do with the “National Cabinet”. That’s a private political get together to negotiate and synchronise the best interests of the participating state and commonwealth premiers.
That’s why they like to keep its horse trading and its minutes confidential, away from the prying public.
David A: “local councils are unconstitutional”
Which section of the Australian or a State constitution do they they contravene?
I’m addressing this note to my Federal MP –
“I draw your attention to the Quote on the Parliamentary Education Office website: “Three levels of government: governing Australia”
i.e. Federal Parliament, State/Territory Parliaments, and Local Councils.
Local Councils derive their powers from State Parliaments.
This shows that local councils are a state matter, not a federal matter.
The Commonwealth Constitution recognises State Parliaments and the Federal Parliament – consisting of House of Representatives and Senate.
The anomaly of the National Cabinet consisting of PM, Premiers, Chief Ministers, Local Government and associated Ministerial Councils, which are operating in the Federal Parliament, is not constitutional, since the Commonwealth Constitution does not recognise State Government and Local Councils/Local Government in the Federal Parliament.
It is my will that in your representation in the Federal Parliament, the National Cabinet and its Ministerial Councils be removed.
It is my will that in your representation in the Federal Parliament, the Federal Cabinet be restored.”
From GOVERNMENT I NEWS – views and analysis of government in Australia.
July 2023 – Council climate network signs first regional partnership
The Hunter Joint Organisation, representing ten regional NSW councils, has become first JO to enter into a regional partnership with the Cities Power Partnership climate network.
As part of the Cities Power Partnership program, councils commit to a series of actions to mitigate climate change, such as supporting renewable energy and planning sustainable transport.
The Hunter JO has pleged:
Regional collaboration on EVs
Regional collaboration on clean energy planning and project delivery
Regional collaboration on emissions reduction
Knowledge sharing
Hunter JO chair Sue Moore, Mayor of Singleton Council, says the agreement means councils can work together to attract funding, resources and projects like fleet electrification.
governmentnews.com.au/council-climate-network-signs-first-regional-partnership/
@Beverley Bakker, check out Wayne Glew’s videos on Youtube or Odysee. The name of his channel is Liabilitymate. Wayne is very clued up on the original 1901 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, and his videos include plenty of nuggets which will help you understand how deep the corruption runs. You can pick up a lot from them without realising. But in a nutshell, local councils are unconstitutional and are being funded indirectly by, and are essentially sattelite offices of the UN/WEF globalist cabal rolling out their agendas.
Pat from Vic
When are we going to stand our ground and tell the machinery of fake corporate “government” and all its sold-out treasonous stooges to go take a jump off a cliff?
Unless we grow a backbone; never.
We 🐑🐏🐑 believe it’s much easier to comply 😷💉 and help the treasonous stooges to take away our freedom, our God-given human rights and applaud them for destroying our great Australian culture and whole way of life. 🤦♂️😠
As I ploughed my way through this article and then passed on to the comments, my mind boggled. This is so far above my head that I feel like I’m in kindergarten trying to figure out & understand trigonometry. I am floundering to make sense of any of it and considered myself to be “up there” on political stuff more than many of my friends. The general public would be adrift in this boggy swamp of convoluted considerations and I am chief among them.! Heaven help me.! I’m at a loss to know where to go to gain some sanity out of this morass.
Timing of this article is golden. I was talking to a guy I have known for years, who works for our local council. The CEO of this particular council according to him gets paid more than the Premier of Tasmania, well in excess of $300,000. The mind boggles. As he said the Premier is supposed to be for all Tasmanians (over 500,000 people), this CEO manages/represents/supports, what is the correct term, dictates?? about 26,000 here locally. What do they actually do?
I wonder if they are all paid so handsomely around the country???
There is no local government, but there is local government?
It may be shonky local government but it is there, as corporations.
Those who put it in place do not care at all, about why it should not exist,
It is a reality and we did nothing to stop it and will likely keep using and supporting it, and it will be accepted as legit, no questions asked
“Vote out the parties to fix it all” we passed that point of no return long ago.
Getting rid of all corporate federal, state and Local governments, by way of community representation, can fix the mess.
We have barely started or even considered communities running communities, as a way for the people to take back control.
The REALITY is we have been, and still are, being lied to, scammed, sold out, ignored, and laughed at by the parasites.
They do not care about our Constitution or our legislation, laws, rules, regulations, etc.
@Ian Rayner, I would start with this site – https://commonlaw.earth/
And here are two other good websites re: common law in Australia –
– https://terraaustralisstatesassembly.com/
– https://commonlaw-australia.com/
In a nutshell, folks – how much more of this corporate BS are we going to tolerate?
When is enough, enough?
When are we going to stand our ground and tell the machinery of fake corporate “government” and all its sold-out treasonous stooges to go take a jump off a cliff?
Where can I find out more about common law?
Flick the UN.
The Commonwealth of Australia did not cease being the lawful and legitimate government in Australia BUT was subverted by the company “GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA” and all ‘capitalised’ derivatives. This happened when the unlawful ‘Australia Act 1986’ was agreed to by the unconstitutional ‘COAG’ or Council of Australian Governments which comprised State and Territory premiers and chief ministers agreeing WITHOUT a Referendum the unconstitutional changes made to laws such as the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865. Bob Hawke was a traitor and criminal who was sworn in under the Constitutional Oath Schedule and was the last to do so. All Australia is now a company and a vassal of the parent company in the USA.
An excerpt from the Quick & Garran “Commentaries on the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia” states:-
“If therefore the Commonwealth were a sovereign and independent State,
no amendment, duly passed in the prescribed form, would be beyond its
powers; the amending power would have no limits. But the
Commonwealth is only quasi-sovereign, and the amending power, though
above the State Governments and above the Federal Government, is below
the Imperial Parliament. The Commonwealth is a dependency of the
Empire; and the amending power—the highest legislature of the
Commonwealth—is a colonial legislature. It can therefore pass no law
which is repugnant to any Act of the British Parliament extending to the
Commonwealth, or repugnant to any order or regulation founded upon
such Act; and on the other hand no law passed by the amending power will
be void on the ground of repugnancy to the law of England unless it is
repugnant to the provisions of some such Act, order, or regulation.
(Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865 [28 and 29 Vic. c. 63, secs. 2–3].)” Please consider this and yes there are other arguments such as the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 and the argument regarding the sovereignty of Australia in joining the League of Nations in 1921 however this has never been explained in legal terms as an ‘independence day’ for Australia.
The Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 is an act of the Australian Parliament that formally adopted sections 2–6 of the Statute of Westminster 1931, an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom enabling the total legislative independence of the various self-governing Dominions of the British Empire. So now the question is why introduce the Australia Act at all? The further question is indeed why local councils, which are just like the State government and ALL its statutory bodies all ABN companies? Please be aware that under the High Court ruling in ‘COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA & ORS v QUEENSLAND RAIL & ANOR [2015] HCA 11’ the companies with ABN are trading companies under Section 51(xx) of the Constitution and with Trading companies they need a CONTRACT!!! The Commonwealth Government shows this as “foreign corporations, and trading or financial corporations formed within the limits of the Commonwealth;. Challenges them on this alone causes some disconcertment.