Response to Discussion Starter 2 - Bill of RightsThe following personal response to the Bill of Rights discussion starter was formulated by Robbie Clark.February 27th, 2001. Hi good people, There are many examples of laws that are passed that at a later date leave people scratching their heads in disbelief. Walking ten paces in front of a vehicle with a white flag so as not to upset the horses is an amusing but apt example. If we could see into the future maybe we could design a bill of rights that would be forever relevant but seeing as we do not have that technology yet I propose another way of approaching this issue. What if we had a directly elected non partisan Head of State whose mandated role it is to direct governments of the day to deal with whatever aspirations are current to the era involved instead of the current ideological imperatives we now suffer under. An office that was not restrained by historical impediments that could reform the system and our legislative rights presumed by precedent by democratic means. As a hobby I have been collecting attitudes and gripes from people in Australia for a couple of decades and have applied them to a set of ideas that may be useful just as an alternative starting point for your groups debate. I am just beginning a BA in Geography and Social Sciences and my preconceived thesis will be on how to reform our system without dismantling the perceived advantages of the current separation of powers affords us. Particularly in regard to land use and jurisdiction. I would appreciate your feedback on the relevance, structure and wording of the questions I have published on my personal Website at home.iprimus.com.au/rpc/index.html and please feel free to pass the link around to enable others to participate and to suggest changes or additional questions. Good luck with your
efforts and please let me know what the outcome of your meetings are.
Thanks for your attention, |