Category: Law

THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY ‘YES’ CAN WIN ‘VOICE’ REFERENDUM

On By Everald ComptonIn Civil Rights, Constitution, Elections, Good Books, History, Law, Referendum, Uluru

If current circumstances prevail, NO will win the Voice Referendum decisively, and this will be a tragedy for Australia.

As a YES voter & YES advocate who campaigns every day for YES to VOICE, I can assure you with certainty that a NO victory will occur for one reason only.

VOTERS DO NOT TRUST POLITICIANS.

Let me give you a factual example of what will happen if the debate on the Voice Referendum continues its current course, especially given the fact that only 18% of Australian referendums have ever produced a YES vote and none have won with the Opposition arguing the NO case.

Back in 1967, I went to my local polling station to vote in 2 referendums on the same day. One enabled indigenous people to have basic democratic rights that were long overdue. The other tried to alter the Constitution to have more electorates created in the House of Representatives without increasing the size of the Senate.

I voted YES to both. 90% of Australians voted YES to indigenous rights but 60% voted NO to having more MP’s in Parliament.

The ‘More MP’s’ referendum was strongly backed by ALP Liberals Nationals in a rare act of unity. The sole opponent was the small Democratic Labor Party led by Senator Vince Gair who had previously been sacked as Premier of Queensland during the great Labor Split and was yearning to take his revenge on everyone for that humiliation.

Gair lacked substantial funding so he campaigned aggressively on one simple slogan –

NO MORE POLITICIANS

and said it over and over again in every speech he made & every media release he issued.

He crushed the well financed campaigns of the three major parties who wanted to create more MP’s.

Right now in 2023, most Australian voters distrust and disrespect politicians far more than was the case in 1967 and they see Voice as creating another lot of politicians who will generate more distrust.

Much more significantly they reckon that, after the Referendum, politicians will fail to deliver on their promise that Voice will have no power to legislate, given that Clause 3 of the Referendum wording clearly gives Parliament the right to determine the powers of Voice. So it is that a majority will vote NO in huge distrust of politicians unless Parliament takes urgent action to fix this significant roadblock.

A ‘YES’ LOSS CAN BE CHANGED TO A LANDSLIDE VICTORY IF THE YES CAMPAIGN TOTALLY REFORMS ITS FAILED STRATEGY OF SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS AND REQUESTS PARLIAMENT TO IMPLEMENT VITALLLY ESSENTIAL LEGLISLATIVE COMMONSENSE RIGHT NOW.

The very simple formula for a YES victory is this.

Introduce to Parliament and pass without delay, immediately it returns from the winter break at the end of July, a concise Bill that will, automatically and indisputably, become law when VOICE wins the Referendum in October.

The Voice Governance Bill must cover, in the clearest and briefest terms, the basics of these crucial issues,

*Who is eligible to vote in Voice Election.

*How many members will be elected to Voice, how long will their terms be and what will be their annual salaries and expenses .

*How many staff will each Voice member have.

*What Voice will cost to operate in Year One, including the cost of the building from which it will operate.

*By what means will Voice convey its proposed policies to Parliament, Government and the people of Australia and what is the time limit that Parliament will have to respond to each policy proposal.

This quite concise and practical legislation will enable voters to choose YES with confidence.

It will also open the door for Parliament to establish the administrative details of how all of the above basic elements will work in practice after the referendum is passed.

The debate in Parliament in passing this urgent Bill, in both the House and Senate, will be to provide a high profile platform for educating millions of voters on the absolute commonsense of Voice before they have to vote.

Once this Bill is passed, no voter will be able to say that he or she is unaware of how Voice will work. It will be enshrined in law before they vote, ready to be implemented without change after they vote.

Dutton Littleproud Hansen will oppose the Bill in panic as they are very aware that it will completely invalidate their campaigns of false information and fear.

Let me again restate an undeniable fact,

THE VOICE REFERENDUM WILL BE DEFEATED UNLESS THE ABOVEMENTIONED BILL IS PASSED BEFORE WE VOTE.

It will be clearly irresponsible not to pass it,

Also, it will be totally false and insulting for advocates of Voice to say, after the defeat that will occur if they continue their current strategy, that it was caused because most Australian voters are racist.

It would also be true at that time to say once more as we pondered the ashes of defeat that we ignored the underlying view of voters that

‘POLITICIANS CANNOT BE TRUSTED’.

Yours in anguish,

Everald

(Go to

Everald’s Mission

to buy a signed copy of my book DINNER WITH THE FOUNDING FATHERS.

Read my account of how New Zealand walked out of the Federation Conference of 1892 when it had been hoped that it would become the 7th State of the new nation, They rightly refused to have the citizenship status of Maoris reduced to the non status of Aborigines. You will cheer New Zealand.)

VOICE

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Constitution, Elections, Government, History, Law, Referendum, Uluru

Sometime during the second half of 2023, we will be given the opportunity to vote YES or NO in what will be known as the VOICE REFERENDUM that arises from the ULURU STATEMENT FROM THE HEART.

As announced by the Prime Minister earlier this year, a YES vote in the Referendum will create an amendment to the Australian Constitution that will enable Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders to participate in a democratic election to establish a VOICE which will meet regularly to recommend policies to the Australian Parliament which will have the total authority to accept or reject them.

After the Referendum, Parliament will debate and enact a Bill that creates the rules that will apply to the way in which the VOICE is elected and operates.

In reality it is quite simply a positive step forward in integrating 65000 years of heritage into our Constitution and our life as a nation.

I will vote YES and actively campaign for a Yes vote.

In doing this, I am well aware that a significant number of my friends intend to vote NO and have carefully considered reasons for doing so. I respect their right to vote according to their conscience.

Here are some of their reasons for voting NO.

*Australia is a nation that already has a voice – our Federal Parliament – to which we have elected a significant number of indigenous parliamentarians.

*The Voice will create apartheid.

*Australia provides billions of dollars to Indigenous people every year and this has been wasted. No matter what is done for them, they are ungrateful and will always want more.

*The establishment of a Voice will not solve the problems that are ingrained in indigenous society such as crime, unemployment, alcohol, drugs, health, housing, domestic violence, poor education and lack of skills.

*It is only city aborigines who want a Voice. Country aborigines have no interest in it.

*A Treaty, based on the Waitangi Treaty of New Zealand, would achieve more.

In response to these concerns and beliefs, I tell my friends the reasons why I will vote YES.

*Indigenous people were excluded from the Australian Constitution in 1901. This was an insult and a mistake which must be rectified now.

*When Britain, in 1788, invaded the continent we now call Australia, they stole land which had been occupied by indigenous people for 65000 years. The welfare that is now given to them is a tiny fraction of the value of their land that they have never ceded.

*100 tribes of Indigenous people have never been able to speak to the Australian Parliament with one democratically elected Voice. Previous institutions have been comprised of political appointees who did the will of the governments that appointed them.

*White people have always decided what is best for aborigines, never the reverse.

*Defeating the referendum will achieve nothing. This issue will never go away. We will just irresponsibly kick the can down the road so our children and grandchildren will eventually have to do what we failed to do.

*It is quite simply the right and decent thing to do.

I am certain there are other important reasons why people will vote YES or NO and these will emerge during the referendum campaign. However, the ones I have outlined give an indication of the general scope of the forthcoming debate.

The Albanese Government will not provide funding for either the YES or NO campaigns. Both sides are required to set up there own organising teams and raise their own funds. This is a good thing as it would be wrong for the government to be seen to be promoting YES even though it is a clear policy of the Labor Party. So, it must promote neither.

I have joined, as a volunteer, a significant group called FROM THE HEART and my role is to help organise a strong YES vote from the Senior Australians. My plan is to enlist as many older Aussies as possible to visit everyone in the streets around their own home to chat about the absolute common sense of having a VOICE. We won’t waste money on advertising. Face to face talking is the powerful way to sell this historic strengthening of our national life.

My gut feeling is that there is a significant task ahead.

Right now, my private polling of public opinion tells me that Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania are likely to vote NO and this will create a national defeat of VOICE as our Constitution says that a referendum cannot pass unless a majority of States vote YES.

I also suspect that Senior Australians will vote NO by a margin of 60/40 because of ingrained negativity about all indigenous issues generated over many decades, but I think that a positive campaign could make it 50/50. Young voters will then take it over the victory line.

Overall, I reckon that with sincere and courteous campaigning the cause for YES can achieve a positive victory and I intend do my best to make it happen. My experience is that most older Australians are responsible people who will try to do the right thing for the good of Australia once they understand the issues at stake.

Creating a VOICE is clearly a nation building exercise that will benefit us all.

Nevertheless, I have an open mind to debate any better alternatives that sincere advocates put forward as this issue will never go away. Defeating it will achieve nil.

Grace and Peace in the spirit of ULURU. It is a symbol of unity.

Everald

TAX CUTS ARE A WELFARE HANDOUT TO THE NEEDY WEALTHY.

On By Everald ComptonIn Business and Enterprise, Community and Values, Government, History, Law

I have never become a member of a political party and never will as this could have the capacity to lead me to life as a one eyed citizen locked in to an ideology that requires a closed mind.

This confirms that I have been a swinging voter all my life during which I have voted for the best leader or candidate, but never the ‘best’ Party.

So it is that I have at times voted for Robert Menzies, John McEwan and John Howard while on other occasions I cast my vote for Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke, Paul Keating and Julia Gillard. On one occasion, I voted for Greens leader, Bob Brown, as he helped me with legislation regarding needs of pensioners. Now I make it my business to back quality independents as we need many more of them to raise the stature of our Parliaments.

My purpose in relating my background is to set the scene for this article.

As I am neither a capitalist nor a socialist and believe that both are equally decadent ideologies, I want to add that I especially vote against anyone who advocates tax cuts and believes in the very false theory of trickle down economics. I fight them both with a burning passion as never in my life have I ever seen either of them do anything meaningful for humanity.

It has been proven over and over again that tax cuts make a few favoured people more wealthy than they already are or need to be and enormously blow out the national budget deficit while in no way doing anything to stimulate the economy.

Most importantly, none of their newly created wealth has ever trickled down to the poor. Not ever. Not even remotely. And it never will.

The lie on which ‘trickle down’ is based and promoted is because the wealthy recipients of tax cuts need to have a moral excuse to justify their greed. They want everyone to understand that only seek wealth so they can pass it on to the poor. Unless they can help the needy, they really don’t want to have one cent of their wealth.

From an early age in my 90 years, I regularly have been making speeches spelling out the sheer hypocrisy of tax cuts and trickle down economics. My critics always declare with venom that I have not got a clue about either economics or good government and should therefore shut up permanently.

So I ask them to give me just one instance where it has been proved that tax cuts have worked, but no one has ever given me a single one that is valid.

They trot out the high profile ones like those legislated in USA by Ronald Reagan, George Bush and Donald Trump or the recent one here in Australia by Scott Morrison, yet none have ever proved that they actually worked for the common good. They are unable to deny that budget deficits blew out and have never been repaid. The poor remained poor and often became poorer. The entire theory is a blatant lie of huge proportions.

THE INDISPUTABLE FACT IS THAT TAX CUTS ARE A BLATANT AND CORRUPT WELFARE HANDOUT TO THE WEALTHY, THE VERY GUYS WHO CONSTANTLY DENIGRATE THE POOR FOR SEEKING WELFARE. THEY ARE ALSO THE SAME GUYS WHO PAY THE LEAST POSSIBLE TAX THAT THEY CAN SO THAT EVERYONE ELSE PAYS THE COSTS OF NATIONAL LIFE.

The proven way to stimulate any economy is for government to create jobs by going into debt to build infrastructure & constantly enhance our essential food, health, education, housing, energy, and transport systems. This generates an army of taxpayers to fund the nation and creates spenders who fire up the market place.

Let me emphatically say in closing that I encourage and hugely admire people who begin life with nothing but work hard and wisely and honestly to gain a position of genuine wealth while paying a responsible amount of tax while they do it. We need many more of them, but no wheelers and dealers and plunderers who are also tax avoiders.

I also work to create a world in which everyone has a fair chance to become financially independent which is the status I have managed to achieve in life and is all that most humans really need to enjoy a good life of positive and creative achievement.

Yours for a good life.

Everald

THE SPLENDID ERA OF ELIZABETH IS OVER. CAN AUSTRALIA NOW BECOME A REPUBLIC?

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Government, History, Law, Referendum

For many years, I have been appalled by the attitude of people who say,

‘When the Queen dies, I will be happy to vote in favour of Australia becoming a Republic.’

What they, in reality, have been callously saying is this.

‘I don’t want to offend Elizabeth, but I have no problem with insulting Charles’.

Why are they happy to declare Charles to be a lesser monarch than the Queen? I can assure you from personal experience that he is actually a decent bloke.

Fact is their thinking is totally emotional, has no shred of logic and is offensive to the King.

Most Australians don’t realise it, but right now two thirds of the members of the Commonwealth of Nations are Republics and the Queen had a good relationship with all of them. So will Charles.

The prime example is India, It won its freedom from Britain in 1947 and immediately became a Republic, severing all constitutional connections with the British Crown, but happily joined the Commonwealth of Nations. Since then, they have invited the Queen to visit them on three occasions and she accepted three times, with huge crowds turning out to greet her. Does this indicate she was offended by them becoming a Republic?

Australians who used the ‘Queen Excuse’ to oppose Australia becoming a Republic have shown themselves to be shallow.

So, lets cut out the emotional nonsense and get down to discussing how Australia formally severs its connections with a decadent Downton Abbey society and becomes an independent nation.

What can stop us from becoming a Republic right now?

There will be a temporary delay due to a timing problem. We have no option but to wait until the Indigenous Voice Referendum has been held in mid 2023 as it is already underway and is a matter of some controversy that can’t be avoided. I intend to vote Yes, but the opposition will be significant.

Nevertheless, we can begin to prepare for it.

An initial hurdle is that we must face the fact that the words ‘Republic’ and ‘President’ switch off far too many voters. People identify those titles with nations like USA and Russia and Trump and Putin, They are a huge negative that will cause the referendum to be lost. So I think it makes common sense to stick with the existing words of ‘Commonwealth of Australia’ and ‘Governor General’.

I have sought legal advice and find it is possible to remove all mention of ‘The Crown’ from the Constitution of Australia and still remain a Commonwealth. A referendum will gain approval for this far more easily than one based on a republic.

It is also wise to retain the title of Governor General as this maintains a relationship with State Governors and removes the huge negative of the word President.

The crucial debate will be centered on the method of appointing a Governor General.

Will he or she continue to be chosen by the Prime Minister as happens at present or can the appointment be made by a vote of a Joint Sitting of both Houses of Parliament with a two thirds majority being required.

In achieving such a vote in the Parliament, should the nominees to be voted on be eminent citizens who are proposed by the People of Australia via a Petition to Parliament or do we let the politicians choose the candidates.

Or should the Governor General be appointed by a direct election in which voters make the choice, not Parliament. Does this mean that a politician will be elected who then feels he or she has a political mandate? It will be necessary for the Constitution to be amended to say that no current or former politicians are eligible to run. The Irish have made direct election work well in Eire so it is possible.

These issues simply remind us that there is a lot of debate to be held before we can decide what is best for Australia.

So, testing times lie ahead.

However, the death of Queen Elizabeth puts it all on the Agenda right now in a far greater limelight and urgency than ever before. Also, the controversial status of the current Governor General over the ‘Morrison Affair’ has highlighted the need for changes to be made as Australia voters had no say whatsoever in the appointment of Hurley.

A step forward will be to create a Constitution Panel to draw up all the changes and additions to the Constitution that are necessary for a Referendum in 2024.

Let’s get this moving but let me say this in closing.

Even though Britain faces dark economic and social challenges at this moment, the Brits have one huge talent they can once more show to the world. They have a magnificent capacity to organise quite breathtaking funerals. The one they did for Diana was an absolute cracker. This one will outclass that one by a huge margin as it is one for the ages.

Elizabeth was as close to a saint as the Brits have had in their royal history. Every republican I know holds her in high regard as a person. They will eventually feel the same way about Charles. In the meantime, they just want Australia to be an independent nation.

With my best regards to all the Windsor family.

Everald

THE POLITICS OF GOTCHA

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Elections, Good Books, Government, History, Law

Am disappointed that an inquiry has been called into Scott Morrison’s irresponsible action in secretly appointing himself to 5 ministries while Prime Minister.

Let me say first of all that I have total confidence in the competence of the former High Court Justice who has been appointed to lead the inquiry. She is above politics and will provide an objective report.

I also believe that Anthony Albanese does not intend the inquiry to be a witch hunt. He wants a non-political report that he can act upon in ensuring that does not happen again.

But, many people like me feel that, nevertheless, it will be converted into a witch hunt in the media, especially social media.

Unfortunately, it looks as though Albo is following the awful tradition created by Scomo, Turnbull and Abbott of constantly and unnecessarily holding witch hunts and this one looks like it is a replica of their efforts to hold power by creating conflicts.

It is a scourge of politics that must stop. It divides Australian society and does nothing to unite us. We are better than that and must cease to foster any form of a divided society.

The recent report of the Solicitor General clearly identified the problems caused by Morrison and Hurley and provided a basis on which to pass quite simple legislation to ensure that Morrison’s transgression can not be repeated again. It should have been passed through Parliament immediately so we can all get on with life and put this behind us.

Sadly, it has now gained Morrison a sympathy vote among conservative voters. Many of them were embarrassed by the abrasive way he performed in the recent election and were ready to forget about him as a genuine leader. They now feel he is simply being picked on for no valid reason and deserves their support again.

The incident also increases his ability to earn lots of money on the conservative public speaking circuit which is quite lucrative world wide. He is being billed as a great conservative who is being unfairly denigrated by socialists. A genuine hero for the cause of righteousness. This is of course not a true assessment of his character.

A better solution would have been to demand that the Liberals censure him at a Party Caucus meeting and request that he resign as Member for Cook immediately.

In addition, the Governor General should resign immediately even though he followed the established tradition of accepting the advice of his Prime Minister. He dismally failed to take up his right to ask questions of the PM as many previous Governors General have done. It would have been quite acceptable for him to ask this question

‘Prime Minister, I have already sworn 5 people into these ministries. Can you arrange for each one of them to send me a letter affirming that they agree to you also being sworn into their ministry?’

Forgetting about the legalities of it all, it would have been an act of common courtesy for him to do this with those Ministers.

However, the creation of a Royal Commission into Robodebt is a totally different matter.

This scandal was a horrible persecution of people over false accusations of theft that caused awful grief and suffering for sins they did not commit. It caused suicides and breakdowns in mental health. And it was carried out by a government that regularly denigrated welfare for the poor but happily gave tax cuts to the wealthy which was pure welfare at its most corrupt.

I fervently hope that the perpetrators of Robodebt wind up with the heavy fines or jail sentences they deserve.

There is no GOTCHA in this one.

The same cannot be said about the Royal Commissions into Trade Unions instituted by the previous government. It was a pure witch hunt & produced close to nil in its results. An absolute disgrace.

Let me close with this positive comment on the possibility of a world without GOTCHA.

When I was writing my book DINNER WITH THE FOUNDING FATHERS, I discovered that in the first decade after Federation in 1901, the Australian Parliament did not have a majority government at any time. Indeed, it had five Prime Ministers in that decade – Barton, Deakin (3 times), Watson, Reid, Fisher. They had no GOTCHA moments as they respected one another and passed some of the finest legislation in the history of our nation, much of which exists still today. They respected one another and amiably negotiated legislation at the Melbourne Club over a fine glass of Red.

Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton should try it. The Commonwealth Club in Canberra would happily welcome them.

May we dispense forever with the politics of GOTCHA. It really is trivia but it produces minimal benefit and huge division.

In the cause of peace.

Everald

While you are here on my website, click on BOOKS and buy one – or 2 or 3.

ONE SMALL STEP

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Good Books, Government, History, Law, Population, Referendum, Uluru

Sometime during 2023, a referendum will be held to determine whether constitutional provisions can be approved to create an Indigenous Voice within the process of democracy in Australia.

Its passing will not alone solve the many cultural, social and economic challenges that face Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, but it will constitute a step forward along a pathway to find solutions to some of the more significant divisions in our society.

At the annual Garma Festival held recently in the Northern Territory, Anthony Albanese announced the words that are proposed to be included in the Australian Constitution if the voters of Australia approve them.

They are –

1. There shall be a body to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

2. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.

3. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have powers to make laws with respect to the composition, function, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

Consultations will be held around Australia before the final wording is put to us at the Referendum when we will vote quite simply – YES or NO.

I intend to vote YES and to publicly campaign strongly for a majority of voters to do likewise.

How did we reach this point in our history?

Except to state in the Constitution that Aborigines are a responsibility of State Governments, the Founding Fathers in 1901, ignored them.

There was a widely held belief that they were a dying race and would have no part in the future of the nation. Indeed, the indigenous population was declining at that time, but this is not now the case. The reverse is occurring. 3.5% of the population of Australia now identify as being indigenous.

At that time, New Zealand withdrew from participating in the proposed Federation as they had already signed a treaty with the Maoris at Waitangi in 1840 and made them full citizens, something that the Australian States did not ever attempt to do and were not willing to do.

To our eternal disgrace, indigenous people were not given the right to vote until 1967, when a referendum gave approval with a vote of 97% in favour.

Then, in 1992, the High Court of Australia held that native title existed for all indigenous people.

Far too many Australian Governments have believed that they could achieve peace with aboriginals by buying their goodwill with money. Although billions of dollars have been spent in this way, little has been achieved.

Then, just a few years ago, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was prepared by the most significant gathering of Indigenous people in the history of Australia and presented to the Federal Government. Malcolm Turnbull declared that the voters of Australia would never accept it. Anthony Albanese believes otherwise.

So it is that you and I will now decide.

I wont set out here the case for either YES or N0.

This will be presented to us in the official referendum documents before we vote. I will now just comment on the draft wording that the Prime Minister has presented to us for consideration.

I find it to be acceptable except for two words.

The word ‘powers’ in the second line of paragraph 3, could cause the referendum to be lost. Paragraph 2 gives the Voice power to make representations only. Paragraph 3 gives Parliament power to give more power to the Voice. In my view, this can only be done via another referendum. The word should be removed from the paragraph.

The word VOICE is a strange title to give to a constitutional entity. It would be far better to call it an ASSEMBLY. This gives it the stature it deserves and we can more readily understand what it is.

Let me make an additional comment.

Once this new body is formed, I hope that it will of its own accord reach out to every nationality now living in Australia to mutually agree of ways and means of becoming a more cohesive society. There are now more than 100 nations represented here and each could send one delegate to a gathering of goodwill organised by the Voice once every parliamentary term.

Finally, may I note with dismay that Pauline Hanson has announced that her political party will campaign for a NO vote. I had hoped that political parties would stay out of it so we can enjoy a genuine exercise in democracy that will bring us together as a nation. Sadly it wont be so. Racism will raise its ugly head and divide us.

After all, we are simply acknowledging that people whose ancient heritage of 65000 years, the longest in the history of the entire planet, should be recognised in our national constitution.

Its just a small step to take.

Everald.

PS. Buy my book DINNER WITH THE FOUNDING FATHERS from my website

EVERALD@LARGE

It tells the mighty story of how our Constitution was written and approved back in 1901. Sadly it reminds us that only 20% of referendums to change or add to our Constitution have ever received the approval of voters. I hope that this one adds to the list of winners.

A NEW PARLIAMENT FOR AUSTRALIA

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Elections, Environment, Good Books, Government, History, Law

This weekend, 227 Members and Senators will travel to Canberra from all corners of our continent to be sworn in on Tuesday to serve in the 47th Parliament of Australia since Federation in 1901.

It will be led by the nation’s 31st Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, who as the Leader of the Labor Party, follows three conservative Prime Ministers, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison, whose tenure will not be treated by historians as kindly as they may have hoped.

Many significant changes have been promised and are expected to be implemented.

If they are not achieved satisfactorily, and begin to produce promised results, voters will react harshly in Election2025 as the people of Australia now have a low tolerance level for crude party politics and inept governments.

So, what are the priorities and which of them are the most urgent?

While I dont expect Albo to take notice of my thoughts, these are my top ten priorities and I have listed them in what I believe is their order of importance.

*HEALTH – We have massively underinvested in all aspects of health, while private health insurance has been plundered by the medical profession and allowed to descend into an unaffordable disaster.

*INFLATION – This is seriously expanding the daily struggle for existence of a growing number of Australians in more ways than any other factor. It has been mainly caused by the greed and corruption of capitalism at its very worst, with costs being faked as a excuse to generate excessive profits. This must be eliminated quickly .

*ENERGY – a costly disgrace, caused by a decade of irresponsible neglect in failing to replace ageing power sources, that is particularly severe on pensioners and low income earners.

*AGED CARE – pitiful and disgraceful. Words cant adequately describe the humiliation and misery that people are suffering in their final years for no valid reason.

*CLIMATE and ENVIRONMENT – long overdue for serious investment, plus personal changes to our own lifestyles. Climate deniers are the world’s most irresponsible people and must be sidelined.

*AFFORDABLE HOUSING – will be solved only when governments make their surplus land and airspace available long term via low cost leases.

*ULURU STATEMENT – Its time to rectify the omission of Indigenous heritage from our original Constitution in 1901. It can be delayed no longer.

*INFRASTRUCTURE – it is either ancient or inadequate or inferior or inefficient. Huge defect in our quality of national life and our level of productivity

*WATER – we are the driest continent on the planet, yet we have never ever harnessed and sustained our water resources in an intelligent manner.

*CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE – long overdue, especially reform of the size and powers of the Senate and the powers of the Crown being passed to the People of Australia,

I an attending the entire opening week of Parliament in Canberra.

Have arranged 24 appointments with Ministers, Shadow Ministers, cross benchers and back benchers from all parties and Independents. I carry out my negotiations as a swinging voter who never has and never will join a political party as I regard them as gatherings where closed minds can flourish.

My personal mission on this visit to Parliament is to take part in discussions on the Inland Railway, Gladstone Railway, Aged Care, Affordable Housing, Uluru Statement and Voluntary Assisted Dying legislation for ACT & Northern Territory. My intention is to follow up these issues relentlessly until results are achieved.

Am hopeful of positive results as the Prime Minister appears to be seriously implementing a significant agenda for change, quite different to the negativity of recent governments that sought to revive ‘good old days’ that have never existed.

Over and above all of this, I hope that dignity and decency will return to the Parliament after a long absence.

Especially, I hope that Question Time will become a place of respectful debate. At present, it projects to the nation a very divisive and angry image which fosters discourtesy in our society.

It particularly encourages school children to speak in the same way to their teachers. They are just following the poor example of our national leaders.

I yearn for the dignified tradition of Menzies and Chifley who regularly debated one another in Parliament with huge courtesy and respect, as well as making excellent use of the English language as their sauce of power.

Yours in genuine hope for a Parliament of quality and achievement.

Everald.

And don’t forget to buy signed copies of my three books from my website

EVERALD@LARGE

or online from Booktopia or Amazon or Dymocks or Fishpond etc.

Even though I say so myself, they are an entertaining read.

USA SUPREME COURT DENIES WOMEN THE RIGHT OF ABORTION AND GIVES MEN YET ANOTHER PASS TO ‘GET OUT OF JAIL FREE’

On By Everald ComptonIn Community and Values, Government, History, Law, religion

During Donald Trump’s four year term as President of the United States of America, three vacancies occurred in the ranks of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court.

He nominated three ultra conservative judges to replace them and made it clear to those judges that he expected them to remove the constitutional right of women to have an abortion whenever the matter came before the Court. He has now publicly confirmed that he had obtained their commitment to do this. His own staff, who witnessed the discussions, have also confirmed what Trump had demanded.

Thus, it happened last month.

The Court struck out the famous ruling in the case of Roe versus Wade, made by the Court 50 years ago, and which rightly and justly gave women control over what happened to their own bodies.

The margin of the vote was 6/3. The winning votes were those of the three #Trump appointees.

At that moment, those three judges ceased to be independent custodians of the Law.. They became politicians, low grade ones. A sad day for America, and the world.

The decision hotly divided the American people who are already hugely torn apart by the issue of gun ownership.

Indeed, it is deplorable that the same people who defend the right to life of unborn babies are the same people who demand the right to own a gun so they can shoot people at will.

It is also unbelievable that, in a grossly overpopulated world,which is in grave danger of having insufficient food and fresh water for its 8.5 billion people, anyone would want to fight for the life of an unwanted child who is likely to live an unhappy life.

So it is that when an American woman falls pregnant and has reasons to abort the pregnancy, she now bears alone the full trauma, responsibility and cost of having to proceed with the birth while her male partner is not burdened in any way. He can simply walk away and make it look as though she ‘deserved it’.

Sadly, this is the way of the world in far too many unfair ways.

It becomes more clear every day that, in every challenge of life, it is women who become second class citizens.

This is not a society that I want to live in and I am certain that most of my readers will agree with me.

What can be done about it in America?

Absolutely nothing.

The Justices of the Supreme Court have lifetime appointments.

The devotees of Donald Trump will control the Supreme Court for a generation and will continue to practice their extremism. The blunt fact is that while Trump lost the election, his legacy lives on.

There is little chance of new legislation passing the Congress that will give approval for abortion as Republicans and Democrats are bitterly divided to the point of total hatred.

An unfortunate fact is that the female Justice who wrote the abortion judgement on behalf of the Court is a devoted Catholic who is a mother of 6. Her world is one in which she accepts that husbands are the head of the family. She did not set out to persecute women with this judgement. She just restored what she believes is the natural place of women, primarily child bearers, a role that she appears to have accepted herself.

It is a tragedy of history that the person she replaced on the Court was Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in my view the finest jurist ever to sit on the American Supreme Court in the history of the nation, She firmly stood for justice for all humanity, especially the poor and the oppressed and especially women who were denied their rights.

Her legacy has been demeaned by her successor but her book MY OWN WORDS is inspirational. I warmly recommend that you read it and applaud the prejudice against women that she had to overcome on her way to the top of her profession. Millions of women have been similarly oppressed.

And it cannot ever be denied that 5 male Justices voted to ban abortion.

They quite clearly do not believe in gender equality.

The same judges repeated their destruction this week by decimating the powers of the USA Environment Protection Agency.

A very disappointed

EVERALD

Don’t forget to enjoy some good winter reading with my books

A BEAUTIFUL SUNSET

DINNER WITH THE FOUNDING FATHERS

THE MAN ON THE TWENTY DOLLAR NOTES

Buy them online from any bookseller or get a signed copy from me.

EVERALD@LARGE

Click on BOOKS