Jump to content

Australian referendum, 1988 (Rights and Freedoms)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BrownHairedGirl (talk | contribs) at 13:37, 17 July 2016 (Cat-a-lot: Moving from Category:Constitutional referendums to Category:Constitutional referendums in Australia). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Constitution Alteration (Rights and Freedoms) 1988 was proposed legislation that was put to referendum in the Australian referendum, 1988. The legislation sought to enshrine in the Australian constitution various civil rights, including freedom of religion, rights in relation to trials, and rights regarding the compulsory acquisition of property.

Results

A Proposed Law: To alter the Constitution to extend the right to trial by jury, to extend freedom of religion, and to ensure fair terms for persons whose property is acquired by any government.

Do you approve this proposed alteration?

Result[1]
State On rolls Ballots issued For Against Informal
Votes % Votes %
New South Wales 3,564,856 3,297,246 965,045 29.65% 2,289,645 70.35% 42,556
Victoria 2,697,096 2,491,183 816,057 33.42% 1,625,484 66.58% 49,642
Queensland 1,693,247 1,542,293 503,217 32.88% 1,027,218 67.12% 11,858
South Australia 937,974 873,511 223,038 26.01% 634,438 73.99% 16,035
Western Australia 926,636 845,209 233,917 28.14% 597,322 71.86% 13,970
Tasmania 302,324 282,785 70,987 25.49% 207,486 74.51% 4,312
Australian Capital Territory 166,131 149,128 60,064 40.71% 87,460 59.29% 1,604
Northern Territory 74,695 56,370 20,503 37.14% 34,699 62.86% 1,168
Total for Commonwealth 10,362,959 9,537,725 2,892,828 30.79% 6,503,752 69.21% 141,145
Results Obtained majority in no State and an overall minority of 3,610,924 votes.

Discussion

The "religious freedom" part of the proposed change was opposed by many churches and religious-affiliated schools concerned that it would be interpreted as requiring a level of church-state separation that would put public funding and government assistance for faith schools in jeopardy.

Conversely, Liberal senator Richard Alston argued that the aforementioned provision could place the use of corporal punishment in religious schools beyond the power of the government to regulate.[2]

See also

References