The last time I read the Australian Constitution (which was only a couple of days ago), I didn't notice any references to the HRC or the ALRC. If the "Voice" is so similar, why would it need specific Constitutional mention?More factual information to keep the fact lovers informed.
As Labor progresses a referendum on the Voice to Parliament, some politicians and pundits have claimed it would be a 'third chamber'. We asked five experts to weigh in.www.abc.net.au
Anne Twomey, professor of constitutional law at the University of Sydney, agreed.
She noted that the Voice would not be able to "initiate, debate, pass or defeat bills and would not have any of the powers or privileges of the existing houses".
Even the suggestion that parliament would need agreement from the Voice to make legislation was "wrong", she added, likening the Voice to other bodies which make recommendations and reports to parliament, such as the Human Rights Commission and the Australian Law Reform Commission.