1937 Australian referendum (Marketing): Difference between revisions
GreenC bot (talk | contribs) Removed 1 archive link; reformat 1 link. Wayback Medic 2.5 |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''''Constitution Alteration (Marketing) 1936''''' was an [[Referendums in Australia|Australian referendum]] held in the [[1937 Australian referendum|1937 referendums]] which sought to alter the [[Australian Constitution]] to remove the restraints imposed on [[Australian Parliament|Parliament]] by section 92 of the Constitution. |
'''''Constitution Alteration (Marketing) 1936''''' was an [[Referendums in Australia|Australian referendum]] held in the [[1937 Australian referendum|1937 referendums]] which sought to alter the [[Australian Constitution]] to remove the restraints on interstate sales of goods imposed on [[Australian Parliament|Parliament]] by [[Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia|section 92 of the Constitution]]. |
||
It was proposed to add a section 92A that excluded "marketing" from the powers of section 92. This was in reaction to the case of James v Commonwealth [1932] AC 578 in which the [[Judicial Committee of the Privy Council|Privy Council]] found that the Commonwealth legislation regulating the sales of dried fruit was invalid.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Davern Wright |first1=R J |title=THE DRIED FRUITS CASE. JAMES v. THE COMMONWEALTH. |journal=Res Judicatae |date=1938 |volume=42 |pages=173-176 |url=http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ResJud/1938/42.pdf}}</ref> |
|||
==Question== |
==Question== |
||
Revision as of 07:34, 5 February 2021
Constitution Alteration (Marketing) 1936 was an Australian referendum held in the 1937 referendums which sought to alter the Australian Constitution to remove the restraints on interstate sales of goods imposed on Parliament by section 92 of the Constitution.
It was proposed to add a section 92A that excluded "marketing" from the powers of section 92. This was in reaction to the case of James v Commonwealth [1932] AC 578 in which the Privy Council found that the Commonwealth legislation regulating the sales of dried fruit was invalid.[1]
Question
Do you approve of the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'Constitution Alteration (Marketing) 1936'?
Results
| State | On
rolls |
Ballots issued | For | Against | Invalid | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | % | |||||||
| New South Wales | 1,550,947 | 1,461,860 | 456,802 | 33.76 | 896,457 | 66.24 | 108,601 | No |
| Victoria | 1,128,492 | 1,074,278 | 468,337 | 46.58 | 537,021 | 53.42 | 68,920 | No |
| Queensland | 562,240 | 519,933 | 187,685 | 38.78 | 296,302 | 61.22 | 35,946 | No |
| South Australia | 358,069 | 341,444 | 65,364 | 20.83 | 248,502 | 79.17 | 27,578 | No |
| Western Australia | 247,536 | 221,832 | 57,023 | 27.77 | 148,308 | 72.23 | 16,501 | No |
| Tasmania | 133,444 | 125,016 | 24,597 | 21.88 | 87,798 | 78.12 | 12,621 | No |
| Total for Commonwealth | 3,980,728 | 3,744,363 | 1,259,808 | 36.26 | 2,214,388 | 63.74 | 270,167 | No |
| Obtained majority in no State and an overall minority of 954,580 votes. | ||||||||
| Not carried | ||||||||
Discussion
This was one of the few instances where a referendum failed to achieve a majority in any state.
See also
References
- ^ Davern Wright, R J (1938). "THE DRIED FRUITS CASE. JAMES v. THE COMMONWEALTH" (PDF). Res Judicatae. 42: 173–176.
- ^ Handbook of the 44th Parliament "Part 5 - Referendums and Plebiscites - Referendum results". Parliamentary Library of Australia. Archived from the original on 29 September 2017..
Further reading
- Standing Committee on Legislative and Constitutional Affairs (1997) Constitutional Change: Select sources on Constitutional change in Australia 1901–1997. Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra.
- Bennett, Scott (2003). Research Paper no. 11 2002–03: The Politics of Constitutional Amendment Australian Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra.
- Australian Electoral Commission (2007) Referendum Dates and Results 1906 – Present AEC, Canberra.
