Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gleeson. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gleeson. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday 14 April 2013

International Court of Justice to hear Australia's case against Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean on June 26, 2013

ATTORNEY-GENERAL TO REPRESENT AUSTRALIA 
 IN INTERNATIONAL WHALING CASE AGAINST JAPAN

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus QC will appear in Australia’s whaling case against Japan which has now been set down for a three week hearing in the International Court of Justice in the Hague from 26 June, 2013.
“I welcome the announcement of the ICJ hearing date. Australia wants this slaughter to end. We will now have our day in court to establish, once and for all, that Japan’s whaling hunt is not for scientific purposes and is against international law,” said Mr Dreyfus.
“The fixing of the date sets up the final stage in this case brought by the Australian Government. The oral hearings are the last phase of legal proceedings before the Court makes its decision.”
Australia commenced the proceedings against Japan on 31 May 2010. The International Court of Justice has received written submissions from both Parties.
Australia’s views on whaling are well known – we condemn all commercial whaling, including Japan’s so-called ‘scientific’ whaling,” said Minister for Environment Tony Burke.
“The Australian Government’s decision to bring this legal action demonstrates our determination to end commercial whaling.”
Minister for Foreign Affairs Bob Carr said Australia’s whaling case did not undermine the relationship between Australia and Japan.
“Australia and Japan have agreed that our differences over whaling will not affect the strong bilateral relationship we share,” said Mr Carr.
“The International Court of Justice is the appropriate forum to resolve these differences in a calm and measured way.”
Counsel appearing in the case with the Attorney-General will include Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson SC, Bill Campbell QC, Professor James Crawford SC, Professor Philippe Sands QC and Professor Laurence Boisson de Chazournes.
“We hope the Court will deliver its decision on the legality of Japan’s whaling before the start of the next whaling season,” Mr Dreyfus said.
April 12, 2013

ICJ hearing schedule

Thursday 4 September 2014

Beware the Secret State - Part Two


The Secret State is becoming more than a concept in Australia as successive governments spend more and more money on surveillance and give more and more surveillance power to federal and state government departments and agencies.

On 5 August 2014 the Prime Minister announced his intention to further broaden surveillance powers via the mandatory retention by service providers of all telecommunications metadata, in order for government agencies to access information on Australian citizens, permanent residents and visiting tourists. 

Between 1 July and 31 December 2013 just one of Australia’s major telecommunications companies received these requests for data held on its customers:

Telstra customer information, carriage service records and pre-warrant checks 36,053
Life threatening situations and Triple Zero emergency calls 2,871
Court orders 270
Warrants for interception or access to stored communications 1,450
Total 40,644
Note: These figures do not include requests by national security agencies.

By 30 June 2014 these requests for data held on its customers in the 2013-14 financial year totalled :

Telstra customer information, carriage service records and pre-warrant checks 75,448
Life threatening situations and Triple Zero emergency calls 6,202
Court orders 598
Warrants for interception or access to stored communications 2,701
Total  84,949
Note: These figures do not include requests by national security agencies.

In addition the centralised database of all Australian telephone numbers including the service and directory addresses provided by the customer, the Integrated Public Number Database (IPND), was accessed by agencies approximately 104,000 times (excluding national security agencies) during the 2013-14 financial year.

Those agencies who can access all this metadata with or without a warrant include; federal, state & territory police forces, Customs, CrimTrac, state anti-corruption agencies, Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, state & territory corrective services, Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, Australian Securities & Investment Commission, Australian Taxation Office, Australia Post, Dept of Human Services (including Centrelink, Medicare, Child Support Program), Dept of Veterans’ Affairs, Dept of Immigration and Citizenship, Dept of Defence, State Emergency Services, the RSPCA, local councils – and many more.

That the system is open to possible abuse is evident.

The Global Mail reported on 13 December 2013 that:

In November [2013], Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus admitted his force had accessed the call data of “up to five” members of parliament. Negus made much of the judicial oversight, through the issuing of a warrant, for any interception of the contents of phone calls, emails or SMS messages – but the elephant in the room was his admission that up to five MPs had been the subjects of warrantless data-surveillance, and that no judge had any input at all regarding the propriety of this access….
The extent of use of these powers is surprising – and suggests that it is being used to shirk the hurdle of judicial oversight. No less than 40 government agencies made 293,501 warrantless requests for metadata from internet service providers in the 2011-12 financial year. Just 56,898 of those requests were made by the Federal Police, which has the primary criminal law-enforcement role. The RSPCA, Wyndham City Council, the Tax Practitioners Board and even the Victorian Taxi Directorate also have been allowed to access individual telecommunications data for a ‘law-enforcement purpose’. Why are we giving quangos and a taxi administrator the power to access often highly sensitive personal telecommunications data?

Voters will never know the level of metadata access, with or without a warrant, that has been available to national security agencies in the the last three financial years.

However, they do know that the Abbott Government intends to increase national security agency powers to spy on them, under the National Security Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014 before the Senate .

The Australian Human Rights Commission stated that it is particularly concerned about the following elements of the bill which are overly broad in their coverage and which potentially impact upon rights to privacy and freedom of expression:
* Provisions enabling warrants for 12 months access to computers, computer networks and premises in the absence of adequate safeguards
* Blanket immunity to ASIO officers from Australian law in conducting surveillance activities with inadequate, independent oversight
* Strict liability for disclosure of information that could capture the work of journalists, among others.

That the Abbott Government intends to use this new legislation to capture journalists' sources can be inferred from this excerpt from a media report in The Sydney Morning Herald on 31 August 2014:

The Australian government has asked the federal police to investigate if lawyer Bernard Collaery and a former spy can be charged with disclosing classified information after revelations Australia spied on East Timor during sensitive oil and gas treaty talks.
Confirmation of the investigation came as the AFP asked the ABC to hand over material relating to its reports on the clandestine operation.
According to sources, the AFP was particularly keen on getting unedited footage of Mr Collaery's interviews with 7.30, Lateline and Four Corners.
It might also want an extract of an affidavit from the former Australian Secret Intelligence Service agent that reporter Conor Duffy claimed to have obtained.
In the interviews with the ABC and other media organisations, Mr Collaery – who had acted for East Timor and the former  ASIS agent – detailed how the former spy led the operation to insert listening devices into the wall cavity of East Timor's government offices under the cover of an aid project.
Attorney-General George Brandis and solicitor-general Justin Gleeson both said the former spy and Mr Collaery appeared to have breached laws preventing the public disclosure of classified information.
The offence carried a prison term of up to two years.
When asked if it was investigating Mr Collaery and the former spy for breaching commonwealth laws, a spokesman for the AFP said: "The AFP can confirm it has received a referral in relation to this matter. As this investigation is ongoing, it is inappropriate to comment further."
The referral was understood to have come from Senator Brandis or his department, which includes ASIO.
In emailed comments, Mr Collaery said he understood ASIO referred the matter to the AFP because of a suspected breach of section 39 of the Intelligence Services Act.
He noted that current ASIO boss David Irvine was head of ASIS at the time of the spying, which Mr Collaery said was illegal.
"This is the police knowingly or unknowingly trying to base a search warrant on an illegality. 
"The AFP should be investigating [former foreign minister Alexander] Downer and Irvine."
The ABC was considering its response but was understood to be prepared to reject the request, despite intimations from the AFP that it would seek a warrant for the material if it failed to comply.
While it was happy to provide footage that went to air (it was available online anyway), it regarded the unedited footage as including off-the-record information that might reveal the identity of protected sources.

Monday 7 November 2016

Two words only - Oh Gawd!



A quick whip around Australian government, mainstream and social media to amuse, bemuse, appal or anger.

TONY ABBOTT ON THE PRIVATE FUNDING TEAT…..




WEIRD MANBABIES BLAMING WOMEN…

Junkee, 1 November 2016:

A pair of Brisbane entrepreneurs have announced an “innovative way to address male related social issues” through the establishment of Australia’s first co-working space exclusive to men. Because if there’s one thing the startup sector needs it’s a blanket ban on women.

Nomadic Thinkers has the backing of six investors and will operate through a “hybridised co-working model with a gym space.” Membership of the space and the gym is open only to men. The founders have acknowledged that the creation of a gender-restricted co-working space “is bound to ruffle some feathers.”

A number of networking events run specifically for women have while in Australia’s notoriously male dominated startup scene and this year the first woman only co-working space was established in Perth. This latest offering is the first time a co-working space has been established to cater specifically to men. The lack of investment in male only working spaces could be down to the fact that currently three in four startups in Australia are founded by men.

The Nomadic Thinkers founders are currently in lease negotiations and the plan is to open up the space in January next year. Initially it will feature just a co-working space, cafe and a gym but “down the road we’re hoping to get a barber and a physio,” Monaghan says.

The startup offers a number of membership packages including “The Bear Grylls” and the “The Musk Have”, named after billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk.

Monaghan told Junkee that there were “a couple of things that got us to this point.”

“We’d been working in coffee shops and at home and it wasn’t that conducive to working,” Monaghan said. “We both had a mate who ended up in a violent situation with his wife. He pushed his wife over.”

According to Monaghan, domestic violence is an issue that “stems from depression in many cases”.

“Depression and suicide result from a lack of social support and community. Having a space where they [men] can be men is more of a preventative measure,” Monaghan said. “Healthy, happy men don’t hit their wives.”

Professor Marian Baird, the Director of the University of Sydney’s Women and Work Research Group told Junkee that Nomadic Thinkers could be the first workplace overtly designed to be exclusive to men. “I’ve never heard of a workplace being designed deliberately to be male only in a physical sense,” Professor Baird said.

Professor Baird wasn’t convinced by Monaghan’s justification for the exclusive nature of the space. “I don’t think there’s any excuse for domestic violence and I think that is a bit of a cop-out,” she said…..


Written by Matt Paul, he is the Director and Startup Architect at Nomadic Thinkers a hybrid gym and co-working space in Brisbane. We aim to launch men in business and in life. Opening Soon.

The pendulum is shifting in the west. And it is not just push back against the insanity of Cultural Marxists and globalists but in the individual lives of its citizens. While travelling and taking a break from the west is a great idea. Do you really want to let the civilisation your ancestors built decay away? With the BRITEXIT, Trump and rise of the alternative media there is a clear opportunity for revolutionary change. But change requires small steps and individual choices to be enduring. So what can you do?

REJECT TOXIC WOMEN & FIND A QUALITY ONE

A man needs his own house in order before he can influence others. While MGTOW community advocate checking out on marriage and women the reality is that will lead to quality men not reproducing and not raising the next generation. Simply put think of it as a numbers game. If you have kids and you are raising them well. This have a multiplier effect. Your ideas and worldview can be bestowed upon them meaning your vote at elections increases, your wealth production increases and your general well-being can increase. That being said the risk of finding a quality mate is high. With increasing divorce rates and laws such as no-fault divorce and Disney's absolute destruction of what Love and real relationships are with an obsession with infatuation. But they are out there and even in the West. Another way of looking at this is taking a proactive role in leadership in your relationship setting ground rules at the beginning is vital. But how do you get to that point? If you are well versed with ROK and other manosphere blogs the best way you can do this is by increasing your sexual marketplace value SMV, do this via increasing your traits as a provider and protector and increase your desirability making it easier to find a quality woman. Hit the gym…..

ABBOTT SETS OUT FOR THE LODGE ONCE MORE……

News.com.au, 1 November 2016:

Mr Abbott hadn’t dispatched her on a deliberate mission to publicly argue for a job. She was not acting as his surrogate, just as a writer looking for a topic.

But he had approved the use of the contents of a recent conversation in Ms McGregor’s Daily Telegraph column today.

“Abbott believes that only Turnbull can restore their relationship. He is the leader,” she wrote.

“He alone can ensure that Abbott is accorded the status and workload, which befits a former Prime Minister.

“Being pragmatic, Abbott actually believes that the solidarity imposed upon him by cabinet is the best insurance against his being deemed a wrecker.”

In short, he will stop being a nuisance if he gets a bigger desk……

5 MONTHS IN AND SINGING THE CYBER CSAR BLUES……


NO, IT REALLY WAS MELBOURNE CUP DAY THAT TUESDAY,  NOT APRIL FOOL’S…….

The Sydney Morning Herald, 1 November 2016:

The federal government's hopes of passing contested legislation in the Senate have been thrown into chaos following explosive revelations that its most friendly crossbench senator, Family First's Bob Day, may not have been legally elected.

The news could lead to a recount of all South Australian Senate votes from the July 2 election and that in turn could result in the election of another crossbench senator or indeed, one from the opposition - potentially changing the composition.

The bombshell news was delivered on Tuesday afternoon, hours after the embattled senator actually resigned in the wake of the collapse of his housing construction firm.

In a dramatic late-afternoon development, Attorney-General George Brandis released a statement advising that Special Minister of State, Scott Ryan, wrote to Senator Parry last Friday with "certain information concerning the position of Senator Bob Day".

Senator Brandis said the information related to a "potential indirect pecuniary interest" in a contract with the Commonwealth.

Normal practice would see Family First select a replacement candidate, who would be ticked off by South Australia's Parliament before taking their seat in Canberra by the end of the year, or early next year. 

However in an email sent to senators on Tuesday afternoon, Senate president Stephen Parry said he was "considering information which raises difficult constitutional questions relating to the composition of the Senate and I am seeking further advice".

Senator Brandis said the government would refer the matter to the High Court. 

200,000 LAWYERS SPEAKING OUT………

Australian Lawyers Alliance, 26 October 2016:

The Australian Lawyers Alliance (ALA) has today called for the immediate resignation of Federal Attorney-General George Brandis, in light of this week's resignation of Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson SC.

ALA national president Tony Kenyon said the Attorney-General's actions in recent months were an unacceptable and gross infringement on the independence of the Solicitor-General, with the Attorney-General no longer able to hold the confidence of the profession.

"Justin Gleeson SC is a distinguished lawyer, with an unblemished reputation for integrity. The attempt to interfere with his independence, and his resignation, are both unprecedented in the 100 year history of Australia's Solicitor-General," Mr Kenyon said.

"There is a compelling public interest in having the Solicitor-General as an independent statutory counsel to government.  A core purpose of the position is to provide frank and fearless advice to government.  Senator Brandis' actions flagrantly ignore this, and bring discredit on his position as Attorney-General.”

"His actions, in requiring the Governor-General, the Prime Minister, other Ministers and Departmental heads to seek his permission before obtaining the Solicitor-General's opinion is a particularly gross infringement on the independence of the Solicitor-General," Mr Kenyon said.

"This action follows a similar incident in Queensland under the Newman Government, who similarly forced the resignation of its Solicitor-General, Walter Sofronoff QC.”
"It is of deep concern to the profession that some Attorney-Generals appear to have no regard for important and fundamental safeguards on executive power, such as an independent Solicitor-General," Mr Kenyon said.

Mr Kenyon said that the ALA had joined many across the broader legal profession in expressing dismay this week at the actions of Senator Brandis with respect to the office of the Solicitor-General……

“IT’S NOT ARAB!”SHE CRIES……

SBS News, 28 July 2016:

In 2007 the One Nation leader took part in a DNA test organised by Queensland's Sunday Mail in which a mouth swab of her genetic material found that her "genetic makeup is drawn from a rich multicultural background, with 9 per cent originating in the Middle East, 32 per cent from Italy, Greece or Turkey and 59 per cent from northern Europe."

It's a fact that has given her detractors plenty of glee to re-report over the years - especially when she pronounces her anti- mosque and halal-certification policies that seem to predominantly target Muslims and migrants of Middle Eastern origin.
 
At the time, Hanson remarked that "All I can think of is that probably down the track it eventuated from some war."

"But I'm not going to knock it. It has made me who I am."
She seems to have changed her tune since then though. Watch the video above to see her reaction when she and the other participants of Pauline Hanson: Please Explain! are asked about their origins and where they are from. 

According to the Sunday Mail; Middle Eastern is defined for the test as modern-day Saudi Arabia, Iraq, parts of Iran, Syria and Jordan and the Arab countries of North Africa.

GOING ROGUE……

The Guardian, 2 November 2016:

Australia’s immigration department has been “freezing” the release of documents about asylum seekers at in its offshore detention centre on Nauru, according to a internal email, suggesting it has been deliberately breaching freedom of information laws.

In an email sent by accident to Guardian Australia, an official at the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, says there are “risks” to the apparent policy and asks for it to reconsidered.

The Greens’ immigration spokesman, Nick McKim said the emails showed the department had “gone rogue”.

The shadow immigration minister, Shayne Neumann, said it showed the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, was mismanaging his department.

The department said the email was “a misunderstanding”.


We note that our Nauru­-related FOI cases (ie summary incident reports, health data set and several others) continue to be on­ hold pending confirmation from you about when we can proceed to finalise them.
Are you able to please give us an update/indication of when you consider we will be able to proceed?
There are some risks associated with not proceeding these FOI requests.
Rather than freezing the processing of these cases for several more weeks or months, we might be better off releasing the documents sooner, with the Nauru information fully exempted under grounds of international relations. This is something we’d want to discuss with Susan [Mathew] given the concerns previously expressed about such an approach.

Under Australia’s freedom of information laws, strict timeframes are set out for processing requests for information, and there is evidence that the department has exceeded the timeframe for processing a number of requests made by Guardian Australia.

GORGEOUS GEORGE PLAYS SKITTLES……

SENATOR THE HON GEORGE BRANDIS QC
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE
MEDIA RELEASE

SENATOR ROD CULLETON

Last Saturday, I wrote to the President of the Senate, the Hon Stephen Parry, to draw to his attention an Opinion which I had received from the Solicitor-General concerning the election of Senator Rod Culleton as a Senator for Western Australia. I received the Opinion late on Friday, 28 October 2016. I also provided a copy of the Opinion to Senator Culleton.

The opinion was sought by me on 13 October 2016 in view of issues raised in proceedings commenced in the High Court against Senator Culleton by Mr Bruce Bell.

It appears that the proceedings brought by Mr Bell are based on an allegation that, at the time of the last election, Senator Culleton had been convicted of an offence punishable by a sentence of imprisonment for one year or longer, and was therefore “incapable of being chosen” as a Senator under section 44(ii) of the Constitution.

The President of the Senate has written to me today to advise that he proposes to bring the matter to the attention of the Senate when it sits on 7 November 2016. At that time, the Government will initiate a referral of the matter to the High Court pursuant to section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act.

2 November 2016

EXCEEDING HIS PARLIAMENTARY BRIEF……

ABC News, 1 March 2016:

Liberal senator Cory Bernardi says he has been warned against "freelancing" during his three-month secondment at the United Nations.

Senator Bernardi has told the ABC he put himself forward for the short-term posting and won the ballot run by his fellow Liberal senators.

"I'm looking forward to engaging with the UN committee system, to see from a much closer perspective how it works and maybe how it can be improved," he said.
Senator Bernardi will be joined by Labor senator Lisa Singh on the annual delegation to New York from September.

They will act as parliamentary observers to the UN General Assembly.

The senators will be expected to help Australia's Ambassador at the "pointy end" of the year by attending committee meetings and speaking engagements.

Senator Bernardi said he was aware he would need to stay on script, telling the ABC: "I've already been told there's no freelancing at the UN."

SBS News, 3 November 2016:

Senator Bernardi has openly backed the Republican candidate - the only person he follows on Twitter - while criticising the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.
Although he insists he's not a cheerleader for Trump, he told Sky News on Thursday the Republican has a "better chance to fix what's wrong with America".
It follows similar comments on social media and other outlets in recent days.

It's Halloween and sometimes the kids nail it! @realDonaldTrump




WHEN YOU'RE THE WRONG COLOUR ON A MAP......

Is Australia's signature colour really beige and does it suit us?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/technology/big-changes-looming-across-the-world-but-australians-could-be-left-behind/news-story/88297afa677cde2fe9fe52746ad2efc5

QUEENSLAND LABOR SAYS BUGGER THE GREAT BARRIER REEF…….

The Guardian, 2 November 2016:

Powers granted by the Queensland government for Adani’s proposed Carmichael mine are unprecedented for a private commercial development, new findings reveal.
Legal analysis by the Environmental Defenders Office in Queensland provided exclusively to Guardian Australia ahead of its public release on Thursday shows that the broad powers have previously applied only to essential endeavours.

Anthony Lynham, the state minister for natural resources and mines, declared the Carmichael mine and its associated infrastructure a “prescribed project” and “critical infrastructure” on 7 October.

There has been only a handful of critical infrastructure declared since laws enabling it were introduced to the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act in 2006. Most of the five relate to water supply.

Most notably, in 2007, the then infrastructure minister declared parts of the water grid in south-east Queensland critical infrastructure because that region was experiencing unprecedented drought.

Jo-Anne Bragg, chief executive of the Environmental Defenders Office Queensland, said the use of a declaration power “largely designed to protect Queensland from the worsening effects of drought” for the Adani Carmichael combined project was “deeply inappropriate”.

At the time of the declaration Lynham told the Sunday Mail: “This is a critical project. The government is serious about seeing it happen. We have to get jobs happening for central and northern Queensland.”

Under the law governing critical infrastructure, the coordinator general may speed up or progress assessment and, with ministerial consent, step in and take control of any legal decision still required for the project to proceed.

At that point opportunities for the community to interrogate the impacts of the project on groundwater may be limited.

The Queensland courts are also stripped of their usual statutory powers to review and determine the lawfulness of any decisions that might be made by the coordinator general.

Bragg said this meant the critical infrastructure declaration “could be used to potentially short-circuit legal protection for vital groundwater resources”.

“We believe the provision has been wrongly used in its application to the Adani project, and believe this could open the floodgates to all manner of major private developments demanding to be fast-tracked through the assessment process,” she said.

She recommended that the state government revoke both declarations to assure Queenslanders that proper procedure would be followed, and for the State Development Act to be amended to constrain the broad powers of the coordinator general in future.

The Environmental Defenders Office’s analysis found that the Adani coal project was assessed faster than the average time taken for major coordinated projects in Queensland.

KALISCH CHAOS CONTINUES…..

The Sydney Morning Herald, 4 November 2016:

David Kalisch Photo: Andrew Meares

The jobs of more than 150 Australian Bureau of Statistics public servants are to be axed as the cash-strapped bureau struggles to balance its shrinking budget.

Workers at the bureau, which finished the past financial year more than $36 million in the red, were told on Friday morning that management will be looking to get up to 150 employees to accept voluntary redundancies in a process that is to begin immediately.

The job cuts are the latest in a string of bad news stories for the Bureau which is still dealing with the fall-out from August's dramatic Census debacle and ongoing financial strife.

The axe is falling just weeks after Chief Statistician David Kalisch said data collection on foreign ownership of agricultural businesses, industrial disputes, motor vehicle sales, livestock slaughter, and crime offenders and victims, could all stop because of the financial pressures the bureau faced.

The Bureau said the voluntary redundancies are "part of a planned approach to transform its workforce for the future" and confirmed "at least 100 packages" would be offered.

"The voluntary redundancies are necessary as we transition from higher staffing levels required to implement the 2016 Census," a statement said.

AUSTRALIA GOING NUCLEAR?.......

SBS News, 3 November 2016:

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has told a charity dinner in Papua New Guinea that he regrets not buying nuclear submarines for Australia.
"I do regret, though, that my own government did not give more consideration to off-the-shelf nuclear-propelled options - as this might have provided a more capable submarine more quickly," Mr Abbott told an Anglicare dinner in Port Moresby.
"In an uncertain world, where countries look to Australia for help, it would have been good to have these new subs much sooner than the middle of the 2030s."

Thursday 31 January 2019

Australian High Court rejects NSW Berejiklian Government's 2018 electoral funding reforms


In May 2018 the NSW Berejiklian Government announced plans to cap election-related spending by unions, environmental groups, and churches at a maximum of $500,000. 

The Electoral Funding Act 2018 No 20 came into force on 1 July 2018.


Australian Financial Review, 29 January 2019:

In July 2018, the Berejiklian Government reduced the amount that unions and other third parties could spend in the six months before an election from $1.05 million to $500,000. A political party and it candidates, however, can spend up to $22.6 million if it stands candidates in all 93 seats.

The High Court said NSW proved that aiming to "prevent the drowning out of voices in the political process by the distorting influence of money" was a legitimate purpose.

However, it said "the reduction in the cap applicable to third-party campaigners was not demonstrated to be reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose".

The court did not accept NSW's argument that $500,000 was still a substantial sum that would allow third parties to "reasonably present their case".

The lead judgement of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justices Virginia Bell and Patrick Keane said "no enquiry as to what in fact is necessary to enable third-party campaigners reasonably to communicate their messages appears to have been undertaken".

The reforms also sought to ban third parties from acting "in concert" by pooling money into multi-million-dollar campaigns, such as the "Stop the Sell-off" campaign against energy privatisation for the 2015 poll. Those who breach the act would have faced up to 10 years' jail.

Former Commonwealth solicitor-general Justin Gleeson SC was lead counsel for Unions NSW and the five unions which also signed up for the challenge.

BACKGROUND

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA, Judgment Summary, 18 December 2018:

UNIONS NSW & ORS v STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES [2013] HCA 58

Today the High Court unanimously held that ss 96D and 95G(6) of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) ("the EFED Act") are invalid because they impermissibly burden the implied freedom of communication on governmental and political matters, contrary to the Commonwealth Constitution.

Section 96D of the EFED Act prohibits the making of a political donation to a political party, elected member, group, candidate or third-party campaigner, unless the donor is an individual enrolled on the electoral roll for State, federal or local government elections. The EFED Act also caps the total expenditure that political parties, candidates and third-party campaigners can incur for political advertising and related election material. For the purposes of this cap, s 95G(6) of the EFED Act aggregates the amount spent on electoral communication by a political party and by any affiliated organisation of that party. An "affiliated organisation" of a party is defined as a body or organisation "that is authorised under the rules of that party to appoint delegates to the governing body of that party or to participate in pre-selection of candidates for that party (or both)".

Each of the plaintiffs intends to make political donations to the Australian Labor Party, the Australian Labor Party (NSW Branch) or other entities, and to incur electoral communication expenditure within the meaning of the EFED Act. The second, third and sixth plaintiffs are authorised to appoint delegates to the annual conference of the Australian Labor Party (NSW Branch) and to participate in the pre-selection of that party's candidates for State elections. A special case stated questions of law for determination by the High Court.

The High Court unanimously held that ss 96D and 95G(6) burdened the implied freedom of communication on governmental and political matters. The Court held that political communication at a State level may have a federal dimension. The Court accepted that the EFED Act had general anti-corruption purposes. However, the Court held that the impugned provisions were not connected to those purposes or any other legitimate end.

· This statement is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the High Court or to be used in any later consideration of the Court’s reasons