What is today: A centralist Government in Canberra implementing the UN’s orders. A government fully prepared to keep all in the dark and trap them at every opportunity.
This paper sets out dates of events that lead to the never-never that Australia faces as we approach the turn of the new millennium. Certain logical and legal outcomes flow from the events listed.
THE TIME HAS ARRIVED for the people to re-assess Australia’s position, and to decide on positive action is needed to address the unconstitutional position we have got ourselves into.
1896 To-date the most effective steps taken towards bringing Australia to a federation with a Constitution when the Federal Constitutional Convention Bathurst in November 1896.
|1897||Federal Constitutional Conventions held in Adelaide and Sydney.|
|1899||Federal Convention held in Melbourne. Constitutional referendum held. Constitution not approved (receiving only 48% of the votes cast), 422,788* is equal to 12.8% of the 3.3 million population of the six Colonies-cum-States. *(Includes ‘plural voting’ where the elite establishment of men had as many six votes each)|
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act passed by British Imperial Parliament on 9 July, it was then “imposed” on the people of Australia. Queen Victoria issues Letters Patent on 28 October 1900 with instructions to Governor-General, without which the Constitution could not be implemented. (The Constitution is not a single document.)
Commonwealth of Australia is officially established. Queen Victoria dies. King Edward Letters Patent 23-Feb. Proclamation proroguing the first parliament. The Official opening of Federal Parliament 9 May included introduction of additional Constitutional instruments.
Australian Parliament establishes High Court when Prominent people raised substantial objection based on Constitutional grounds to the act establishing the High Court.
High Court takes first step to remove people’s rights. Then Chief Justice Samuel Griffith, ex-premier of Queensland and powerful in establishing the Constitution pronounced:
“The contention that a law of the Commonwealth is invalid because it is not in conformity with Magna Carta is not one for serious refutation”
In plain language, Magna Carta could no longer be relied on by Australians. This position since taught in our universities and practised in our courts.
Chief Justice of South Australia Supreme Court refuses position as High Court Justice. Andrew Clarke of Tasmania a prominent member of the team that drafted the Constitution passed over for a High Court position because of his opposition based on Constitutional grounds to the High Court system as established. (Back then it was clearly a stacked High Court as it is now.)
World War 1. King George V declares war on behalf of Australia. (see declaration of war 3 Sept. 1939)
Australia now a Dominion, member of the British Empire contingent, joins the peace conference at Versailles on the 13 January 1919 with W M Hughes and Sir Joseph Cook as Australia’s representatives.
Supported by an agreement reached at the 1917 Imperial War Conference held in London and argument put by the President of the USA, W Wilson, W Hughes and Sir Joseph Cook sign the Peace Treaty of Versailles on 28 June 1919, not in the name of the British Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia, but in the name of the nation, Australia.
Prime Minister Hughes in an address to Federal Parliament on 10 September 1919 said,
“Australia has now entered into a family of Nations on a footing of equality. Australia has been born in a blood sacrifice”
referring to the first world war.
On 10 January 1920 the League of Nations becomes part of International Law. With
This is Australia’s Independence Day! The British Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia ceases to exist as does the authority of the British Crown over Australia. British subjects at that time resident in Australia became Australian citizens.
The book “A Handbook to the League of Nations” by Sir Geoffrey Butler KBE lecturer in International Law and Diplomacy of the Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, used by all nations as a reference to the League of Nations at the time, referring to Article I of the covenant of the League of Nations states that,
“It is arguable that this article (Article 1) is the most significant single measure. – By it the British Dominions, namely New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and Canada, have their independent nationhood established for the first time. There may be friction over small matters in giving effect to this internationally acknowledged fact, but the Dominions will always look to the League of Nations Covenant as their Declaration of Independence”.
The League of Nations confirms Australia’s mandated territories of Nauru and German New Guinea on 17 December 1920.
Sir Joseph Cook becomes the first Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom on 11 November 1921. The United Kingdom again recognises the independence and sovereignty of Australia by its acceptance of his credentials which they did without delay.
G F Pearce represents Australia at the Washington conference, 12th November to 6th February 1922, resulting in the signing of the Washington Naval Treaty, Australia’s very first treaty with a foreign nation. Prior to 1920 treaties fell under the authority of the Monarch, since then the executive has “assumed” this role.
Balfour Declaration; equal status with Britain confirmed.
Imperial meetings produce Statute of Westminster. (its infamy may dormant until1986). Wall St stock market crash and the start of the depression.
Statute of Westminster enacted by the British Parliament; Section 2(2) releases all governments from being bound and limited by the Laws of England, (Magna Carta Habeas Corpus etc.) Individual governments needed to adopt the sections that suited them (Section 2(2) of this Statute was not adopted by the Australian States until 1986).
The Federal government had no need to adopt, as they were not bound by the Laws of England [since 1920], unless they chose to be so bound. The State governments were.
3rd September Australia declares War on Germany. ( Australia, not the King as in 1914).
United Kingdom and United States secret meeting to establish United Nations.
Twenty-six nations including Australia calling themselves the United Nations sign pledge to defeat the Axis countries.
Australia backdates the adoption of certain sections of the Statute of Westminster as extra procuration in the event of England being defeated – Rejecting section 2(2), later adopted as part of the Australia Act 1986.
Section 2(2) changes Australian government, both State and Federal from limited to unlimited government, cancelling all legal right of people. What were inalienable, forever rights, now at the whim of the politicians and the courts.
Big four nations USA, USSR, UK, & CHINA meet to draw up plans for a new world body, the “United Nations”.
YALTA: The USA, UK and the USSR agree on voting procedures and call conference to draw up charter for ” United Nations”.
H V Evatt and F M Forde represent Australia at the 50 Nation, United Nations Conference on International Organisation in San Francisco from 25 April to 26 June 1945.
Australia signs the UN Charter as a foundation Member State on 26 June1945. The UN Organisation replaces the League of Nations which is officially terminated in 1946.
The British government orally states and provides documentation to the UN with regard to the legislative powers of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
“No act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom or act that looks to the parliament of the United Kingdom for its authority is valid in Australia or its territories in accordance with the laws of the United Kingdom and the Charter of the United Nations” ( Article 2 paragraph 1 and 4).
When later asked specifically about the validity of the following British acts of Parliament, the British government referred to their previous reply, as stated above.
The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 UK.
Advise received from the office of Legal affairs of the Secretary General of the UN states, “It could be argued the above acts including the Letters Patent contravene Article 2(1) and resolution 2625 (xxv) of the Charter”.
British Imperial Parliament renews Citizen Act. – Australia enacts new Citizen Act.
The Declaration of London, India becomes a republic, but remains a member of The Commonwealth of Nations, and retains allegiance to the Monarch. This closely resembles the position Australia got itself in by default and high level fraud, independent [a republic] with allegiance to the Monarch.
Canada adopts a Bill of Rights. (Not the best way to address the loss of protection of peoples’ rights but they did something, while Australia did nothing, it can now be seen why, somebody intends that the High Court will hand out rights as and when and IF it suits. This has come to pass with the High Court actually reading rights into the so called constitution that never was never drafted to grant rights as there was no necessity to do so at the time.)
Canada adopts new Citizenship Act recognising Canadian nationality and Commonwealth Citizenship but confers no rights.
British Imperial Parliament enacts British Nationality Act to come into effect on 1st January 1983.
Canada adopts new Constitution, starting with “Canadian Charter of Rights and freedoms”. – Australian Ministerial statement “Australia only country in world excluding England to continue the concept of British subject”. High Court expands the meaning of “External affairs” section 51 (xxix) of the Constitution, to enable the Federal Parliament to make laws governing human rights. All totally without the authority of the people.
1st January British Nationality act 1981 takes effect, Australians are now aliens in Britain. – Federal Parliament deregulates Banks.-High Court removes Tasmania’s right to build dam, the second time imposing UN law over Australian Law.
Federal Parliament repeals part 11 of the Australian citizenship act, confirming the earlier cancellation by Britain of our status as British citizens, severing one of the last links in the chain of rights under the law. * Queen Elizabeth as Queen of Australia revokes Queen Victoria’s 1900 Letters Patent that establishes the responsibility of the Governor General as the Commander in chief over the Commonwealth with power to appoint and dismiss Judges, Commissioners, Justices of the Peace, Ministers of State etc. Command that all officers, Ministers, Military and inhabitants be obedient, aiding, and assisting to the Governor General. Queen Victoria’s clear instructions to the Governor General including the taking of an Oath as provided for by law. No affirmation was authorised as would be expected of the Commander in Chief of a government established with the blessing of Almighty God. All these things now revoked and replaced with an entirely new Letters Patent that allows an affirmation and omits reference to the position of Commander in Chief or to who appoints Judges etc. etc. etc.* A whole new ball game is set in place.
The Australia Act, that, among other things, conferred a legal position on the State Parliaments allowing the making of laws that remove the inherited rights of all Australians. Establishing the States as Republics, legally able to disregard all earlier State laws that secure peoples’ rights as a free people.–Illegally altering the Constitution.
Mabo, a “set-up” case where there was no need for Mabo to go to the High Court the local Court would have ruled Mabo owned title to his land as there was no other claimant. This is a regular procedure in local courts making Mabo a set-up.
*Hong Kong, a British colony gained independence when at midnight 30 June
|1997||all British law ceased to have authority. (exactly what should have happened in Australia on 10-1- 1920)Wik another destructive judgement of the High Court.— High Court strikes critical blow at States rights to levy taxation and collect revenue to enable them to survive as independent States, reversing a High Court decision of 1977.|
*A Constitutional Convention orchestrated by the establishment to obtain a specific outcome, in an attempt to deal with the problem of operating government in Australia without legal authority. The plan to have all citizens attend referendum and approve existing constitution with or with out a change of name for head of State.
*Remains a super important year in given Australia’s constitutional never-never land.
* indicates material added to original document. Update of events in 1998 is not yet complete.
There must be another way. Summarised, the forgoing chronology establishes that Australia has been moved off course by world events, from a Constitutional Monarchy, to a defacto republic.
A nation in grave Constitutional danger. All this occurred as a result of lot of pushing by certain internationalists; Britain herself has cast Australia adrift and broken the chain of legal links it had with the Australian people.
With the help of the High Court, which can now be seen as little more than an agent for a foreign power—the United Nations, Australians have had stolen from them, their legal and rightful links with English Common Law, links that once guaranteed Australians their natural and fundamental rights under the law.
We at United People Power arrive at the forgoing conclusion from the chronology of events set out above. We believe the facts are beyond dispute, and with more delving we will find more evidence that will confirm Australia’s situation as having entered a constitutional never-never land.
Australia stands at the crossroads, there is no way back, we are left with three choices, to the right a road to more of the same dictatorship, to the left a road to an unknown republican dictatorship, or straight ahead to build on the Constitutional foundation that we all have faith in.
The reality is this, Australians have not retained access to the rights of Englishmen via Magna Carta and The Bill of Rights and the other Great Charters of free men; the right to justice and mercy under Common Law is no longer a right in Australia, but a privilege very often denied as is the right to self defence. We are in a never-never land.
The Monarchists-cum-No-Republic people however well intentioned they may be, offer no solution to the dilemma facing all Australians. Any attempt to prevent our move from where we are constitutionally, is an attempt at national suicide.
The republicans are driven by one of two things, a hatred of the past and our heritage, or/and a burning desire to retain and increase elite/government control over people, and they will use every deception to accomplish their goal, many not realising the consequences of their actions. The planned referendum is one monstrous deception, where Australians may well be tricked into approving the existing dictatorial constitution that the people one hundred years ago rejected. Approval with or without a new name for the so called Head of State.
The road ahead is well set out in the “Alternative Three” proposals. All Australians should make themselves fully conversant with Alternative Three, and compare this with what the others have to offer.
The planned 1999 Constitutional referendum will either get Australia back on track or it will prove to be the end of Australia as we know it was and can be again; and as we all wish it to be again. The decision will be yours and mine. We need to make our decision early and convince all we come in contact with, that there is a road to prosperity; it is the Alternative Three road. The road bringing power to the people and real opportunity in our pursuit of happiness.
The Institute of Taxation Research
1. Why does the Institute of Taxation Research exist?
Most of the members of the Institute are old enough to remember when Australia’s taxation system maintained some degree of fairness and ordinary Australian’s could retain a significant proportion of the results of hard work. Over the 15 years from 1983 to 1998 there has been a significant shift in taxation. Even lowly paid workers are being taxed at rates which used to be reserved for managers and professionals, managers and professionals are being taxed at rates formerly reserved for the rich and most significantly the rich are hardly being taxed at all.
The official figures tell it all. Companies which do 70% of Australia’s business pay 10% of Australia’s tax. The small companies and individuals who do 30% of Australia’s business pay 90% of the tax and the Australian Taxation Office is concentrating on making this 30% pay an even bigger percentage.
ITR’s sole reason for existence is to bring this state of affairs to an end. On the day Australia gets a fair taxation system the Institute will gladly close it’s doors.
2. Will the Howard government’s proposed changes with a GST and income tax adjustments create a fair taxation system?
Not even a slightly fairer system. In fact ITR research suggests the major multinational companies will be able to reduce their tax payments even below today’s meagre rates.
3. What are the major losses caused by the current taxation system?
There are three categories of losses created for the community by the current system. Firstly, individual saving, either for normal family needs or for retirement, is penalised at every turn. The result is that Australia has one of the lowest savings rates in the civilised world guaranteeing there is a shortage of capital for development of ideas, businesses and infrastructure.
Secondly, businesses are penalised for having employees. High taxation means much higher total wages are needed to provide even basic living standards for the average worker. The result is that many Australian companies now import their products rather than employing Australian workers either directly or indirectly to make them. At ITR we have also seen many businesses forced to close by the ATO, putting the staff out of work.
Thirdly, large capital imports are needed to pay for capital works and the imported goods from countries which don’t have punitive taxation systems. This forces the value of the Australian dollar down, diverts the returns from Australian exports to overseas financiers in the form of interest and the interest charges plus devaluation forces the costs of imported goods up in relation to Australian incomes.
After 15 years of the current system Australians are measurably poorer than they were. Most discretionary incomes have shrunk, large numbers are out of work, and our living standards have slipped tremendously in relation to the rest of the OECD nations.
4. Why haven’t we previously heard about the Institute of Taxation Research?
The Institute itself is new and is focussed totally on taxation. It was only formed in July 1998 after members witnessed a series of small businesses being closed and their workers sacked as the result of ATO activity rather than tough business conditions. However, the members have been working at the research parts of the project for up to 25 years and key members of the legal profession have been applying the principles to battles with the ATO and other authorities for at least five years. The Institute itself does not act as the lawyer for clients though there are legally qualified people on staff.
The support group for the Institute, which consists of over 400 highly qualified and successful Australians including some 20 senior counsel and 5 professors of constitutional law. In addition, it has the support of the professionals of International Law at two prestigious overseas universities.
Despite being new, the Institute is recognised by the Government and the ATO as a major threat. As a result, at government request, the media imposed a blackout on the constitutional issues. Occasionally, the blackout leaks and the public gets a brief glimpse. But no follow-up stories are ever allowed to see the light of day. The self-interest of the major news proprietors and the government coincide. Truth is the casualty – as usual in these matters.
5. Why is ITR a threat to the ATO and the Government?
Most Australian’s believe the ATO is all-powerful and invulnerable. They believe that it is backed by legislation and powers which can defeat all except the few super-rich members of the community who also can afford unlimited legal advice of the highest quality. In its press releases the ATO is consistently threatening and intimidatory – not the least towards journalists. ITR’s research has shown this aggression and intimidation is based on bluff – and that the Commissioner of Taxation and those closest to him are very well aware of how shaky the legal ground is on which they stand but their response has been to increase the aggression. But for the first time in Australia’s history individual ATO officers are being cited before the courts, stripped of their legislative protection, and for the first time personally answerable for their actions. Legally the ATO and the government are servants of the United Kingdom…and Australian sovereignty means they can’t be.
|6. What is Australian Sovereignty?
Sovereignty occurs when the other nations of the world recognise a country as an independent nation. It means that as a people we are entitled to completely control our own affairs both nationally and internationally. At federation in 1901 we were still a colony, legally under the control of the United Kingdom. Today we are recognised by every country in the world as an independent sovereign nation. We are even recognised as such by the United Kingdom.
7. What does it really mean and when did this change from colony to sovereign nation take place?
In strict legal terms Australia became an independent nation at the moment Sir Joseph Cooke lifted his pen from signing the Treaty of Versailles as the second signatory on Australia’s behalf at about 11:30am on 28 June 1919. From that moment on the Australian people had the right to decide their own future. But more importantly it meant only the Australian people could decide what legal and political systems we should live under.
8. But haven’t we done that since 1901?
No, we haven’t. We have never had either an Australian system of law or an Australian system of government. We have remained firmly under British law but without the protections British citizens have. Australian courts have ruled that we are bound by British laws in the form of the Commonwealth and State constitutions but we are denied the legally enforceable civil rights which exist under other British laws. Simply put, the lawyers and the politicians have decided we will keep the British laws which limits their power but which existed as part of the legal environment when the constitutions were written. This is why none of the Australian constitutions contain any form of civil rights other than the right to vote.
9. If the Constitution isn’t broken why fix it?
Who says the constitution isn’t broken? The “splendid constitution” myth is perpetuated by the politicians and lawyers who are the only ones to benefit under it!
Effectively, the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution is a document for a dictatorship. For instance, it allows an appointed Governor General to govern with out a parliament and with ministers solely appointed by him/her for as long as the Governor General may wish. The only restriction is that the ministers can only serve for 90 days without being a Member of Parliament but a nominal change of the portfolio – even a simple change of name for the ministry – can easily overcome this. You don’t believe this – then read the Constitution from Section 61 onwards.
The proponents of the 1901 Constitution try to escape this problem by saying that the “conventions” prevent this occurring. But in fact the “conventions” have no legal force, they are simply the way things have been done in the past and recent experience shows today’s politicians simply regard the past as a disposable nuisance.
Most importantly the International Law Commission of the U.N. has ruled that “the laws of one Member State cannot apply within the territory of another Member State except via a reciprocal treaty. Such treaty may not infringe the sovereignty of either Member State.”
The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution is a British law, passed by the Westminster Parliament on 25 October 1900 and there is no reciprocal treaty between Australia and the UK to allow the continued use of the colonial Constitution. Therefore under two aspects of international law the continued use of the Constitution is illegal, both under the normal powers of sovereignty and under the requirements of major treaties, to which both Australian and United Kingdom are signatories.
10. What difference does this make?
Every building depends on its foundations. If the foundations collapse so does the building. In legal terms the Constitution is the foundation of Australian government and the Australian legal system. Its collapse under international law means the “building” of the Australian government and legal systems also collapses. The only legal response under international law is a new constitution and new legal and political systems as chosen by the Australian people. No one else has the power to create the new system.
11. We elected the government. Doesn’t that give it power and authority?
In law there is a concept called “informed consent”. It means that if you are to make an important decision, for instance on whether to allow a surgeon to undertake a very risky operation, then you must be provided with all the information about the risks which may take your life or the surgeon has gained permission to carry out the operation by fraud.
In political terms this means that the first government after independence (or indeed any later government) had to inform the Australian people that British power, including that of the Queen, no longer applied in Australia and that a vote at the election handled all of the power, including the royal power, to the politicians.
The politicians have carefully avoided informing the Australian public since they know the public would demand safeguards against abuse of political power to be built into the system. Today there are no safeguards. Without informed consent the politicians and the governments have no legal authority but they do still possess power since public servants will obey them and attempt to enforce laws no matter how unjust these may be.
Professor I.W. Cumpston, Emeritus Reader in Commonwealth History at London University has described this as the “greatest political confidence trick in history.”
12. What about the Taxation Laws?
Laws passed before 1919 were valid laws under the colonial system since the Constitution was still valid. However the first Commonwealth Income Tax Act was passed in 1936 and amended in 1942 to take over all income tax from the States. By the time these tax laws were passed the Constitution had been null and void for 17 year and any domestic law dependent on it is “ultra vires” i.e. without legal force.
13. But didn’t the Australia Acts of 1986 fix all this?
The politicians and lawyers would love you to believe they did. In fact the concept on which the Australia Acts were based is legally absurd. The Australian Parliament was legislating to stop a foreign parliament, the Westminster Parliament, from making laws and the Westminster Parliament was making laws in respect to a foreign country, Australia. Both parliaments were acting in contravention of Articles 2 and 4 of the Charter of the United Nations which they sworn to uphold. Under international law the Australia Acts are an exercise in illegality which fixed nothing.
14. What about the Statute of Westminster 1931?
Most Australian lawyers believe the Statute of Westminster 1931 is what gave Australia sovereignty. The same lawyers also believe the earth is flat.
Careful reading of the Statute shows it is one side of an “international arrangement” which requires legislation by the affected Dominions. Unfortunately for the lawyers Article XVIII of the League of Nations Covenant, by which both Australia and the UK were bound, requires “international arrangements” to be registered and published the League of Nations otherwise they are null and void and deemed not to exist. The Statute of Westminster and the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 were not registered and therefore are not valid in international law since they fall directly under the terms of assigned and ratified treaty. In any case, Australia was independent long before the Statute was produced in an attempt to hide the political chicanery of 1919-1920.
15. Then who does hold sovereignty over Australia?
In a word, the people, the people of Australia! And the High Court of Australia was ruled so in the Australian Capital Television Case 1992.
Despite the historical links, legal sovereignty passed from King George V to the Australian people on 28 June 1919. The legal and constitutional changes needed to accompany this transfer have never been made. Because of this, Elizabeth II has never been sovereign Queen over Australia. The UN certifies that Australia was a sovereign nation at least by 1945 when we joined the UN (sovereignty being a condition of joining) and when Elizabeth did not assume the throne of the United Kingdom until 1952. Since two sovereignties can’t co-exist and the Australian people have never surrendered theirs, then Elizabeth has never been sovereign Queen over Australia. The title Queen of Australia given to Elizabeth by the Royal Styles and Titles Acts of 1953 and 1973 is purely honorary and carries no constitutional power.
16. What is the current status of the legal system?
Technically the entire legal system does not exist. The states themselves cease to exist as legal entities on the day the Constitution died. They were created from colonies by Section 6 of the Act and without it return to being colonies. However, colonies of the UK can’t exist in independent Australia today and the states therefore legally disappear as do their courts and legal authority.
Likewise, the Commonwealth legal system does not exist de jure, ie. at law. But both Commonwealth and State legal systems exist de facto and have to be dealt with in a practical sense. Dealing with these de facto systems is the area in which ITR’s expertise becomes most useful. Because the legal systems are riddled with contradictions because of the way in which they have been perpetuated we pit the contradictions against each other to the benefit of our clients.
17. What about the Governor General and the State government?
The State governors claim to draw their power from the Australia Act 1986 (Cth) which places them in a remarkable position given that its mere existence contradicts international law and the UN Charter.
The Governor General gains his authority from the Queen of Australia an honorary position, which carries no authority under the Constitution. Section 2 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act says all references to the Queen in the Constitution refer to “Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom”.
Australia is not mentioned and because no referendum was ever held under Section 128 to alter the Constitution to include the Queen of Australia, the Constitution has not been altered and the Governor General appointed by the Queen of Australia has no power under Section 58 to give “Royal Assent in the name of the Queen” to laws made by the parliament. It means all the laws made by Parliament since 1984 have not received Royal Assent and are therefore NOT LAWS even without the invalidity of the Constitution.
18. But can’t they just backdate everything?
Under International Law there is no such thing as retrospectivity. No matter how much the ATO wish it were different there is no way new tax laws can be made retrospective to justify the many obnoxious decisions being made today by the ATO.
DEALING WITH THE A.T.O.
19. Will I go onto an ATO hit list if I use this historical and legal knowledge?
*Anyone who has received an amended ATO notice is ALREADY on an ATO hit list.
In fact anyone in any reasonably well paid occupation is already on an ATO hit list. As the time of writing this document, the ATO had publicly attacked footballers, blitzed builders, wiped out a group of publishers, and was attacking people who invested in superannuation schemes, investments in film and television, investors in agriculture research projects, backers of stage shows etc, to name a few targets. About the only people the ATO doesn’t have on a hit list are the major multinational companies who pay little or no tax in Australia.
20. But I do my taxation return carefully and absolutely honestly – aren’t I safe?
* We wish you were. But the record shows, and every tax accountant knows, that if the ATO decides to audit your affairs they will not accept that you got everything right. In any case the tax laws are so complex and contradictory that if you get something right by one measure it can be made wrong by another tax measure if the ATO decides you have to be punished even if for no reason other than they don’t like the way you look. horror stories abound of the various ways in which ATO officers invented faults in order to justify the audit taking place. The sad truth is that even the most honest citizens are not safe when dealing with the ATO.
21. But don’t the ATO have incredible powers to investigate and punish?
* In a nutshell, NO! And what’s more they never really had these powers. It didn’t matter so much when the old Taxation Department was simply an arm of the government, strict but operating very carefully and correctly. However the transition from Taxation Department to Australian Tax Office introduced a new culture where bonuses are paid on the basis of the amount of tax collected. Not all ATO officers are on a bonus but enough are to make putting a return in no better than a lottery – but a lottery you can’t win, you can only lose. AND THEY PUT PART OF YOUR LOSS IN THEIR OWN POCKET.
22. But don’t they always win in court?
*Not any more. The court system may not be about truth, that disappeared long time ago from the British/Australian system. It is about procedure and precedent and the rules of court and these can be turned against the TO. It is a question of saying to the ATO “forget your rules and play according to ours where the dice aren’t loaded your way.”
23. Is it that simple as just writing a letter to the ATO and setting out the facts?
* We wish it was but the truth is the lower ranks of the 11,000 tax office employees are deliberately kept in the dark by their superiors otherwise the honest lower rankers would refuse to collect illegal taxes. So the ATO has produced a number of computer generated letters which are used to answer letters from taxpayers on constitutional matters. They are full of legal and historical errors but the bluff often works and if someone fights back they are referred to special sections who know a bit more.
A monster like the ATO doesn’t just roll over and die but like all dragons it can be killed and its fire put out. It does take persistence and knowledge about how the dragon lives.
24. But don’t people get sent to gaol for tax evasion?
*Tax evasion presumes two conditions
- A. Legal taxes
- B. Illegal manoeuvres used to escape the legal taxes
In Australia today the position is totally reversed.
- A. The taxes are totally illegal
- B. The best manoeuvres to prevent their collection are 110% legal
In fact the only real effective manoeuvres are 110% legal. Part of the problem so many people now find themselves in is the methods they’ve used to avoid tax are marginally legal – it’s a question of opinion.
25 Then why can’t we go to our normal legal advisers for protection?
*If you have honest legal advisers you can. The difficulty is that the average solicitor is part of the legal system and their entire income and status depend on them continuing to support the status quo.
But there is another problem. When most of these lawyers were studying law, they simply accepted the validity of the Constitution without question and now they find it impossible to question the basic law on which their entire career depends. There are a few with intellectual honesty needed to examine the facts regardless of where that leads. If you have one of these lawyers value them highly.
26. What if my legal adviser wants a Q.C’s opinion on this?
* Then your legal adviser has no confidence in his own ability to read history.
Opinions are about the meaning of laws but every Q.C’s opinion in the world can’t change the historical facts. Professor D.P.O’Connell, a world expert on international law explained in International Law Volume 1,. 1970 that at no matter what form a change of sovereignty takes there is a break in legal continuity. The law of one sovereign power comes to an end and the law of the new sovereign power begins.
Sovereignty is a fact which has its own imperatives. And the facts of sovereignty are there to read – in the parliamentary Hansard records of 10th September, 1919, in the Paris newspapers of 28th June and 29 June 1919, in the writings of Australia’s official World War One historian Dr C.E.W Bean, in the declaration of the Inter Imperial Relations Committee of 1926, in the speech of King George V accepting the Diplomatic Credentials of Sir Joseph Cooke as Australia’s High Commissioner to London and in the Report by the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee dated November 1995 on the Commonwealth Power to Make and Implement Treaties as well as major legal texts published 25 years or more ago.
The main concern that most Q.C’s reveal in the discussions is that these facts will produce widespread chaos. We believe that most citizens’ lives will be relatively unaffected in the short term. The chaos will principally affect lawyers – justice indeed since they’ve kept everyone else in the dark for years.
Unfortunately hiding the facts is no longer possible. After all the events which are the cause of these problems happened some 80 years ago.
27. What can the A.T.O. do to counter this?
* Nothing. For the first time in its existence the ATO has no defences except for a corrupt legal system. But don’t count it simply melt away. There are still over 9 million Australians paying tax and the ATO will take as much from everyone as they can until the day no one will pay them anymore. 28 June 1919 was Australia’s day of independence. The day the ATO finally gives up is the date of Australia’s freedom.
29. Should I discuss this with my accountant?
* Yes of course. In general it can be presumed that accountants are fully on their client’s side but with the position that if they are registered tax agents they will be very careful about their relations with the ATO.
The bottom line is that the constitutional issues will change the emphasis of the work accountants do, shifting away from the purely negative activity of dealing with the ATO into positive protection and promotion of your interest including less restricted advice about investments. They will probably also enjoy no longer having to be the bearers of bad news for their clients unless a business or individual is in trouble for reasons other than taxation.
30. Why should I believe everything in this booklet?
*Without checking you shouldn’t. Blind faith is for fools and idiots. But each of the historical facts existed long before we uncovered them and international law wasn’t formulated for the ITR’s benefit. Use the internet and local libraries. You won’t be able to uncover the range of material we have found over 25 years, but you will find enough to convince yourself of the truth. That’s what this is all about – just the truth. And as a wise friend of ITR said “The truth eventually exposes itself. Facts can’t be kept secret forever.”
High Court transcript
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/transcripts/2002/S153/1.html “ “ “ “ “ “
High Court transcript
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/transcripts/1999/B54/1.html “ “ “ ” “ “
The Australia Act 1986: available free of charge from your Federal representative.
Adoption of the Statute of Westminster Act 1942 “ “ “ “ “
State Request and consent to The Australia Act 1985- 86: available free from State representative.
HASCO (Heritage Australia Sovereign Constitutional Organisation
Trial by jury
The denial of the Common Law Trial by Jury transfers supreme power from the People to a ruling élite: a despotism or oligarchy. The denial of the Juror’s rôle and Duty denies Trial by Jury.
AUSTRALIA – THE CONCEALED COLONY “The Truth Will Set Us Free”