AUSTRALIA SAYS "NO "

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22671, 8 March 1937, Page 10

AUSTRALIA SAYS "NO "

The two proposed amendments to the Constitution, submitted to a vote of the people of Australia on Saturday, have been rejected. The one which proposed to give the Commonwealth Government power to control air services within the States as well as between the States gained a majority in the total vote, but failed to carry a majority of the individual States. Therefore, in accordance with Constitutional requirements, it fails; surprisingly, since the advantages of having one authority to control aviation throughout Australia might have been thought obvious enough to have gained the day for the amendment. The other issue was given much less chance of success by competent observers. The amendment was designed to vest in the Commonwealth Government power to establish marketing schemes to control the s # ale in Australia and abroad of various primary products. Several of these had been in operation, notably those governing dairy produce and dried fruits. The procedure was to limit the quantity supplied to the domestic market, thus to raise the price above the expoi-t parity, and to distribute the extra returns among all the producers. For such control to be effective, trade across State borders had to be regulated. An obstacle in the way was section 02 of the Constitution, which runs: " Trade commerce and intercourse among the States shall be absolutely free." After many legal battles, culminating in an appeal to the Privy Council, it was established that even the Commonwealth Government—elsewhere given power to legislate concerning "trade with other countries and among the States" —could put no restraint on interstate trade. The marketing schemes were thus cast into the melting pot. Experience had shown they could not be successful on a voluntary basis, though they had begun in that way. Hence an amendment to the Constitution was submitted, which would have given the Commonwealth the necessary powers. It has been rejected; in part, perhaps, because the consumers realised it would mean paying higher prices for necessaries, in part out of State jealousy of Federal authority, in part because the natural impulse seems to be to vote against changes in the Constitution. Now, according to the highest authority, marketing schemes covering the whole of Australia cannot be legally operated.