this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
37 points (95.1% liked)

Australia

3533 readers
247 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To be clear, this detail is not part of the constitutional amendment – and it is entirely normal for constitutions to leave this type of detail to be worked out in future by the parliament.

That statement is completely false.

There is not a single constitutional vote that has not outlined in full the changes to the constitution.

[–] Mountaineer 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's extremely common for law to be established in 2 seperate ways, an act that defines what it's for and who it effects and regulations that establish the how.

I think that's what the article is saying; we are being polled on the concept of the voice, the actual wording of the specific law will be nailed down in parliament once they have approval to do it.

In an area that I happen to know a lot about, Gun laws in South Australia, there is the Firearms Act 2015 and the corresponding Firearms Regulations 2017