Australian referendum, 1988 (Rights and Freedoms)
The Constitution Alteration (Rights and Freedoms) 1988 was proposed legislation that was put to referendum in the Australian referendum, 1988. The legislation sought to enshrine in the Australian constitution various civil rights, including freedom of religion, rights in relation to trials, and rights regarding the compulsory acquisition of property.
Results
A Proposed Law: To alter the Constitution to extend the right to trial by jury, to extend freedom of religion, and to ensure fair terms for persons whose property is acquired by any government.
Do you approve this proposed alteration?
| State | On rolls | Ballots issued | For | Against | Informal | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Votes | % | Votes | % | ||||
| New South Wales | 3,564,856 | 3,297,246 | 965,045 | 29.65% | 2,289,645 | 70.35% | 42,556 |
| Victoria | 2,697,096 | 2,491,183 | 816,057 | 33.42% | 1,625,484 | 66.58% | 49,642 |
| Queensland | 1,693,247 | 1,542,293 | 503,217 | 32.88% | 1,027,218 | 67.12% | 11,858 |
| South Australia | 937,974 | 873,511 | 223,038 | 26.01% | 634,438 | 73.99% | 16,035 |
| Western Australia | 926,636 | 845,209 | 233,917 | 28.14% | 597,322 | 71.86% | 13,970 |
| Tasmania | 302,324 | 282,785 | 70,987 | 25.49% | 207,486 | 74.51% | 4,312 |
| Australian Capital Territory | 166,131 | 149,128 | 60,064 | 40.71% | 87,460 | 59.29% | 1,604 |
| Northern Territory | 74,695 | 56,370 | 20,503 | 37.14% | 34,699 | 62.86% | 1,168 |
| Total for Commonwealth | 10,362,959 | 9,537,725 | 2,892,828 | 30.79% | 6,503,752 | 69.21% | 141,145 |
| Results | Obtained majority in no State and an overall minority of 3,610,924 votes. | ||||||
Discussion
The "religious freedom" part of the proposed change was opposed by many churches and religious-affiliated schools concerned that it would be interpreted as requiring a level of church-state separation that would put public funding and government assistance for faith schools in jeopardy.
Conversely, Liberal senator Richard Alston argued that the aforementioned provision could place the use of corporal punishment in religious schools beyond the power of the government to regulate.[2]
See also
| ||||||||||||||
