Pirate Congress 2016/Motions

FM-1: Motion Name
Put by: Catty McCat

PM-1: Creative Works Act
Put by: Policy Development Committee

Motion
Replace the contents of the existing copyright policy with the Creative Works Act, but keep the title 'Copyright' in the platform and policies.

Rationale
This policy, if adopted, would be the most ambitious copyright policy of any party in Australia, if not the world. This is a radical overhaul of the current copyright policy, making it both more direct and more detailed. It succinctly states the problems with contemporary copyright law, and proposes a replacement of copyright with a new, modern system.

PM-2: Codification
Put by: Policy Development Committee

Motion
Insert into the Reform of Democratic Institutions policy the following point under 'Improve transparency and credibility in systems of governance':


 * Codify all federal legislation into an administrative code, civil code, commercial code, criminal code and revenue code, and any specialist codes as necessary.

Rationale
The vast majority of the world has all of its laws in a handful of codes. In the United States, all federal laws are contained in the United States Code, which lists provisions under subject-specific titles. The process of shifting toward such a system is called codification, and is an approach favoured across the world, from Continental Europe to Latin America, and Asia to Africa.

The primary advantages of codification are transparency and accessibility: no more consulting thirty different pieces of legislation to determine what is and isn't legal. One example of this being done well in Australia is the Australian Consumer Law, but perhaps the best example is the corporations legislation, which is now essentially contained in just two pieces of legislation. A similar example is the Australian Criminal Code, which contains most — but for some reason, not all — federal crimes.

Separating laws into a limited number of categories allows them to be organised rationally within those categories, and for duplicated, superseded, contradictory and irrelevant laws to be more easily removed. It follows that codification will greatly assist in leading toward a body of law that is simple, accessible, consistent, modern and certain.

Most countries divide their codes into major areas of law, typically criminal and civil, but specific codes are often used. Latin American countries in particular have a tendency to move from decodification to recodification: specialist legislation appears and is then eventually integrated into the existing codes. Examples of specialist codes include those related to employment, intellectual property and consumer protection.

This policy amendment proposes five specific codes which should be sufficient, but would allow for the creation of additional codes if necessary. These might include an environmental code, evidence and procedure code, land and property code, and so on.

PM-3: Abortion
Put by: Policy Development Committee

Motion
Amend the Bill of Rights policy to read:


 * The right to control your body and health, including the right to terminate a pregnancy.

Rationale
Our policy on abortion is to 'Extend protections within the Victorian Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 nationwide, to provide baseline legal abortion services'. This amendment makes it a constitutional right and brings it to greater prominence within our policy set.

PM-4: Versioning of legislation
Put by: Policy Development Committee

Motion
Amend the Reform of Democratic Institutions policy by adding the following points under the heading "Improve transparency and credibility in systems of governance":


 * Make all legislation accessible and searchable online with the ability to compare selected revisions side-by-side to see the differences.
 * Make all bills accessible and searchable online with the ability to view proposed amendments in the context of the legislation being amended.

Rationale
It is currently very difficult to see how legislation has changed over time. This is despite the fact that tools like wikis exist which allow direct comparisons of past and present versions of documents. Although AustLII does provide historical copies of legislation, it leaves a lot to be desired as a free, non-government resource — there is no direct means to compare current legislation with earlier versions. This policy would resolve that issue.

Secondly, as anyone who has tried understanding legislative amendments would know, it is not immediately apparent what changes a bill makes without flipping through the various acts it amends and trying to understand the context. This policy would allow the public to see legislative amendments in context and determine whether representations that have been made about their effect are accurate.