When interpreting the Commonwealth Constitution the High Court of Australia gives a
wide interpretation to sections that give powers to the Commonwealth Parliament
under s 51 of the Constitution.
There are competing views about whether the Commonwealth Constitution should be
interpreted broadly or narrowly.
A broad interpretation is criticized as giving the Commonwealth Government more
power than the drafters of the Constitution, and the Australian people who voted to
adopt the Constitution, intended.
The competing view argues that a broad interpretation is necessary to enable the
Commonwealth Government to respond to modern issues that were unimagined
when the Constitution was drafted pre-1900.
Do you think the Constitution should be broadly or narrowly interpreted? Analyse the
arguments for each side.
750 words
Include an explanation of the rules of statutory interpretation that are used to support
a broad interpretation.
750 words

The Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC) style of legal referencing must
be used