Regarding “Is changing Sec 1350 of the Corps Act a valid change to the Constitution?”.All you legal eagles out there that love to have a go on this site, please knock me down and tell me why it is valid or why it is not valid.It’s RUOK day to and to be honest, no I am not ok.If the government passes this legislation what is stop them using this as a precedent for other legislation?If they legislate to build a new freeway and say this clause does not apply to this project. They won’t compensate you for your property.If they legislate about whatever profession you are in to remove an element that affected the value of your business. They won’t compensate you for your property.If this is the case and people were aware there would be outrage at the Government.This is the thin edge of the wedge.Please someone tell me I am wrong and this isn’t changing the Constitution by stealth.Maybe if I can make some sense out of all of this might be improved rather than OK.This about the bigger principle of being compensated on just terms for anything you are entitled to not just Grandfathered commission.It is about accountability for the way the Constitution can be changed.It is about the next change that gets made that gets slipped into legislation that takes your property.RUOK with this?
In order to give you the best site experience, we need to know what kind of investor you are. Please select the title that best describes you below.
Financial Advisers - Investment
Financial Advisers - SMSFs
Individual Investors with SMSFs
Financial Advisers - Insurance
Accountants and Solicitors
Financial Services Professional