While I have no problem with Australia not allowing itself to become a dumping ground, I wonder what part outsourcing and privatisation play in our inability to see what is going on.
There was a time when governments were responsible for the policing done in their names. Now it seems that a multinational can be hired to do the job, and as much of what then transpires is considered Proprietary and/or commercial-in-confidence, it remains shielded from public view.
With more transparency a Bill of Rights might not be needed. And a Bill of Rights can disappear. America's certainly has, and the camp followers in Canberra seem to have no trouble with that. I can't see them honouring a Bill of Rights, even were we to have one.
It might be easier to just get them to fess up. Good luck with that.

A bill of irrevocable rights, is exactly what we do need, to advance real social cohesion.
Only the very worst control freaks would deny their own citizenry, these rights, given all too often, they would lose their own sense of highly addictive power, if we the people had some irrevocable rights.
Which must include the right to peaceful assembly, the right to speak our minds, even where that may offend a small minority, and the inviolable right to personal privacy.
And a right to be different, and say no!
There could be other rights, such as equal treatment before the law, truly equal tax treatment, a sovereign right to own property in fee absolute, where a man's home really is his castle, and a right to bear arms, to protect himself and family members, from uninvited, unwanted intrusions into said castle. Those arms could be limited to specific weapons and ammunition, where say the first three rounds in any magazine, are non lethal bean bags.
We have reintroduced Dames and lords, surely such a change needs to be accompanied by a return of the moat, at least hypothetically!
And there are several other rights, which like a right to, as consenting adults, in the privacy of their own homes, float their own boats!
And freedom to choose which boat to float?
Rhrosty.

Throsty. Sadly, your satire will go unnoticed.

Rhrosty..<<..A bill...of irrevocable rights,..to advance real social cohesion.>.so much depends..on us being..ON THE SAME PAGE..SO TO SPEAK..AS TO..WHAT WORDS..REALLY Mean..

[that person..only includes..THE LIVING/
THAT All/ANY..the govt LARGESS And bailout/of..incorporate-person hood]..not be/by adding extra burden..UPON THE Living

[for burden..see service-charges/access-charges
taxes and gst fees fines levies TOLLS RTV..MOT/VAT..etc]

..<<..if we the people..had some irrevocable/rights..include the right..to peaceful assembly,..the right..to speak our minds,..even where that may offend..a small minority,..and..the inviolable right to personal privacy.>>FOR ALL LAWFUL REASONS

THAT LAWFUL..and legal..mean..two different things
statute..'law'..is legal..but its unlawful

<<>.And a right to be different,..and say no!>>

AND..that all living..shAre an equal share..of govt revenue
[ALL GETTING EXACTLY..THE SAME..$$.[MINUS Costs govt alread.. gave them

accumulative..IF UNCLAIMED
THE TOP 50 PERCENT..AUTO Default..the dividend..to HELP OUT THE LEAST/ADVANTAGED

that the living..get any tax advantage/but not corporations
THAT ALL TAXES..BE PAYABLe only by the dead/not the liviung
THAT MONEY BECOME...ONCE MORE A TRUE STORE OF VALUE..THAT DEBT..BE A GOVT SERVICE JUST LIKE INSURANCES BY A GOVT Service/that fines not raise revenue..for dead corporations..AND THAT GOVT UNDERWRITE ALL INSURANCE needs..for its own[COMMONWEALTH/PRIVILEGE/Benefit].

THAT EACH LIVING BEING.HAVE CLAIM IN A Global money system[see wikiSEED/WIKIGELD[S.U.N.Treaty]..THAT Patent right not out live original PATENT HOLDER/THAT NEXT GENERATION BE..allowed a child grace period of half royalties..not exceeding average income

<<..equal treatment before the law,>>
DEMANDS THAT LAWS BE Lawful[not legal]
as there was no informed connect to the sOCIAL CONTRACT

<<..truly equal tax treatment,>>

JUST A FLAT Transaction tax payable..BY THE MONEY/payee

<<..a sovereign right to own property in fee absolute>>
BUT WITH OBLIGATION..by user pays[the more you USE..THE MORE YOU MUST PAY[higher rates]

<<where a man's home really is his castle,>>

at his prime residence/not estates nor 'holiday/HOMES'..OR RENTALS
NOT Subsidy of rent..to increase land Lords GAINS

<<..and a right to bear arms,>>

THE LAWS OF patent/stem..from heraldry[ie coat of arms]
but sure you got rights TO OWN GUNS/BUT NO ONE HURTS ANYONE/but goes to jail/minimum half the murdeAD LIFE Remaining

[1/2..natural life term>]

<<..freedom to choose..which boat to float?>>
but no license..ORDER/OR WARRENT/PERMISSION..ever..
to hurt VICTIMIZE/humiliate/intimidate/THREATEN NOR KILL

Hi there...

I surprised at the thrust of your piece to be honest, it appears prima facie, that you're a supporter of these asylum seekers who arrive here unannounced, with many of them allegedly attempting to obfuscate all attempts by authorities to properly identify them. Some have even discarded all documents of identification, yet they seek our help and succour, to avoid being returned to their original homeland ?

By your own brief description in your vocational antecedents, I'm quite surprised that you've taken the line you have ? I therefore ask myself why ? It's folk like you sir that's damaging this once great country of ours with your far left opinions and attitudes. Though, as you sound to be a potential candidate for 'the Greens' I suppose I should not be so surprised after all ?

"Could a bill of rights stem growing levels of community disenchantment with the standards and behaviour of Australian political leaders."

No is the answer. A Bill of Rights will not affect the way politicians behave. It hasn't done so anywhere a Bill of Rights has been enacted.