The Commission’s proposed model has most of the attributes of the dialogue model, with one key departure – the Commission is not proposing a formal power enabling courts to notify the Parliament about laws that breach human rights, and is instead proposing an alternative informal notification process. This is due to constitutional concerns that have been raised in relation to such a formal power in Australia, discussed in chapter 10. As such, the model may not be viewed as a ‘pure’ dialogue model, although it shares other key features of the model.4 Some Free & Equal stakeholders expressed support for a constitutionally entrenched Bill of Rights in preference to a legislative model.5 However, the Commission considers that a legislative model is the most pragmatic and compatible model with Australia’s government structure and political norms. A constitutional model provides stronger, less easily reversible human rights protections. However comparable legislative models have successfully embedded human rights into the fabric of parliamentary democracies, and none have been repealed once introduced. Further, the Commission notes that the passage of a legislative model does not exclude the entrenchment of those rights in the Australian Constitution at a future date. 102