Hi, I want help with this question and this has to follow proper AGLC 4th citation, I do not understand how to answer this as this essay has to be quite critically evaluated and has to be lengthy most importantly this question is based on the Australian constitution.

In SGH v Commissioner of Taxation,1 Gummow J stated, "Questions of construction of the Constitution are not to be answered by the adoption and application of any particular, all-embracing and revelatory theory or doctrine of interpretation." While many Justices of the High Court have championed such a view, others, such as Kirby J, have argued for the adoption of a single, unified approach to the interpretation of the Constitution.

You are required to critically analyse the two approaches to interpretation, for and against a unified approach, and clearly state and justify which of the two approaches you favour. In your argument, briefly explain the different interpretive techniques adopted by past and present Justices of the High Court and explain which, if any, of these techniques Kirby J believes should be the adopted by the High Court.