Category: politics (Page 30 of 42)

Victorian Senate Group AM: When the Labour Party becomes Democratic

September 3, 2013 / Catherine / 3 Comments

Last party! Though there are still two ungrouped independents to go, of course, but still, the end is in sight! And now we get to meet the Democratic Labour Party, which informs me that it is “Putting YOU back into Labour”.

The Democratic Labour Party actually is related to the ALP (though they could certainly not be considered to be allies), being a Catholic off-shoot of the party, founded in 1955 as a reaction to a perceived Communist takeover of the Labor Party. Their original name was the Australian Labor Party (Anti-Communist), because you wouldn’t want to be too subtle about this, but they eventually changed their name to the Democratic Labor Party. In the past, their policies in areas of have been a weird mix of the very well thought-out and the intensely reactionary, but they seem to evolve a bit every election, so it’s hard to say where they will go this time.

Let’s look at their Group Voting Ticket for some clues…

Victorian Senate Group AL: In which our Timbers are Shivered

September 2, 2013 / Catherine / 13 Comments

Ahoy there, me hearties, it’s the Pirate Party! Arrr! I have been looking forward to this one for *weeks*. I have no idea what it’s going to be about, but I have high hopes that Johnny Depp will be involved. Or better still, Geoffrey Rush…

It must be acknowledged that the Pirate Party Australia clearly wins the prize for the most amusing political party name on this year’s ballot. Good show! But since I have scrupulously avoided finding out what they stand for up until now (because I was saving this party as a reward for being nearly at the end of my tiny parties project), I really have nothing more to add in this preamble, so let’s get straight on to seeing who they like on the Group Voting Ticket.

Victorian Senate Group AK: In which Socialists demand Equality!

September 2, 2013 / Catherine / 8 Comments

I was rather sad to note that the Socialist Alliance wasn’t fielding any Senate candidates this time around, because really, what is an election without a slightly unhinged Socialist Party to make it more fun? (To be fair, the Socialist Alliance has been becoming alarmingly sane of late – or maybe I myself am losing it? This is always a possibility…)

Fortunately, the Socialist Equality Party have stepped into the breach, doing its level best to be the counterbalance to all the somewhat terrifying right-wing parties we had to read about earlier in this process. I have high hopes of them, I must say, because their rhetoric last time reminded me of Don Camillo’s Peppone at his best, and I didn’t think that anyone talked about the proletariat any more.

Let’s start off with their Group Voting Tickets, which are an absolute mess, if you will forgive me saying so. Actually, I think they are a *deliberate* mess. There is no way you could end up with such a perverse combination of tickets by accident.

Victorian Senate Group AJ: Bob & Kylie Nicholls, Peter Webb

September 2, 2013 / Catherine / 3 Comments

We now come to another collection of independents, and one of whom I know nothing, which is always refreshing. The independents are Bob Nicholls, Kylie Nicholls and Peter Webb, and they have kindly provided me with a website to look at, bobnicholls.com.au. And we know it’s going to be good, because it has a Eureka flag on it. That’s three parties invoking Eureka so far that I’m aware of…

Let’s see who Bob and Team, as they occasionally like to call themselves, have preferenced in the Senate.

Victorian Senate Group AI: In which a Council of Citizens is Elected

September 1, 2013 / Catherine / 7 Comments

I have to admit, I always rather look forward to the Citizens Electoral Council, because you never know quite what will be on the policy list this time, but you can be sure there will be something magnificently grandiose and just a little bit mad. I like that in a political party.

Also, the CEC are local – our Senate Candidate also runs in our local government elections sometimes, so I feel a certain neighbourly affection. We have our very own Coburg crazies and now, we get to export them to the world! Or at least, to the rest of Victoria.

Sadly, not too many of the major parties share my affectionate feelings for the CEC, so they don’t tend to get very far in the Senate. If I’m being sensible, I have to acknowledge that this is probably a good thing.

So let’s see what the CEC thinks of everyone else on the Group Voting Ticket…

Victorian Senate Group AH: And another Christian Party

September 1, 2013 / Catherine / 4 Comments

There are so many Christian parties on the ballot this year! It’s insane. I’m Christian myself and I’m turned off by this – we really do not need a lobby group, and we certainly don’t need five of them. Actually, I really do think religion ought to stay out of politics, except as far as it informs the principles by which one governs. (And since this *is* a Sunday, let me just add that I personally feel that if one is a politician who likes to parade his or her Christianity, it would be nice if one also paraded a commitment to assisting and empowering the disadvantaged, the poor, rather than worrying about people’s love lives. The Bible isn’t actually all about sexual morality, and the New Testament barely touches on it at all.)

Have your eyes glazed over yet? I’m sorry. I’m a little frustrated by some of these parties, and I just caught sight of something on the Australian Christians‘ website that made my blood boil. But we’ll get to that in a bit. Also, I really, really hate their party name. Setting aside that it is purely silly to claim that you are the Australian Christians when there are four other loudly Christian parties on the ballot, it implies that they speak for all Australian Christians. Well, they sure as hell don’t speak for me. Oops, I said hell. That really was unintentional, but now I feel compelled to leave it there.

Ooh, hello, I just went and had a look to see who, if anyone, this group were affiliated with and discovered firstly that they seem to be linked to Fred Nile’s Christian Democrats (which explains a lot), and secondly that the Melbourne Anglican Archbishop and the General Secretary of the Victorian Council of churches have much the same objection to the name that I do:

“I am concerned about the possible effects to religious harmony in Victoria if a political group which does not represent the views of the majority of Christians in Australian were to be allowed to use the name ‘Australian Christians’, with an obvious implication that it did speak for all Christians,” says a letter written by Dr Freir to the Electoral Commissioner (as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald late last week).

General secretary of the Victorian Council of Churches, Theo Mackaay told ABC’s PM program last night, “By calling themselves ‘Australian Christians’ they could very easily give the impression during an election campaign that they are speaking for all adherents to the Christian faith.

“What I know of the party, they really do not represent the broad scope of Christianity.”

Sorry to go on and on about this, but a very reasonable criticism frequently levelled at progressive Christians is why don’t they speak out against the extremists. It seems important, therefore, to point out occasions when they do.

Anyway, let’s look at who the Australian Christians (or some of them) are preferencing in the Senate.

Oh, and another disclaimer, I suppose. I’m quite pro-choice. This lot really aren’t. And they make me very, very angry with some of their claims.

Victorian Senate Group AG: Faster than a speeding bullet (train)

September 1, 2013 / Catherine / 4 Comments

I’ve been so looking forward to the Bullet Train for Australia Party. You just know you are onto a good thing with a party name like that. And you have to love a party that states right up front that they are ‘a not-for-profit single-issue political party. Our sole issue is getting a Bullet Train for Australia and the benefits that a proper rail service will bring to our cities, our regional centres and Australia.’

Really, what’s not to like?

Let’s have a look at their preferences.

Victorian Senate Group AF: In which Drug Law is Reformed

September 1, 2013 / Catherine / 3 Comments

I have to say, I rather like the look of the Drug Law Reform Party. At first glance, they look like a saner, better-thought-out version of HEMP – HEMP for the middle class, educated voter who may have dabbled in social work, or may just have had a joint or two at University and not regretted it. They are pretty much a one-issue party, but there are worse issues to have. Such as fishing.

The Drug Law Reform Party has two tickets, both of which start with the Australian Democrats, a sound move in my book. And I’ve just realised that the lead candidate for Victoria is Greg Chipp… a striking coincidence, don’t you think? Sure enough, it turns out that Greg, the party’s founder, is the son of Don Chipp, founder of the Democrats. According to the Herald Sun he is also a former heroin addict who apparently wants to show people in the throes of addiction that they can recover and make a contribution to society. Good on him, I say. Now, back to those tickets…

Victorian Senate Group AE: In which the Greens must be stopped!

September 1, 2013 / Catherine / 1 Comment

I really was enjoying living in the land of policies that didn’t raise my blood pressure, but now we must return to the Outdoor Recreation Party, which also goes by the catchy name of Stop the Greens.

Already, we know so much about them…

The Outdoor Recreation Party does not have a Group Voting Ticket in the Senate, so we’ll be taking a look shortly at where others have preferenced them, but this also seems like a good time to raise the issue of connections between libertarian micro-parties. You see, as you might have noticed, there have been five parties in Victoria who didn’t manage to complete Group Voting tickets – The Liberal Democrats, One Nation, the Australian Republicans, Smokers Rights, and this party, Stop the Greens. With the possible exception of the Republicans, all of these parties are on the far right and have libertarian tendencies, and it’s actually very unusual to have registered parties failing to lodge tickets, because the advantage of having people able to vote for you above the line is absolutely huge. Apparently, the reason for this was that David Leyonhjelm, the registered officer for both Stop the Greens and the Liberal democrats, was responsible for putting in Group Voting Tickets for four parties in the Victorian Senate, and was ‘overwhelmed‘.

This is hardly surprising, as one usually has one registered officer per party. Crikey has written an article suggesting that the LDP, Smokers Rights, the Republicans and Stop the Greens are very closely linked, and may have been intended to funnel votes to each other, though clearly this did not work out in Victoria. (One Nation is apparently not part of this group – it’s just disorganised) Certainly, the evidence suggests that they are working together very closely, and it’s interesting to note that three of these parties were only registered in the last couple of months, and that Leyonhjelm was involved with both.

I’ll let you reach your own conclusions on that one, but it seemed relevant to mention it. We shall now turn to the question of who likes Stop The Greens enough to put them high on their Group Voting Ticket.

Victorian Senate Group AD: Laboring for Australia

August 31, 2013 / Catherine / 9 Comments

We pause in our tour of teeny tiny parties to take a brief peek at the ALP. As with the Coalition, I will not be reviewing the ALP’s policies here, because most people are already either aware of these policies or able to find out about them from other, better-informed sources. Besides, the purpose of this project is to help people figure out which party is which – I think, on the whole, most people know which one the ALP is.

(Hint: they are currently most of the government)

But I will, of course, have a quick look at their preferences, as these are often illuminating, and if there’s going to be a repeat of the Family First debacle from 2004. Good Lord, that’s ten years ago. Have I really been doing this for ten years?

The ALP’s Group Voting Ticket in Victoria actually preferences the Greens first of all (take that, Coalition). And in all honesty, I think that’s a good move – the Greens are closer to Labor than either party would like to think, and I think the ALP membership are generally to the left of the leadership, and would approve of this preferencing.

The ALP then sends any remaining bits of votes to the Sex Party, the Democrats, the Socialist Equality Party and the Pirate Party. In fact, it’s all the little lefty parties, then the saner libertarian parties, and then the more dodgy right wing ones. Family First turns up at 73,-75, followed directly by the Liberals and the Nationals. The very bottom of the ticket is reserved for Independent Darrell Morrison – can’t wait to find out what he’s done to earn this – and to the grouped independents Nicholls, Nicholls and Webb. Directly above these we have One Nation, Rise Up Australia, and the other ungrouped Independent, Lyn Gunter. The Climate Sceptics are at 87-88 and, fascinatingly, the Secular Party are at 85-86, making them the only left-wing party who isn’t near the top of the ballot. An attempt to distance themselves from the famously atheist Gillard, perhaps?

I actually quite like this ticket, and may well end up using parts of it as a template for my own ticket, when I get to creating one at Below The Line. There seems to be a good sense of which parties are the scariest preserved in their rankings, and I like that in a Senate ticket.