Thursday, August 19, 2010

Election 2010 and how I'm voting

I still haven't decided how I'm voting. There's 6 candidates in my safe(ish) labor seat. The incumbent Labor member, an openly gay Liberal candidate, a greens candidate, a family first candidate, an australian secular party candidate and an australian sex party candidate.

Apparently Melbourne Ports has since been classified as a marginal seat... Don't ask me I don't get it.

So first the no's
I'm not voting for Family First. I absolutely, completely refuse to on principle. This is a party that espouses family values are more important than anything else and they are generally the most narrow minded and bigoted people you will encounter. Like pretty much being told that me raising my family is akin to child abuse because I have denied my children the right to a mother and a father.
I am not voting for the Australian Sex Party. I can never work out if these people are serious or not. I really can't. It always feel like it's a piss-take of some description or another. From their policy statement "The Australian Sex Party is a political response to the sexual needs of Australia in the 21st century. It is an attempt to restore the balance between sexual privacy and sexual publicity that has been severely distorted by morals campaigners and prudish politicians."
The Australian Secular Party is another I just don't get. They're all for the seperation of church & state but their philosophy confused me.
So the Labor sitting representative. Now I've never seen my local representative. I get the odd newsletter here & there which is the usual crap about what a fabulous job he thinks he's doing... Now he is his party's representative so I am judging him on that. I completely disagree with the ALP's stand on the proposed internet filter, this is a democracy, the government doesn't not have the right to censor information without the populations knowledge. We have the right to discuss, question and contest it - as we do now with our current classification guidelines. I also think NBNCo is a massive waste of money - wee fibre to home networks when large numbers of people are moving to wireless technologies... Then there's the leadership coup, that left a really bad taste in my mouth as to what our elected officials are capable of. And then there's the cheap vote buying ala this was in one of my local papers this week - "Danby flags shift on same-sex laws. Labor Melbourne Ports MHR Michael Danby told a crowd of voters at St Kilda Town Hall that he believed a policy shift on same-sex marriage was "coming". Although he supported Labor's stance leading into the election. He flagged the possibility of "serious movement" on the issue, saying many politicians supported overturning the same-sex marriage ban introduced in 2004." I find this really insulting personally. I do.

Then I'm torn between the greens candidate and the liberal candidate. I'm getting more conservative as I'm getting older (and also because I now have a family) which is part of it. I'm hestitant to vote for the Greens candidate as I don't want the preferences going to Labor and I really, really hate preferential voting. I also find the liberal candidate kind of endearing but also kind of irksome. He's "openly" gay but yet he refers to his partner in gender neutral terms, that annoys me...

I suspect I'll end up voting Liberal...

And I'm voting Greens in the Senate. I don't want either major political party with control of both houses.

3 comments:

  1. Stupid American time here...

    In Australia do you have single member districts like in GB or is it party voting only?
    Is the identity of your MP more or less important than who is the PM?
    How important is the Australian Senate? Is it akin to the US Senate as an equal body or is it less important to merely being a frivolous throwback to an earlier time?

    ReplyDelete
  2. If it helps you understand Gregory Storer for the Secular Party, read his blog and perspectives here.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Joe - We have single member districts like Great Britain, our system of government is pretty much completely modelled on the british system.

    The MP should be more important than the PM - but it never quite works that way. Basically MPs don't campaign on local issues anymore - they pretty much campaign specifically on party lines - the smaller parties & independents will generally campaign on more localised issues as that's what can be more important. Hell I'd be happier knowing that my MP was representing my interests but that's not the way the game works here. The PM gets more media attention obviously and I think most people basically go leader of party is the same as the local candidate. Which I think is also encouraged by the parties.

    The senate is actually quite important to our system of government - so it's an equal body. We've had governments dissolved because the House of Reps and the Senate couldn't agree to pass the budget. And it's normally the budget that creates the sticking point.

    Thanks mikeybear - I will try to read before I go vote

    ReplyDelete