Advertisement

Irwin Ross, Rise Up Party for the Senate, Candidate Questionnaire, Election ’13

By 29 August 2013 138

Irwin

Rise Up Australia’s Senate Candidate Irwin Ross has sent us in his answers to your questions.

Candidates, the readers of RiotACT are your voters and they have questions for you! If you’d like to answer those questions and prove you care what your voters think then email us at contact@the-riotact.com.

You can find the questions here.


1. What are your views on euthanasia?

Rise Up Australia is pro-life and supports doing everything possible to protect lives.


2. Do you support a High Speed Rail Link between Sydney/Canberra/Melbourne?

Yes. One of our policies would be to ensure that Australia provides a transport and communications infrastructure that serves the needs of a modern ‘first-world’ productive economy and that provides for the social interactions of all Australians: this means we need a coherent transport policy that integrates road, rail, air, coastal shipping; we affirm that vital transport infrastructure (Qantas, airports, major rails, ports, freeways etc) should have majority ownership by Australian citizens or governments; we favour a fully or partly government-owned Very Fast Train between Melbourne and Sydney (then Brisbane).


3. Are you comfortable with the distribution of wealth in modern day Australia?

Rise Up Australia believe that government funding should be directed into the areas that are needed the most, i.e. helping the poor and needy/homeless; funnelling more funds into the areas of health; and directing funds into developing a world-class education system.


4. Recent polling (Auspoll) shows housing affordability to be a critical issue for a majority of Australians, with 84% of respondents saying it was important to them or their families, putting housing affordability ahead of issues such as education, border security, the NBN and NDIS.

The same poll also revealed that 84% of respondents also believe that Australia is not performing well on housing affordability.

Australian Governments are failing badly on this issue of critical importance to Australians.
What would you do to improve housing affordability?

Housing affordability relates to the CPI, the Reserve Bank and its decisions, people’s supply and demand, how people view the nation and the future of their nation. The federal government can implement all sorts of initiatives, but it all comes down to local governments. Housing affordability is very much tied in with world economics also, and there is not a lot that governments can do to sway that, otherwise they would be guilty of interfering with free enterprise.


5. To me the NBN seems like a great idea, can you tell me why you think it’s ace/a dumb idea.

Rise Up Australia definitely agree with the NBN. We would look into policies that encourage high-class infrastructure within Australia.


6. Do you think cyclists should be registered?!

Rise Up Australia do not believe that cyclists need to be registered. We do not see any advantage in doing this, in fact we believe that if registration of cyclists was mandatory, it would discourage people from getting on their bikes and riding, as it would be an unnecessary added expense.


7. What is your position on gay marriage?

Rise Up Australia want to protect the traditional family unit, comprising man, woman and children; to promote marriage (as defined in the Marriage Act 2004) as an institution that provides the best nurturing environment for children and that has substantial economic benefits for society; while recognising that adults are free to pursue their own sexuality in private, we do not agree with the promotion of homosexuality as a normal practice in schools and in public; we affirm the basic right for a child to have both a male and a female as its parents (and to know why they are) in the best interests of the child; we oppose same-sex marriage, bigamy, polygamy and Centrelink funding of such and similar practices.


8. Would you be willing to cross the floor on matters of strong personal conscience or of significant concern for your electorate?

Rise Up Australia operates on biblical principles and has strong convictions that concur with social justice values. Rise Up endeavours to make the best decisions possible with the information and resources it has at the time concerning matters of conscience. Rise Up Australia will make ethical decisions that will be justified based on an ethical framework.


9. What are your views on the NSA collecting private information of Australian citizens and corporations, of the Australian government’s participation in similar programmes, and of the apparent silence of Australian politicians on the matter?

Rise Up Australia wants to reduce the influence of external organisations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organisation (WTO) and United Nations (UN) on Australia’s domestic policies and assets. At the same time, we are committed to working with these organisations to benefit mankind. Rise Up Australia believes that collection of private information of Australian citizens should not be undertaken by sources outside of Australia, without their prior consent or knowledge.


10. We hear so much negativity about the opposition when election time rolls around– what three things do you consider to be positive about any of your opponents and why?

Rise Up Australia are aware that during election time many candidates fall into the trap of speaking out negatively towards their opposition, and we are strongly opposed to this. Even though we may not agree with some of their policies, Rise Up Australia respects our opponents’ freedom of speech, which is one of our top priorities. We seek to honour and respect the opposition, even if we do not agree with their policies.

Please login to post your comments
138 Responses to Irwin Ross, Rise Up Party for the Senate, Candidate Questionnaire, Election ’13
#1
pierce11:32 am, 29 Aug 13

Does this mean that people calling for cyclist registration make Rise Up look moderate?

#2
Jim Jones12:25 pm, 29 Aug 13

Ah, the ‘god told me to be a bigot’ party.

Truly the worst of the lot. You have to sink pretty low to scrape the bottom of the barrel this time around, and yet they’ve accomplished it almost without trying.

#3
fernandof12:50 pm, 29 Aug 13

Q7 and Q8: that’s all I needed to know.

Jim Jones said :

Ah, the ‘god told me to be a bigot’ party.

Yep, that’s a pretty accurate summary.

#4
ActuAli12:52 pm, 29 Aug 13

“Rise Up Australia operates on biblical principles…”

Does that include the principles of slavery that are set out in the Bible?

#5
Robertson1:15 pm, 29 Aug 13

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

#6
Rollersk8r1:15 pm, 29 Aug 13

Ahh, Rise Up Australia as in the Jesus Rise Up Party. Ok, got it. That’s all I need to know.

#7
poetix1:21 pm, 29 Aug 13

Rollersk8r said :

Ahh, Rise Up Australia as in the Jesus Rise Up Party. Ok, got it. That’s all I need to know.

I very much doubt that Jesus would vote for these people.

#8
YeahBuddy1:24 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

Who the f*ck is this guy to tell the people of Australia that they can’t provide a loving and safe home for children unless they are a man and a woman. What about sole (not single, this has nothing to do with relationship status) parents of either sex? Are they failing too because the child has only one parent, be it male or female?

Religion and politics do not mix. One is a cult, the other …. well.

#9
Postalgeek1:33 pm, 29 Aug 13

pierce said :

Does this mean that people calling for cyclist registration make Rise Up look moderate?

Apparently so.

#10
arescarti421:47 pm, 29 Aug 13

Q4 – The way I read that is despite clear evidence that the electorate thinks housing affordability is a problem, you’re going to dismiss it as a non-issue, and despite seeming to support keeping the government out of the way, you’re fine with continuing the massive and damaging distorting interference it currently conducts.

Great.

#11
Jim Jones2:06 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

That’s right. It’s the inane fundy bigotry that makes them bigots.

#12
DrKoresh2:09 pm, 29 Aug 13

“we affirm the basic right for a child to have both a male and a female as its parents (and to know why they are) in the best interests of the child”

I don’t think people like this even realise how offensive statements like this are. Aside from the obvious, that it implies gay couples are incapable of raising ‘normal’ children, what about the umpteen thousand kids (like me) raised in single parent households? What about the traditional family units that abuse and belittle their kids? One of my mates has two mums, he and his sisters are some of the loveliest, most well adjusted people I know. It’s a load of ignorant bullshit that has absolutely no factual basis, it only serves as a smokescreen to cover up bigoted people’s hatred and insecurities.

I need to step back before I start getting abusive about this offensive shite the baldy who spouted it. I’ll finish reading the rest of his responses, maybe he’s redeemed himself in there somewhere.

#13
DrKoresh2:14 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

It just makes you an idiot. What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together? A child has a right to a happy and loving home, and having two parents of opposite genders is not a prerequisite do that.

#14
YeahBuddy2:53 pm, 29 Aug 13

DrKoresh said :

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

It just makes you an idiot. What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together? A child has a right to a happy and loving home, and having two parents of opposite genders is not a prerequisite do that.

+1000

#15
Jono3:40 pm, 29 Aug 13

DrKoresh said :

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

It just makes you an idiot. What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together? A child has a right to a happy and loving home, and having two parents of opposite genders is not a prerequisite do that.

Agreed. My mother died when I was 6 and my father never remarried. Should he have been prosecuted for denying me my “basic right .. to have both a male and a female as (my) parents” as I grew up? Or should I have been sent to state care because I was denied this “basic right”?

The sex of your parents (or even the number, in my case) isn’t the major issue, what’s critical is to be brought up in an environment where you’re loved, wanted, respected and given the skills to join society.

#16
Jono3:44 pm, 29 Aug 13

poetix said :

Rollersk8r said :

Ahh, Rise Up Australia as in the Jesus Rise Up Party. Ok, got it. That’s all I need to know.

I very much doubt that Jesus would vote for these people.

People like this always remind me of the quote that’s been commonly attributed to Ghandi on the subject of Christianity – “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

#17
p14:45 pm, 29 Aug 13

This is a very weird mix of responses, some like 3 and 7, come across as well considered¹, and coherently written expressions of firm policy. Then the answer to 4… in one paragraph it says that housing affordability is tied to commonwealth, local and international factors, but claims it can’t be helped because it would require governments to interfere with the free market. No where else in their answers to I see any concern for interference in the free market.

…and question 9 – the actions of the IMF, WTO and UN are of equal concern to Australian citizens as the NSA when it comes to data gathering? ²

Question 8 just flat out waffles, and totally fails to address the question.³

¹ - Although this one is based on bats#it crazy arse#at fundy logic
² - *Cough* conspiracy nut keywords *cough
³ - Not the only candidate to fail to understand that some of these questions are aimed at them as a person, not just them as a proxy for a party (or in this case a charismatic religious leader of dubious sanity

#18
lostinbias4:48 pm, 29 Aug 13

DrKoresh said :

What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together?

I suspect that Rise Up Australia politicians would wholeheartedly support the repeal of no-fault divorce if they thought they could get away with it.

#19
ScienceRules4:59 pm, 29 Aug 13

Well I was going to wade in here on the views of this hate-filled bigot and his theocratic fellow-travellers but I see that the ever reliable RA mob has done the job already.

Well done everyone

#20
Robertson5:05 pm, 29 Aug 13

DrKoresh said :

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

It just makes you an idiot. What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together? A child has a right to a happy and loving home, and having two parents of opposite genders is not a prerequisite do that.

Not everybody shares your opinion, and unless you have any evidence in the form of IQ tests, your “idiot” assertion is baseless.

#21
watto235:09 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

Maybe bigot is harsh, but its true. while they probably don’t say they disapprove of single parents, their beliefs incriminate them. The traditional definition of a family no longer exists and hanging onto it is a sign that people live in denial and can’t move on. The reality is they can keep their marriage act, but it won’t stop the majority of families these days being non-conformist to their ideals.

Rise up goes last on my ballot. My concern is many preference deals were done and rise up is not last on many tickets that hold opposite ideals…..

#22
Robertson5:09 pm, 29 Aug 13

Jono said :

Agreed. My mother died when I was 6 and my father never remarried. Should he have been prosecuted for denying me my “basic right .. to have both a male and a female as (my) parents” as I grew up? Or should I have been sent to state care because I was denied this “basic right”?

.

Logic fail. Just because planes sometimes crash doesn’t mean pilots should not be expected to not crash them.

Many people believe a child has a basic human right to its mother and its father. The UN supports this in their declaration of the rights of the child.
Ask any teacher if they are of the opinion that children growing up without both their parents are vastly more likely to be troubled and/or troublesome.

#23
DrKoresh5:11 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

Not everybody shares your opinion, and unless you have any evidence in the form of IQ tests, your “idiot” assertion is baseless.

If you think that children cannot be properly raise by gay couples or single parents, you’re an idiot. And if you think that an IQ test is a comprehensive and accurate assessment intelligence, you’re an idiot.

#24
Robertson5:13 pm, 29 Aug 13

ScienceRules said :

blah blah blah this hate-filled bigot blah blah blah

Well done everyone

You disagree with him. Therefore he is a “hate-filled bigot”. Very nice.

I see no evidence that what you say is true. I do see fairly plain evidence that you are a hate-filled bigot yourself though.

#25
johnboy5:13 pm, 29 Aug 13

Enough with the personal abuse both of you.

#26
ScienceRules5:13 pm, 29 Aug 13

Robertson said :

DrKoresh said :

Robertson said :

Opposing changes to the Marriage Act and stating a belief that a child has a right to a mother and a father doesn’t make anybody a bigot.

It just makes you an idiot. What do you think we should do about couples with kids who get divorced? Force them to stay together? A child has a right to a happy and loving home, and having two parents of opposite genders is not a prerequisite do that.

Not everybody shares your opinion, and unless you have any evidence in the form of IQ tests, your “idiot” assertion is baseless.

I’m pretty sure that the term “idiot” in this context actually meant “someone who favours the application of tribal laws born of Iron Age nomadic goatherders to a 21st Century cosmopolitan democracy”. It would probably be more acurate to call such a person “fearful, bigoted, un-thinking and nasty” than an idiot.

#27
ScienceRules5:14 pm, 29 Aug 13

johnboy said :

Enough with the personal abuse both of you.

Sorry Dad…

#28
Robertson5:17 pm, 29 Aug 13

DrKoresh said :

Robertson said :

Not everybody shares your opinion, and unless you have any evidence in the form of IQ tests, your “idiot” assertion is baseless.

If you think that children cannot be properly raise by gay couples or single parents, you’re an idiot. And if you think that an IQ test is a comprehensive and accurate assessment intelligence, you’re an idiot.

You’ve missed the point. Labelling somebody an idiot on the sole evidence that they disagree with your opinion is in itself fairly idiotic. An IQ test would be far better evidence than no evidence at all.

And I don’t see anybody saying a single parent “can’t raise a child properly”, I just recognise there is a fairly popular idea that children have a right to their parents.

Many people seem to think adults have a right to children. I would suggest they have got the wrong idea and that the rights of the children are far more important and should take precedence.

#29
DrKoresh5:19 pm, 29 Aug 13

johnboy said :

Enough with the personal abuse both of you.

Me, abuse? Never! :o

#30
Robertson5:22 pm, 29 Aug 13

watto23 said :

The traditional definition of a family no longer exists

but it won’t stop the majority of families these days being non-conformist to their ideals.

I don’t know where you live, but here in Canberra the majority of families are nuclear families consisting of a mother, a father, married, with about 2.5 children.
If you ask people what a family is, the majority will describe that norm.

Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.