Candidate Questionaires for 15 October

I am not anti-gambling, I am not anti-“going out and having a good time” I am not what I am is anti exploitation and coercion. I don’t want to ban anything I want an even “playing field”. I want to see far more nighttime entertainment options; I want more places like The Front, The Phoenix, The Green Room, The Basement and The Pot Belly and I still morn the loss of The Gypsy Bar.

I think that with the School of music and the significant student population that we can have a really great live music scene. I would love to make Civic better. I’ve put my ideas out there to discuss them, as Jazz said the CAP had a policy of community engagement so there will be a lot of discussion and compromise before any of this comes into play but I believe that the public deserve to know what my personal beliefs are. I understand that my ideas will not appeal to everyone but I believe that these ideas should be discussed.

Kudos to Norvan for actually making a few tangible statements about what he’d do compared with some of the inoffensive motherhood statements that have no substance made by some other candidates. Despite the fact that i disagree with some of his policies (which he already knows as I know norvan personally) I do think it takes a bit of guts to stand up and display leadership on certain positions rather than trying to please everyone.

Sure the idea of a lock in curfew at midnight seems a bit extreme. But lets be realistic, it would probably be modified on consultation with the appropriate business/community groups to something that is eminently workable and addresses the issue of making civic a safer place for everyone.

prettynpink – You won’t see many head up their ass army Jerks around.
In most of the major clubs its just the ADFA kids.

I’m not sure if it’s 100% correct, but someone told me that venues were out of bounds for one group or the other, that you wouldn’t find army and adfa in the same place.

I could be completely wrong of course, that’s just what I heard.

slaxwarez said :

Jakez I don’t think that you should equate anarchism with libertarianism. And I think that your language is a little over the top! Here are some word definitions from dictionary.com you’ll find that what Norvan is proposing is not any of these.

draconian
1876 (earlier Draconic, 1680), from Draco, Gk. statesman who laid down a code of laws for Athens 621 B.C.E. that mandated death as punishment for minor crimes. His name seems to mean lit.

authoritarian
1. favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed to individual freedom: authoritarian principles; authoritarian attitudes.
2. of or pertaining to a governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.
3. exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of another or of others: an authoritarian parent.

p.s good on you Norvan for saying something substantial in your interview, something that you believe in all of the interviews have been far to bland with no real indication of what some of these characters will do when they get in. If you are not elected it will be because you are far to honest and positive.

Firstly, the english language is a living entity. The manner in which I used those two words is perfectly acceptable.

Secondly, I’m not equating libertarianism with anarchism. I am a minarchist libertarian myself. However you can’t throw the non aggression principle out the window and still call yourself a libertarian. At the very least an understanding and acceptance of individual rights and personal responsibility is a must. There is no such thing as collectivist libertarianism.

Pretty – also, if you think Canberra “sux”, can you please bugger off?

Pretty – can you explain why you think non-profit poker tournaments are a stupid “idea”? They are actually a real thing – they happen all over Australia, but not in the ACT, exept for people playing online… Is it really stupid to allow this to happen in the ACT? If so, why?

Norvan I don’t agree with the non-profit poker card game tournaments answer that you gave, if you are such a champion of anti gambling then you could you be supportive of non-profit poker card game tournaments! They are such a stupid idea! Although I think that Norvan is right on the mark, Civic is a Shit place to go out! If you are not getting lip from some head-up-their-ass Army Jerk or ADFA creep then you are getting vomited on buy some teenie-bopper that have one to many alcoh-pop. The clubs just get people pissed then throw them out on to the street to harass the rest of us. That is why the lock in is a good idea let the clubs deal with the problem not the rest of us. I have had great nights out in many cities in Australia and overseas and Canberra sux and its only getting worse. If something does happen then it takes 20min for the cops to turn up and then there is 9 of them. Most of the police that are in Civic at night are junior officers that look younger than me and I’m 24.

I really like a lot of your ideas, Norvan, particularly in relation to poverty and helping the homeless.

It is probably good to have them out there for discussion, as the feedback will help you further refine policies or strategies and highlight areas needing more research or investigation.

Best of luck for Saturday!

Jakez I don’t think that you should equate anarchism with libertarianism. And I think that your language is a little over the top! Here are some word definitions from dictionary.com you’ll find that what Norvan is proposing is not any of these.

draconian
1876 (earlier Draconic, 1680), from Draco, Gk. statesman who laid down a code of laws for Athens 621 B.C.E. that mandated death as punishment for minor crimes. His name seems to mean lit.

authoritarian
1. favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed to individual freedom: authoritarian principles; authoritarian attitudes.
2. of or pertaining to a governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.
3. exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of another or of others: an authoritarian parent.

p.s good on you Norvan for saying something substantial in your interview, something that you believe in all of the interviews have been far to bland with no real indication of what some of these characters will do when they get in. If you are not elected it will be because you are far to honest and positive.

Does young Norvan do anything other than running for elections and publishing disturbing eyebrow raising television advertising?