Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

Election ’10 Candidate Questionaire – Quintin Phillips-Hedges for Fraser

By johnboy - 3 August 2010 30

Quintin

Quintin Phillips-Hedges, the Secular Party of Australia’s debut candidate in Fraser is our first candidate to return answers to your questions:

1) whitelaughter asked: Would you support abolishing self-government in the ACT? Please include a “yes” or “no” in your answer.

No… We have a large enough population to be self regulating. Stanhope wanted to bring in Same-Sex Marriage and a Bill of Rights knocked back by the Feds. I support self determination for the ACT.


2) neanderthalsis asked: Do you support the proposed internet mandatory ISP filter and Data Recording Directive that record the browsing history of all internet connections?

No, except to keep an eye on your Mother.


3) 54-11 asked: Comsuper and DFRDB pensions are indexed by the CPI rather than by a wage-based index. The former Government, with the full support of the then Labor Opposition, stopped using the CPI to index the Age Pension more than a decade ago because it was considered an unsuitable and unfair way to adjust pensions. As a politician, your super is indexed to the increase in Parliamentary salaries and allowances, which is far more generous than for anyone else. Do you support, and will you actually do something about, fair and equitable indexation of all pensions?

What do you think? I am due to retire in the foreseeable future.


4) Thumper asked: What do you consider to be the maximum sustainable population for Australia and how do you intend to ensure that that this maximum is not breached whilst continuing to encourage immigrants as well as accepting genuine refugees?

The Secular Party deplores xenophobic attempts to demonise refugees and asylum seekers. We support continuation of an immigration program that is both economically beneficial and environmentally sustainable.

That said we need to spend a lot more money on infrastructure to sustain the population we already have. (PS If we tax the Churches we will have the money.)


5) Primal asked: Why were you deemed the best candidate for your party in the seat you’re contesting?

I was here.


6) Jivrashia asked: If a man says something, and the wife isn’t there to hear him, is he still wrong?

Just checking… dear?


7) colourful sydney racing identity asked: Did you prepare this response to RiotACT questions yourself or was it done by your party office?

I’m being supervised by the cat and a woman with a wooden spoon… dinner smells good.


8 ) p1 asked: Do you think that the Commonwealth Government should be able to overturn laws passed by the ACT?

That is a two sided coin. See question 1. We need more say in the governing process not just voting for tweedle tony or tweedle julia.


9) bd84 asked: What are the top priorities or projects for Canberra that you will be lobbying the new Government for?

Self determination and to reduce pollution via a light rail system.


10) Pommy bastard asked: Witches on Mt Ainslie, should their freedom of expression be protected from interference by fundy nutsacks?

See my video here including a free plug for Fiona.


The Eleventh Question

#33:housebound asked: How will electing you prompt the Commonwealth Government into paying attention to Canberra/Fraser?

The Secular party (my party) will rub a lot of people up the wrong way.

We want to ‘tax Churches’ and remove the Lords Prayer at the start of Parliamentary sessions and remove any mention of God from the constitution.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
Election ’10 Candidate Questionaire – Quintin Phillips-Hedges for Fraser
Jim Jones 2:15 pm 03 Aug 10

Pommy bastard said :

Jim Jones said :

The major parties have conflated the issue of asylum seekers with immigration (in a cynical ploy to pander to bigotry and fear). I’m quite pleased that this isn’t happening here.

I totally agree, I’m an immigrant and proud of it! I did everything that Australia requires of me, paid all the fees, passed all the tests, and was able to offer skills that were valued, (believe it or not.) I waited four months in Blighty, away from my new Aussie wife, until my visa had been approved. I have worked and paid my way for all the years I have been here, and never once claimed benefits (outside of the medicare GP visit rebate.)

That’s nice. You see, the overwhelming majority of ‘illegal immigrants’ in Australia are from England and New Zealand – they regularly arrive in big metal things called ‘aeroplanes’ in the tens of thousands.

The ones that arrive on boat are insignificant in number (in 2009, there were under 2,000 boat arrivals and about 160,000 other incoming migrants (mostly skilled workers)) and around 80% or more are generally found to be legitimate asylum seekers (who, if they didn’t get on a boat to flee their home country, would probably be dead).

Pommy bastard 2:09 pm 03 Aug 10

Cancel
Spectra 2:00 pm 03 Aug 10

What about if we taxed churches on their income, but allowed deductions for costs that benefit the community? Some churches have food distribution programs for the needy, etc.

So…treated them like any other business? Tax their income and deduct their expenses including charitable work? I’m pretty sure that’s exactly the idea.

Pommy bastard 1:50 pm 03 Aug 10

Jim Jones said :

The major parties have conflated the issue of asylum seekers with immigration (in a cynical ploy to pander to bigotry and fear). I’m quite pleased that this isn’t happening here.

I totally agree, I’m an immigrant and proud of it! I did everything that Australia requires of me, paid all the fees, passed all the tests, and was able to offer skills that were valued, (believe it or not.) I waited four months in Blighty, away from my new Aussie wife, until my visa had been approved. I have worked and paid my way for all the years I have been here, and never once claimed benefits (outside of the medicare GP visit rebate.)

georgesgenitals 1:36 pm 03 Aug 10

Jim Jones said :

The policies of taxing the Churches and removing the lord’s prayer seem entirely reasonable to me. One issue relates to taxation (and the fact that many ‘churches’ are extremely profitable organisations that should be taxed accordingly), and the other is an issue of the separation of church and state.

What about if we taxed churches on their income, but allowed deductions for costs that benefit the community? Some churches have food distribution programs for the needy, etc.

p1 1:20 pm 03 Aug 10

2) neanderthalsis asked: Do you support the proposed internet mandatory ISP filter and Data Recording Directive that record the browsing history of all internet connections?

No, except to keep an eye on your Mother.

I’m not sure if that is a “your Mum” joke, or if it is creepy.

Or does your Mum browse a lot of pr0n?

Jim Jones 12:52 pm 03 Aug 10

justin heywood said :

The major parties have conflated the issue of asylum seekers with immigration (in a cynical ploy to pander to bigotry and fear)

My problem with the Secular Party is that it is itself pandering to bigotry and fear. His platform seems designed to appeal to those people who have come to believe that religion is the source of all evil.

Remove the Lord’s prayer from the opening of parliament? Fine, but what difference will it make? Are our politicians guided in their conduct this prayer?

Quintin dodges the immigration question @ number 4 by claiming that if we ‘tax the churches’ we will have enough money to solve all our infrastructure problems. How will that work? Does he advocate resuming all church land and selling it off? Will there be ‘good’ religions and ‘evil’ religions. Should we tax the Catholics, but not the Salvos?

None of us are free from bigotry. The only difference between One Nation and The Secular Party is that they hate a different set of people.

I haven’t seen the Secular Party pandering to ‘fear’, could you give an example?

The policies of taxing the Churches and removing the lord’s prayer seem entirely reasonable to me. One issue relates to taxation (and the fact that many ‘churches’ are extremely profitable organisations that should be taxed accordingly), and the other is an issue of the separation of church and state.

justin heywood 12:45 pm 03 Aug 10

The major parties have conflated the issue of asylum seekers with immigration (in a cynical ploy to pander to bigotry and fear)

My problem with the Secular Party is that it is itself pandering to bigotry and fear. His platform seems designed to appeal to those people who have come to believe that religion is the source of all evil.

Remove the Lord’s prayer from the opening of parliament? Fine, but what difference will it make? Are our politicians guided in their conduct this prayer?

Quintin dodges the immigration question @ number 4 by claiming that if we ‘tax the churches’ we will have enough money to solve all our infrastructure problems. How will that work? Does he advocate resuming all church land and selling it off? Will there be ‘good’ religions and ‘evil’ religions. Should we tax the Catholics, but not the Salvos?

None of us are free from bigotry. The only difference between One Nation and The Secular Party is that they hate a different set of people.

Jim Jones 11:54 am 03 Aug 10

Pommy bastard said :

The Secular Party deplores xenophobic attempts to demonise refugees and asylum seekers. We support continuation of an immigration program that is both economically beneficial and environmentally sustainable.

Another idiot unable to differentiate between “refugees and asylum seekers” and “immigrants”

To be fair, the fact that both issues were addressed in the same section is probably more due to the question that was being answered than anything else (have a look).

The major parties have conflated the issue of asylum seekers with immigration (in a cynical ploy to pander to bigotry and fear). I’m quite pleased that this isn’t happening here.

Spectra 11:06 am 03 Aug 10

I’m very pleased to see these guys running a candidate in my electorate. Going through all the parties registered for the election, this one came pretty much top on my list in terms of policies/views that matched my own. It won’t matter to the outcome, of course, but if people like this don’t stand up to offer those of us paying attention (as opposed to those who vote Labor or Liberal, giving it no more thought than “I’m a Labor/Liberal voter”) a choice, we don’t really have a democracy.
Best of luck, Quintin.

Pommy bastard 11:00 am 03 Aug 10

The Secular Party deplores xenophobic attempts to demonise refugees and asylum seekers. We support continuation of an immigration program that is both economically beneficial and environmentally sustainable.

Another idiot unable to differentiate between “refugees and asylum seekers” and “immigrants”

dtc 11:00 am 03 Aug 10

Awesome +2

I didnt even know you existed. I just read your policies and I think I agree with just about all of them (except for light rail, but thats a minor issue).

HappyDaisy 10:31 am 03 Aug 10

I like rubbing people up the wrong way

Woody Mann-Caruso 10:20 am 03 Aug 10

Atheist blasphemers. Just you wait til His Noodliness gets his starchy appendages on your soul and sends you to suffer in The Hell of Kraft Parmesan Shakers for all eternity.

Jim Jones 10:16 am 03 Aug 10

Awesome!

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site