How do Canberra Libs get out of the wilderness?

Alderney said :

dungfungus said :

Obviously, if someone supports (by membership) one organisation as a membership condition the members are bound to support any affiliated organisation.
It is therefore fair to say CPSU members will vote Labor. Some will fudge a bit and vote Green but then the Greens are affiliated with Labor also so the outcome is the same.

Bollocks.

Just because one is a member of union doesn’t guarantee they will vote a particular way. It might point to the likelihood of them voting a particular way, but doesn’t guarantee it.

When I joined the PS 6 years ago (after 23 yrs in the private sector) I was presented with a membership application form, for whatever the applicable union is, and it did contain an option to not have my funds contribute to the Labor Party.

I believe in unions and think they do good work, in the main.

I do think they need to re-invent themselves and break the link with the Labor Party as they (LP) no longer serve the purpose as the political wing of the union movement, despite having to be a union member to join them.

I’m a left leaning liberal (or am I a right leaning Labor?), but as I would never join a union I’m effectively excluded from the Labor Party.

Bollocks? What, you don’t think it’s fair to say that most unionists are Labor/Green voters?

What percentage of them would vote liberal then, do you reckon?

Nylex_Clock said :

Ban aspiring members of Canberra’s town council from being a member of any political party. Ditch the Government/Opposition charade. Make all town councillors work. Ban the funding of political advisors and other scum-suckers.

+1, but good luck with the implementation!

I can’t remember who said that anyone who aspired to politics should automatically be banned from the profession.

dungfungus said :

Alderney said :

dungfungus said :

Obviously, if someone supports (by membership) one organisation as a membership condition the members are bound to support any affiliated organisation.
It is therefore fair to say CPSU members will vote Labor. Some will fudge a bit and vote Green but then the Greens are affiliated with Labor also so the outcome is the same.

Bollocks.

Just because one is a member of union doesn’t guarantee they will vote a particular way. It might point to the likelihood of them voting a particular way, but doesn’t guarantee it.

When I joined the PS 6 years ago (after 23 yrs in the private sector) I was presented with a membership application form, for whatever the applicable union is, and it did contain an option to not have my funds contribute to the Labor Party.

I believe in unions and think they do good work, in the main.

I do think they need to re-invent themselves and break the link with the Labor Party as they (LP) no longer serve the purpose as the political wing of the union movement, despite having to be a union member to join them.

I’m a left leaning liberal (or am I a right leaning Labor?), but as I would never join a union I’m effectively excluded from the Labor Party.

When you get over your identity crisis write something that makes sense please.

Do you ever get sick of being wrong all the time? About everything? Not a rhetorical question I really wonder what motivates you to keep banging away on your keyboard without any comprehension of whats happening around you.

Alderney said :

dungfungus said :

Obviously, if someone supports (by membership) one organisation as a membership condition the members are bound to support any affiliated organisation.
It is therefore fair to say CPSU members will vote Labor. Some will fudge a bit and vote Green but then the Greens are affiliated with Labor also so the outcome is the same.

Bollocks.

Just because one is a member of union doesn’t guarantee they will vote a particular way. It might point to the likelihood of them voting a particular way, but doesn’t guarantee it.

When I joined the PS 6 years ago (after 23 yrs in the private sector) I was presented with a membership application form, for whatever the applicable union is, and it did contain an option to not have my funds contribute to the Labor Party.

I believe in unions and think they do good work, in the main.

I do think they need to re-invent themselves and break the link with the Labor Party as they (LP) no longer serve the purpose as the political wing of the union movement, despite having to be a union member to join them.

I’m a left leaning liberal (or am I a right leaning Labor?), but as I would never join a union I’m effectively excluded from the Labor Party.

When you get over your identity crisis write something that makes sense please.

gazket said :

ban preferential voting , first past the post should always be the winner.

Ban aspiring members of Canberra’s town council from being a member of any political party. Ditch the Government/Opposition charade. Make all town councillors work. Ban the funding of political advisors and other scum-suckers.

dungfungus said :

Obviously, if someone supports (by membership) one organisation as a membership condition the members are bound to support any affiliated organisation.
It is therefore fair to say CPSU members will vote Labor. Some will fudge a bit and vote Green but then the Greens are affiliated with Labor also so the outcome is the same.

Bollocks.

Just because one is a member of union doesn’t guarantee they will vote a particular way. It might point to the likelihood of them voting a particular way, but doesn’t guarantee it.

When I joined the PS 6 years ago (after 23 yrs in the private sector) I was presented with a membership application form, for whatever the applicable union is, and it did contain an option to not have my funds contribute to the Labor Party.

I believe in unions and think they do good work, in the main.

I do think they need to re-invent themselves and break the link with the Labor Party as they (LP) no longer serve the purpose as the political wing of the union movement, despite having to be a union member to join them.

I’m a left leaning liberal (or am I a right leaning Labor?), but as I would never join a union I’m effectively excluded from the Labor Party.

gazket said :

ban preferential voting , first past the post should always be the winner.

But what if there are 10 candidates and, in a first past the post system, the lead candidate only gets 15% of the vote. Do the other 85% just have to lump it?

ban preferential voting , first past the post should always be the winner.

dungfungus said :

herp derp, i don’t know what i am talking about…i post something that is incorrect and the i try to defend it herp derp.

Could not have put it better myself.

LadyxBec said :

dungfungus said :

Queen_of_the_Bun said :

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

This is how dungungus rolls – makes shit up, then makes up more lies.

Yes, to be an ALP member, you have to be a union member. But to be a union member, you do not have to join the Labor Party. Case in point – the most powerful union in the country, the Australian Medical Association.

You obviously sent your (abusive) post before you read what I posted in the meantime namely:
“The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

This means that if someone joins the CPSU they become, by proxy, members of the ALP through the CPSU’s affiliation with the ALP. If potential members think the CPSU’s activities (this means its affilation with the ALP) “are not appropriate” then their membership is not accepted.
So, if you join the CPSU you join the ALP through affiliation.

Some of you may be in denial about this but, as I pointed out, it is on record and easily accessed on the internet.

I don’t know why you mentioned the AMA – was it like “quick, look over there, is that a unicorn?”

Sorry, but it’s on record.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

Sorry, but it’s on record.
Cancel
Saving…

Actually when you join the CPSU they ask you if you would like your membership to opt-out of ALP affiliation. From my understanding they were the first union to offer this. Therefore CPSU membership does not always = ALP membership.

I don’t doubt what you are saying but it would be good if you could post proof of this opt-out as the only reference to the ALP affiliation requirements I have seen says what I posted earlier.
This was in a copy of a letter from the CPSU to the NSW Electoral Commission. It is on the internet.
Obviously, if someone supports (by membership) one organisation as a membership condition the members are bound to support any affiliated organisation.
It is therefore fair to say CPSU members will vote Labor. Some will fudge a bit and vote Green but then the Greens are affiliated with Labor also so the outcome is the same.

link – http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/life-is-tweet-for-act-liberals-as-they-get-their-own-social-media-adviser-20140402-35z4i.html

employ a social media advisor O_o

dungfungus said :

Queen_of_the_Bun said :

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

This is how dungungus rolls – makes shit up, then makes up more lies.

Yes, to be an ALP member, you have to be a union member. But to be a union member, you do not have to join the Labor Party. Case in point – the most powerful union in the country, the Australian Medical Association.

You obviously sent your (abusive) post before you read what I posted in the meantime namely:
“The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

This means that if someone joins the CPSU they become, by proxy, members of the ALP through the CPSU’s affiliation with the ALP. If potential members think the CPSU’s activities (this means its affilation with the ALP) “are not appropriate” then their membership is not accepted.
So, if you join the CPSU you join the ALP through affiliation.

Some of you may be in denial about this but, as I pointed out, it is on record and easily accessed on the internet.

I don’t know why you mentioned the AMA – was it like “quick, look over there, is that a unicorn?”

Sorry, but it’s on record.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

Sorry, but it’s on record.
Cancel
Saving…

Actually when you join the CPSU they ask you if you would like your membership to opt-out of ALP affiliation. From my understanding they were the first union to offer this. Therefore CPSU membership does not always = ALP membership.

At dungfungus #7 post, and subsequent responses – the OP was all about the dysfunctional shambles currently trading as the Canberra Liberals.

It’s understandable, dungfungus, that you might want to talk about something else – must be terrible to be such a right-whinger and know no-one is falling for it. But in that case, a decent thing to do might be to create a new thread on topic, rather than try to derail an unrelated conversation. Things are desperate, eh.

And then you have the audacity to call Queen of the Bun for unicorn-spotting !! That is truly breath-taking self-delusion.

I’d be happy to join that other conversation because, as ever, you are wrong – but how about letting this thread get back on topic.

dungfungus said :

The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

Sorry, but it’s on record.
Cancel
Saving…

So, kind of like what you said, except for the bit you said about *having* to vote for the Labor Party is you join a union. Which you don’t. Which is kind of lke what I said.

I’m impressed that since RA when to $hit, dungo has dialed the nutty up to eleven.

Queen_of_the_Bun said :

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

This is how dungungus rolls – makes shit up, then makes up more lies.

Yes, to be an ALP member, you have to be a union member. But to be a union member, you do not have to join the Labor Party. Case in point – the most powerful union in the country, the Australian Medical Association.

You obviously sent your (abusive) post before you read what I posted in the meantime namely:
“The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

This means that if someone joins the CPSU they become, by proxy, members of the ALP through the CPSU’s affiliation with the ALP. If potential members think the CPSU’s activities (this means its affilation with the ALP) “are not appropriate” then their membership is not accepted.
So, if you join the CPSU you join the ALP through affiliation.

Some of you may be in denial about this but, as I pointed out, it is on record and easily accessed on the internet.

I don’t know why you mentioned the AMA – was it like “quick, look over there, is that a unicorn?”

Sorry, but it’s on record.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

Sorry, but it’s on record.
Cancel
Saving…

dungfungus said :

Queen_of_the_Bun said :

dungfungus said :

pepmeup said :

The local libs need to run a few more moderate candidates, like Kate Carnell and Gary Humphries. who in the current Canberra Liberals is a moderate? I thought Jeremy Hanson was but it seems he is trumpeting the Conservative line. I would have thought Brendan (I once owned a business) Smyth was but no.

The one thing I think is they should run some moderate candidates, and allow them to say they are moderate socially progressive liberals. Under the Haire Clarke system, voters don’t only get to elect the government but we get to decide the members who make up a government and the opposition. We can assume that both major parties will run 25 candidates in 2016, five in each. the libs should run two moderates in each electorate. That way moderate voters an help change the liberal party to a party that more represent the fiscally responsible, socially progressive community.

All you have said may be feasible but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them it is all academic.
I would love to hear from a member of the CPSU that has refused to toe the line.

I am a union member – MEAA – and have never joined a political party, nor been compelled to vote for one. I know many CPSU members, but have no idea if any of them are members of any party.

I know there is no point asking you to provide evidence for these claims. But you are completely wrong on this one.

One of the ALP ACT branch membership application conditions:

“The Australian Labor Party (ACT Branch) Rules require applicants
to be a financial member of a trade union, if there is a union that
covers their occupation, trade or profession that they are eligible
to be a member of. All applicants who are financial members of a
union that is affiliated to the ALP are entitled to a membership fee
discount (refer to list of affiliated unions overleaf).

I see why you dont like quoting sources. When you do you contradict yourself. Read what youve posted then have a think about what you claimed before. This doesnt support your claims but then the real world rarely does.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

This is how dungungus rolls – makes shit up, then makes up more lies.

Yes, to be an ALP member, you have to be a union member. But to be a union member, you do not have to join the Labor Party. Case in point – the most powerful union in the country, the Australian Medical Association.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

The CPSU openly states it is affiliated with the ALP. It also states potential members considering joining the CPSU make a judgement about the union’s activities, including its political activities. Should potential members feel that the CPSU’s activities are not appropriate and do not represent their interests, they do not join.

Sorry, but it’s on record.

dungfungus said :

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

You didn’t say there was a connection, you said “…but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them…” which seems to be a bald faced lie (I certainly haven’t noticed the union goons marching members into polling booths at gunpoint to enforce the how to vote cards – although maybe that is an inner north thing?

I imagine a very high percentage of union members support the Labor Party.* Doesn’t mean what you said wasn’t bull$hi1.

*- I've heard that the Greens are all secretly Communist-Socialist-Islamists so some union types probably support them.

miz said :

Re the proposed arboretum bus, if there really is going to be one from July, all I can say is FINALLY – and hopefully it will not just for the (ACT) school holidays, as it is now (and too bad if you are from interstate). I wonder what had to be ditched to get the arboretum bus up, because I have it on good authority that there is no new money for buses whatsoever, just rearranging the furniture.

I was told by a mechanic that some Action buses can’t handle the gradients on the road to the top of the arboretum. Something to do with the way their gearing is configured. Anyone heard something similar?
Also, the TWU will surely want a danger allowance for their drivers to take a bus up and down that incline.

Aeek said :

dungfungus said :

“The Australian Labor Party (ACT Branch) Rules require applicants
to be a financial member of a trade union, if there is a union that
covers their occupation, trade or profession that they are eligible
to be a member of.

Read it again. It says that ALP members must be a member of a trade union, if there is one.

It does not say what you think “union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them”

You are correct. I don’t know how I misread that as there is no connection with trade unions and the ALP.
How stupid of me to think that union members should support the ALP.

miz said :

QoTB, I am a CPSU member and am not a member of any political party. CPSU acts in the interests of its members, like any employee organisation. .

You must be pretty naive if you don’t realise that maintaining influence in the Labor party (and getting political jobs etc) plays a role in the decision making of CPSU leadership.

Re the proposed arboretum bus, if there really is going to be one from July, all I can say is FINALLY – and hopefully it will not just for the (ACT) school holidays, as it is now (and too bad if you are from interstate). I wonder what had to be ditched to get the arboretum bus up, because I have it on good authority that there is no new money for buses whatsoever, just rearranging the furniture.

Joingler, I fail to see how you can say ‘The light rail will not duplicate the bus network.’ The light rail route is a total duplication of the popular and well patronised 200 bus route. Even if light rail eventually replaces the present 200 bus route, that will not result in any net improvement to the congestion of Northbourne, as the light rail is to run on tracks along Northbourne. It therefore is not the panacea they are attempting to tout, as there is no actual net benefit whatsoever. Rather, it is obvious that the proposed light rail is a very, very expensive toy aimed at placating and justifying some kind of weirdo, irrational ideology pushed by Mr Greenie, whose sole vote keeps the present mob in government. Frankly this a completely unethical use of this vast amount of public funds. It certainly is not for the greater good of most Canberrans, given the huge cost and minimal, if any, net benefit.

dungfungus said :

“The Australian Labor Party (ACT Branch) Rules require applicants
to be a financial member of a trade union, if there is a union that
covers their occupation, trade or profession that they are eligible
to be a member of.

Read it again. It says that ALP members must be a member of a trade union, if there is one.

It does not say what you think “union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them”

Just on a point of detail, Miz (#9) – the federal Government is talking about selling Medibank Private – the publicly-owned private health fund, not Medicare; that said, I agree with much else you said.

My earlier comment (#8) was meant to be an endorsement of Frances (#1):

“It is possible to be socially progressive and economically conservative you know. Unless you learn that, you’ll never win government.”

And “economically conservative” doesn’t necessarily involve flogging off valuable government assets to mates, or outsourcing etc. for the sake of it, it means being cautious and prudent in spending public funds and managing public assets.

Get rid of Gulia Jones and Vicki Dunne. Why do people vote for idiots like that? I will never vote for a Liberal government with those two tossers.

The thing is, for the most part Gallagher and her mob are doing a decent job. My experience with health, education and public transport has improved significantly since 2011. The ACT library network is the best in the country while Housing is a massive area of concern so I’ll be interested to see what they do to fix that. I’m not so kee

Put simply, the libs need to actually start convincing Canberrans that they can do a better job. And right now, I don’t even think the liberals themselves think that. THe negativity that wins sits in Western Sydney does not work in Canberra. Labor have figured that out but the libs haven’t.

Example:
Katy Gallagher announces closure of Walk in Clinic at Woden. Clinics at Tuggeranong and Belconnen will be built instead.

Jeremy Hanson issued a press release claiming that this broke Katy Gallaghers election promise that funding for walk in centres would continue.

How dumb does Mr. Hanson think we are?

miz said :

3. Ditch light rail and use funds for all Canberrans, e.g. bus route improvements – e.g. why is there no bus to airport or arboretum?

[Rant over]

The new bus work will have a bus to the arboretum. The light rail will not duplicate the bus network. The lightrail will add capacity to the bus network. Northbourne avenue is currently a congaline of buses. These buses will be able to be dispatched to other areas of Canberra once light rail is built. This will have a flow on benefit to all Canberrans.

QoTB, I am a CPSU member and am not a member of any political party. CPSU acts in the interests of its members, like any employee organisation. I have never received any material from CPSU telling me how I should vote. But I CAN tell you that CPSU stepped up and provided journey insurance cover as part of its membership when former PM, JWH, removed worker’s comp for APS employees involved in an accident to or from work (unlike any other employee in Australia) as a ‘cost saving’ measure. Actions speak louder than words.

Queen_of_the_Bun said :

dungfungus said :

pepmeup said :

The local libs need to run a few more moderate candidates, like Kate Carnell and Gary Humphries. who in the current Canberra Liberals is a moderate? I thought Jeremy Hanson was but it seems he is trumpeting the Conservative line. I would have thought Brendan (I once owned a business) Smyth was but no.

The one thing I think is they should run some moderate candidates, and allow them to say they are moderate socially progressive liberals. Under the Haire Clarke system, voters don’t only get to elect the government but we get to decide the members who make up a government and the opposition. We can assume that both major parties will run 25 candidates in 2016, five in each. the libs should run two moderates in each electorate. That way moderate voters an help change the liberal party to a party that more represent the fiscally responsible, socially progressive community.

All you have said may be feasible but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them it is all academic.
I would love to hear from a member of the CPSU that has refused to toe the line.

I am a union member – MEAA – and have never joined a political party, nor been compelled to vote for one. I know many CPSU members, but have no idea if any of them are members of any party.

I know there is no point asking you to provide evidence for these claims. But you are completely wrong on this one.

One of the ALP ACT branch membership application conditions:

“The Australian Labor Party (ACT Branch) Rules require applicants
to be a financial member of a trade union, if there is a union that
covers their occupation, trade or profession that they are eligible
to be a member of. All applicants who are financial members of a
union that is affiliated to the ALP are entitled to a membership fee
discount (refer to list of affiliated unions overleaf).

dungfungus said :

pepmeup said :

The local libs need to run a few more moderate candidates, like Kate Carnell and Gary Humphries. who in the current Canberra Liberals is a moderate? I thought Jeremy Hanson was but it seems he is trumpeting the Conservative line. I would have thought Brendan (I once owned a business) Smyth was but no.

The one thing I think is they should run some moderate candidates, and allow them to say they are moderate socially progressive liberals. Under the Haire Clarke system, voters don’t only get to elect the government but we get to decide the members who make up a government and the opposition. We can assume that both major parties will run 25 candidates in 2016, five in each. the libs should run two moderates in each electorate. That way moderate voters an help change the liberal party to a party that more represent the fiscally responsible, socially progressive community.

All you have said may be feasible but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them it is all academic.
I would love to hear from a member of the CPSU that has refused to toe the line.

I am a union member – MEAA – and have never joined a political party, nor been compelled to vote for one. I know many CPSU members, but have no idea if any of them are members of any party.

I know there is no point asking you to provide evidence for these claims. But you are completely wrong on this one.

As a wealthy and educated place, Canberra is quite lefty. The traditional Lib model will only work where people become disillusioned enough with local Labor to stick the boot it.

This is why the Libs don’t care much about Canberra. They know nothing they do will ever be good enough, or the right way, so why bother?

I’d happily support whoever decided to get to focussing on core services and stop wasting resources on all the other bullshit the current government seems to love.

miz said :

I am quite conflicted on this issue. Canberrans are intelligent and know how govt works. They expect value for money from local government. While this is almost unachievable with the current model, at least they could stop wasting money on impossible high court challenges and light rail projects that will actually clog up Northbourne and aims to duplicate an effective bus route already extant.

Federally I tend to prefer Labor due to their strong education and health policies, but I truly dislike local Labor, due to their complete disregard for Tuggeranong in general and poor decisions that have negatively affected me directly in particular. My perception is that ACT Labor (and the sole Green) seem to have no qualms about treading on individuals and the community in general so long as they stay in government, yet they are generally crap at actually improving local services. They are clearly la-la-la-ing with their fingers in the ears about the light rail project, and are worsening already-poor checks and balances on planning and development. They are still stuck in a 1980s ‘user pays’ time warp which everyone knows is inequitable.

That said, I truly detest the economic rationalist agenda of federal Libs and their quest for selling everything off and ruining the things that make Australia great, like Medicare, in the pretence that private enterprise (i.e. their mates rubbing their hands together) can do it better, which everyone knows is blind ideological BS. Canberra is a government town. Canberrans have seen it all before and KNOW stuff. They cannot be hoodwinked like ‘Western Sydney’.

I think the local Libs could easily tap into people’s disillusionment with local Labor. But the trouble is the local Libs seem to be in bed with developers and would probably want to privatise everything. They would truly have to banish this fear if they want to get in, and resist the temptation to privatise if they do actually get in.

My tips to local Labor and Libs are:

1. commit to improving municipal services (e.g. green bins, hard rubbish collection, bus to airport and arboretum) and not on costly and pointless grandstanding (like wasteful high court proceedings) or expensive projects like the light rail that duplicates a bus service already in existence
2. Don’t piss off Canberrans by having a privatisation agenda. It’s so 1990s and people are still angry now about it. There are some essential things that just should always remain in public hands, for the public good – e.g. water, power, communications, public transport and food bowl agri land.
3. Ditch light rail and use funds for all Canberrans, e.g. bus route improvements – e.g. why is there no bus to airport or arboretum?
3. Do something about housing affordability. It has been ridiculous for years and ACT Govt policy is not helping. Eg restore first home buyers grant on established homes.

[Rant over]

+ 1 . I would vote for you. Also if you promised to get rid of the ACT Human Rights Commission and other things a council should not be involved in.

One a lighter note, lets make it easier for organisers, community groups and entrepreneurs to hold events in Canberra to make the place more lively. The Multi Cultural Festival is great, but it has grown too big, and now an overt money making venture. Why cant be have more of these types of ‘big’ events, actively promoted by the Government, and designed to add vibrancy to the city, and not just a kids and family event. I get the impression its just too hard and difficult to overcome hurdles to do these things in this city.

Alderney said :

That being said, as a political scholar, I firmly believe the whole paradigm of the party political system in Australia needs a radical overhaul whereby, the left of the liberal party and right of the labor party form a centreist party, the greens are left on the left and the conservatives are left on the right. The union movement, if it wans to stay politically involved, needs to go back to its roots by selling its vote on each issue to whomever gives it the best deal on that issue, and have any of its political representatives remain on the cross benches otherwise.

I’ve had similar thoughts about the state of the nation’s politics being in a better place if both the major parties split more or less in half. The liberal name could stay with the moderate section of the party while the conservatives formed their own party and the labor name could stay with their left faction with the right faction becoming the progressive party. There would have to be a lot more time spent talking about what each party wanted to achieve compared to the situation now where its a valid strategy to just rubbish the other side.

For me very simple. Present themselves as an alternative government, not an opposition party.

For all the supposed mistakes of Labor, I am yet to be convinced the Libs could do any better so my vote stays right where it is.

To convince me they need to stop whinging and whining and present alternatives. One such example Mr Coe carries on about all the time is dead running on Action buses. So Mr Coe what would you do that is practical to stop this? What about road works, you talk about poor management from Labor, yet what would YOU do differently? Bearing in mind of course that the day to day running of programs is with the public servants who will be the same no matter who is in charge.

I am quite conflicted on this issue. Canberrans are intelligent and know how govt works. They expect value for money from local government. While this is almost unachievable with the current model, at least they could stop wasting money on impossible high court challenges and light rail projects that will actually clog up Northbourne and aims to duplicate an effective bus route already extant.

Federally I tend to prefer Labor due to their strong education and health policies, but I truly dislike local Labor, due to their complete disregard for Tuggeranong in general and poor decisions that have negatively affected me directly in particular. My perception is that ACT Labor (and the sole Green) seem to have no qualms about treading on individuals and the community in general so long as they stay in government, yet they are generally crap at actually improving local services. They are clearly la-la-la-ing with their fingers in the ears about the light rail project, and are worsening already-poor checks and balances on planning and development. They are still stuck in a 1980s ‘user pays’ time warp which everyone knows is inequitable.

That said, I truly detest the economic rationalist agenda of federal Libs and their quest for selling everything off and ruining the things that make Australia great, like Medicare, in the pretence that private enterprise (i.e. their mates rubbing their hands together) can do it better, which everyone knows is blind ideological BS. Canberra is a government town. Canberrans have seen it all before and KNOW stuff. They cannot be hoodwinked like ‘Western Sydney’.

I think the local Libs could easily tap into people’s disillusionment with local Labor. But the trouble is the local Libs seem to be in bed with developers and would probably want to privatise everything. They would truly have to banish this fear if they want to get in, and resist the temptation to privatise if they do actually get in.

My tips to local Labor and Libs are:

1. commit to improving municipal services (e.g. green bins, hard rubbish collection, bus to airport and arboretum) and not on costly and pointless grandstanding (like wasteful high court proceedings) or expensive projects like the light rail that duplicates a bus service already in existence
2. Don’t piss off Canberrans by having a privatisation agenda. It’s so 1990s and people are still angry now about it. There are some essential things that just should always remain in public hands, for the public good – e.g. water, power, communications, public transport and food bowl agri land.
3. Ditch light rail and use funds for all Canberrans, e.g. bus route improvements – e.g. why is there no bus to airport or arboretum?
3. Do something about housing affordability. It has been ridiculous for years and ACT Govt policy is not helping. Eg restore first home buyers grant on established homes.

[Rant over]

Reply

pepmeup said :

The local libs need to run a few more moderate candidates, like Kate Carnell and Gary Humphries. who in the current Canberra Liberals is a moderate? I thought Jeremy Hanson was but it seems he is trumpeting the Conservative line. I would have thought Brendan (I once owned a business) Smyth was but no.

The one thing I think is they should run some moderate candidates, and allow them to say they are moderate socially progressive liberals. Under the Haire Clarke system, voters don’t only get to elect the government but we get to decide the members who make up a government and the opposition. We can assume that both major parties will run 25 candidates in 2016, five in each. the libs should run two moderates in each electorate. That way moderate voters an help change the liberal party to a party that more represent the fiscally responsible, socially progressive community.

All you have said may be feasible but as long as union members are compelled to be members of the ALP and vote for them it is all academic.
I would love to hear from a member of the CPSU that has refused to toe the line.

The local libs need to run a few more moderate candidates, like Kate Carnell and Gary Humphries. who in the current Canberra Liberals is a moderate? I thought Jeremy Hanson was but it seems he is trumpeting the Conservative line. I would have thought Brendan (I once owned a business) Smyth was but no.

The one thing I think is they should run some moderate candidates, and allow them to say they are moderate socially progressive liberals. Under the Haire Clarke system, voters don’t only get to elect the government but we get to decide the members who make up a government and the opposition. We can assume that both major parties will run 25 candidates in 2016, five in each. the libs should run two moderates in each electorate. That way moderate voters an help change the liberal party to a party that more represent the fiscally responsible, socially progressive community.

Disclosure: I’m a left-of-centre voter who always feels some disappointment as my preferences inevitably slide towards Labor.

What would get me to vote for the Libs? As Gary H suggests in the CT article, ditching the conservative zealotries and offering to represent the views of the Canberran population would be a start. Defending Canberra from the Abbott government’s rapine would help. Running a campaign of vision rather than blame and fear would be welcome too.

So, evolve. The righties will inevitably vote Liberal so there is opportunity to move back towards the centre to wedge Labor.

How can the Liberals get out of the wilderness? Become liberals for a start (that may go over the top of some of your heads).

When I sat on management committee some years ago I told them that if they ever wanted to win government they needed to be more left than right. I even told one of those right-wing nutters, who goes by the initials JK, that the clue was in the name of the party.

Apparently, liberal is a term of derision.

I’d start by cutting loose the young libs, as currently, their numbers control the party. Whoever controls the young libs controls the party because the young ignorant ones think it’s all a game and consistently vote as a block. Zed better watch his back ’cause the Coe’s coming to get your senate seat, in about 2 terms.

That being said, as a political scholar, I firmly believe the whole paradigm of the party political system in Australia needs a radical overhaul whereby, the left of the liberal party and right of the labor party form a centreist party, the greens are left on the left and the conservatives are left on the right. The union movement, if it wans to stay politically involved, needs to go back to its roots by selling its vote on each issue to whomever gives it the best deal on that issue, and have any of its political representatives remain on the cross benches otherwise.

This however does come with the added cost of perpetual minority, or at the least loose coalition, government.

That’s it in a nutshell. It’s difficult to write a thesis on the issue on the riotact.

Frances said :

It is possible to be socially progressive and economically conservative you know. Unless you learn that, you’ll never win government.

If they did I’d be really tempted to vote for them. Not for the current lot though.

Reduce the size and scope of the ACT bureaucracy, focus on the delivery of essential services. We’re one city and not a big one at that – just stop pretending to be anything more important and special than a city council.

In-source the essential services again, like garbage collection. (I don’t necessarily think this is at odds with my first point. There are functions and services Government should provide, and ones they don’t need to.)

Stop the cheap pointscoring by opposing necessary, if unpopular, reforms like those recommended by the Henry tax review.

25 MLA’s is fine if they are accessible – pretty much a replacement for Canberra Connect.

Annual vehicle inspections required for rego renewal.

… Oh – and give Canberra motorsport enthusiasts somewhere to enjoy their pastime.

Lastly, maybe change their party name? I don’t think being associated with their Federal-level counterparts is doing them any great favours.

I’m a Liberal too but I can’t vote for the ultra conservatives like Z Seselja, Guliar Jones, Alistair Coe, Vicki Dunne and so on (sigh – is the list endless) so I end up voting all over the place. Come on Libs get some policies that will resonate with your electorate. It is possible to be socially progressive and economically conservative you know. Unless you learn that, you’ll never win government.