New political party on deck for the ACT

Most contributors who have participated in this debate have done so are anonymously.

I guess this depends how you define anonymity. Personally I know none of the “named” people speaking for CAP, however I am familier with the postings of many of the other contributers to this thread from the last few years. So I actually feel, when following this discussion that the named people are much more anonymouse then say Thumper, who I always picture as a kind of slow, lovable bunny rabbit.

Greens MLA Deb Foskey’s amendments to ACT electoral legislation, to be debated next week in the Assembly, include

* A return to the 6m rule for handing out How-to-Votes, as applies at federal elections
* making parties disclose their donations before the election rather than after it
* requiring property developers to disclose their political donations whenever they make a development application
* keeping “non-party” groups on the ballot paper, to ensure political parties don’t have too much advantage over independent candidates.

There are long odds on any of these sensible amendments getting up.

Your point about preference flows from Greens votes proves nothing beyond the fact that 80% of Greens voters at the last election preferred the ALP over the Liberals, which is unsurprising in the least. It doesn’t take a genius to see that Greens voters are more likely to be socially progressive than average, and further that the ALP has a stronger reputation for being socially progressive than the Liberals.

You could try and distribute a HTV card, but since it’s illegal to give them out in close proximity to a polling place (100m, in the ACT) you’re not going to have much success with that.

aresbandit22

If you read Greens policies you would see that thee is no proposal to legalise all sorts of drugs, or indeed ANY currently illicit drugs.

I’d be interested in you view of Greens policies on health and hospitals, or on children and young people, for example, instead.

ACT Greens policies are being reviewed, but Australian Greens policies (with which ACT Greens policies need to be consistant) are available on the website – http://www.greens.org.au.

CharlieBell said :

Hey people, in this town you don’t just get one vote. Every electorate elects 5 (or 7) members. You get to number lots of boxes to help rank the candidates. Your number 2, 3, 4 votes are almost as important as your number 1. You could vote 1 CAP, 2 Labor, 3 Lib if you want. If you vote for what we already have you’ll just get the same people again. What we really need is good people in the Assembly, not some bunch of party drones who all do what they are told.

Hey CharlieBell, nice try, just goes to prove my point to Caf about preferences, maybe it should look like this, 1 CAP, 2 Lib, 3 The motorist party 4 Labor 4 Anyone but the Greens, Last The Greens Party (not happy with a party that wants to legalise all sorts of drugs and makes that as more important than our children, hospitals, policing and safety).

caf said :

arsebandit22: You clearly have no idea how Hare-Clark works. Parties can’t lodge group voting tickets, the order of candidates names is randomised within their group, and HTV card aren’t allowed to be distributed at polling stations. The practical upshot is that parties can’t distribute preferences (they can’t even directly influence which of their own candidates is elected preferentially).

Thanks Caf for your version of Hare Clarke, you may want to study the system a little closer before you open your mouth and show how much you don’t know, of course they can influence preferences just have a look at the preference flows from the Greens at the last 3 ACT elections 80% to labor, why do you think they have 9 seats, they didn’t win them on first preferences from themselves.

It doesn’t take much to put out a how to vote card saying vote for CAP as your first preference and then Green and then Labor, guess who eventually gets the vote. If you are going to have your say at least be factual.

I don’t quite understand the rational behind the secrecy but if there is someone out there that could please let me know how to get in touch with someone from CAP I would greatly appreciate it.

Hey people, in this town you don’t just get one vote. Every electorate elects 5 (or 7) members. You get to number lots of boxes to help rank the candidates. Your number 2, 3, 4 votes are almost as important as your number 1. You could vote 1 CAP, 2 Labor, 3 Lib if you want. If you vote for what we already have you’ll just get the same people again. What we really need is good people in the Assembly, not some bunch of party drones who all do what they are told.

@ cambrus; seeing as though you chose not to answer my previous questions (comment 67) i’ll assume you dont have answers to those concerns; and i’ll ask a few easier questions; how can you claim that you are willing to work with both sides of govt. when slandering stanhope to such a level? If elected how do you intend on increasing police numbers to cater for a growing city? Where do you expect to find the funds needed to improve conditiomns of canberra roads? How do you intend on finding the staff needed to open new, drastically needed, hospital beds? (where are you going to find the money to pay for the support staff (cooks cleaners etc)needed for these new beds?) If there is a minority govt which side would you support? (and why shouldn’t voters just support that party?)

again its not good enough to simply say policies will be released in due course when nobody knows what you stand for; in govt there there will events which need swift decisive action and voters need to know where you stand in order to make a decision that you’re the right/wrong to make those decisive actions. In all honesty you seem completely out of your depth on this page; god help you if you actually fluke your way into a seat.

The joy of anonymity is that, at least in theory, one can engage the issues and the way they are addressed and expressed by others without any personal baggage creeping in. For those who work for government agencies, or the media or large commercial bodies or as contractirs to government, it is a mechanism to say things that in the workplace would be countercultural and seen as contrary to an established policy.

I don’t know anyone from CAP personally (to my knowledge), but I am delighted by this opportunity to discuss whether an entity devoid of express policy can be considered a political party. External silence suggests internal unresolved debates and that points the way to later explosions. But, for the third time, who would CAP back as a minority government? Or, another way, to whom will they suggest that preferences go?

Cambrus’ only policy to date seems to be to finish off Stanhope. Some may think that commendable – I don’t agree, because those in his own party and those on the other side would all seem out of their depth in a puddle of dried spit. He seems like an adult.

to Ant: You said ‘Many people are supporting you’. This support is appreciated of course. Many of the comments posted have been relevant and thoughtful, including your own. You added ‘but you seem to be saying that we are all bad and against you? This was certainly not my intention. If I say something it can be taken at the same face value that Astrojax mentioned. You also said ‘If you … feel unable to engage in rational debate with people who don’t “use their own names”, then the door’s over there’. I am quite capable of carrying on a rational debate even if the protagonist is anonymous. In fact even more so. Caroline Ambrus

arsebandit22: You clearly have no idea how Hare-Clark works. Parties can’t lodge group voting tickets, the order of candidates names is randomised within their group, and HTV card aren’t allowed to be distributed at polling stations. The practical upshot is that parties can’t distribute preferences (they can’t even directly influence which of their own candidates is elected preferentially).

Wake up Canberra this party is full of disenfranchised labor voters, where do you think their second preferences will go (to Labor obviously just like the the looney smacked up Greens).

Most contributors who have participated in this debate have done so are anonymously. This is not transparent or accountable. It enables you to make comments without taking any responsibility. If you are concerned about transparency in government I would suggest that you start with your own behavior on this web site.

now you’re getting really ludicrous. this isn’t a transparent political campaign site, but a local issues blog for anyone with anything – sensible or otherwise – to say about anything to do with the ACT – whom you and your cronies seek to represent. you would do well to not mock or harangue us here as we are your electorate. and you would also do well to take our comments at face value as you see fit because for all their vehemence or sardonic tenor contain some real clues as to what the ACT voter wants.

‘cambrus’ as a ficsuit does not tell us your name, caroline, even if closely based on it. and a policy to post on riot-act under your real names when dozens of other local [prospective and actual] politicians before you have already done so is hardly revolutionary and vote-spinning. if this is all CAP stands for, it can sit down again for mine…

Ms Ambrus, your tone is not conducive to positive debate. Many of us have politely raised issues and concerns, but rather than discussing those, you’ve adopted a sanctimonious tone.

Many people are supporting you, but you seem to be saying that we are all bad and against you? This does not bode well for your party’s future success.

If you don’t like the organisation of the forum you’re in, and feel unable to engage in rational debate with people who don’t “use their own names”, then the door’s over there.

The CAP came into being because of the Stanhope Government’s increasing arrogance, lack of accountability and transparency. This Government has systematically removed or debauched those checks and balances meant to modify government excesses and keep governance honest. I would hope that contributors to this site are concerned about these issues.

Most contributors who have participated in this debate have done so are anonymously. This is not transparent or accountable. It enables you to make comments without taking any responsibility. If you are concerned about transparency in government I would suggest that you start with your own behavior on this web site.

You should also note that CAP members, namely myself, Caroline Ambrus (cambrus), James Sizer and Mike Crowther have commented under their own names. This is not only talking the talk, it is walking the walk. Perhaps we could start off the CAP policy debate by calling this a policy.

Just promise to put the police contract out to tender and see how many votes that sucks in.

CAP – I’d keep it simple.

Focus on a few key things – say more police, shorter waiting times for hospitals, and better access to GPs. (Noone can seriously be against any of these.)

Possibly greater community involvement in planning decisions (getting trickier).

If you try to have a policy on everything under the sun you will get too bogged down, and noone will know what you stand for.

@ cambrus or another CAP person; hospital waiting times in emergency have been in the news a lot of late; if elected how do you intend on reducing them? A percieved leinency in criminal sentencing as been a point of contention lately, if elected how do you intend to satsify the community on this matter while still maintaing a just court system? Housing affordabiltiy is becoming a significant issue in the lead up to the election, how do you intend to alleiviate this if elected?

It’s not good enough to simply say policies will be released in due time; if elected you will be subject to ‘events’ which will require swift policy decisions; if you cant do that here than what hope do you have if you do win a seat?

Thumper – nice sentiment about waiting to see what CAP has got, but (a) do they have anything and (b) do they all have the same thing, or enough of the same thing to be at least coherent? And I still don’t know if they’d back the ALP or the Libs in a minority government. I only get one vote, and I’d need a lot of persuading to part with it for people who seem to be posing as non-politicians.

Ingee,

I’ve been around a while, but your comments above are straight out of Young Lab/Lib.

I can appreciate a Devil’s Advocate, but mate, this is just a bit too intense.

I’m pretty sure I’m not going out on a limb here when I say that the majority of voters want their elected representatives to govern – not continually ask the good people of Canberra what we think they should be doing. If we don’t like what they’re doing, or we think someone else can do it better, we’ll let them know on polling day. You get too touchy-feely with teh constituency and you end up smelling like those soft-head douche-bags in the Democrats (remember them? Weren’t they a bunch of really useful engines).

It’s not about dictatorship or totalitarianism, its about leadership. Standope has it (although he’s an A-Class tool), the Liberals dream about it and you guys seems to want to distance yourself from it.

Tell me, what are you lot going to consult about? All you’ll manage to dredge up is the same dickheads with nothing to do of an evening other than wander off to you focus groups to peddal their own little barrowfuls of retarded special interest polices like saving our bankrupt, dysfunctional schools, give me better health services for free, build me new – more – wider bike lanes, stop the world developing near my house … I could go on.

Ingeegoodbee, We seem to be having a debate about polarities. On one hand we have community consultation and on the other hand tyrannical rule. Would you care to identify the viable middle ground between the two which is perhaps what grass root politics is all about. As for your repeated comment ‘just another policy free zone’, perhaps you would care to identify those other policy free zones to which you refer.

Oh great, we’re not getting potential candidates with the balls to make decisions, we’re getting home-spun muppets who have to run back to their constituency for help every time they’re faced with a decision.

You’re just another policy free zone.

Consulting with community groups is good on the face of it, but what about issues where you’ve got highly organised lobby/pressure groups that don’t necessarily reflect the views of most people? Reproductive health is one such area that springs to mind.

Community groups are convenient becasue they’re organised and contactable, but there’s potential danger there.

When a party has set policies, then the people vote for them if they like the policies. I guess you could say that it’s too late by then, but if we don’t know what peopel stand for, we could be getting all kinds of weird baggage.

At least some broad policy platforms to show where the party stands on the basic things. A policy of wide consultation (with the method of consultation) could underpin all that.

Ingeegoodbee stated ‘people coming together to form a political party would be expected to be of one mind on a range of key issues, so a basic platform of policies would be a no-brainer …’ So lets create that basic platform that Ingeegoodbee craves.

Off the top of my individual’s head I would say: water security: pray a lot for rain or pay the water diviner more money; education: compulsory schooling until 30; financial management: bring on the gravy train; health care: phase out health care for anyone over sixty who is not receiving a six digit income. I could go on… like capital punishment for politicians who tell lies and break promises.

Ingeegoodbee’s concept of how political parties are formed and how they function is a tad simplistic. If CAP members who ‘came together’ were of one mind on a range of issues, I would be wondering from which planet they had arrived. A party that arises from the community has the mandate and the duty to consult with the community before arriving at policies that reflect the community consensus. This takes time and thoughtful consideration which is why Mr Stanhope fails to consult with community groups. Don’t be taken in by his meet the people scam which is coming to a centre near you soon.

Ingeegoodbee just might have to wait until I convince the rest of the Community Alliance Party that my policies have merit, end of story.

I agree, holding back on policy are the realm of established parties. New parties need to get on their soapbox and promise to change the world in order to get listened to.

The astonishing silence from CAP on the policy front highlights the fact that they have no real idea what they’re on about – as a simple point of logic, people coming together to form a political party would be expected to be of one mind on a range of key issues, so a basic platform of policies would be a no-brainer …

Entrenching the widely held view that CAP talks the talk but isn’t up to walking the walk, hinting that there might be some conceivable strategic reason for announcing polices on their terms rather than being open, forthright and transparent they do nothing but reinforce the view that they have something to hide, some fundamental aspect of their policy framework that would unsettle the electorate.

It’s amusing to imagine that they might even believe that they’re in a position to play like the big boys – holding back policy substance and letting the incumbents dig their own hole, relying on voter dissatisfaction alone … even this would be remotely plausible, if they actually had any policies to reveal on their own terms – the fact is they don’t … education – ummmm we’ll get back to you … water security – whats that? … health care – take two aspirins and call me in the morning … financial management – we’re still trying to recruit an accountant as a member … I could go on.

It’s a policy free zone. End of story.

Obviously, CAP needs more time to come up with its policies. But for now, maybe CAP can grant the good people on this forum a sneak peek into what it stands for.

Your time starts now.
Q1. Recumbent bikes: good or bad?
Q2. Mungbean Patty or medium-rare Rump Steak?
Q3. George Harcourt or Shooters?
Q4. Hillary or Obama?
Q5. Who would you go gay for – Standope or Zed?

cap is coming to us with itself in its hand, begging us for time to reveal itself. the time for action is upon a new party if they are to have any [positive] effect in the forthcoming election. guff about major party hacks looking for dirt is bollocks – if the policies are robust, the community CAP purports to represent won’t be put off and should see through dirty politics.

i wouldn’t vote for an unknown quantity, even if the known quantity is completely pants at what it does, and i would hope the other voters would similarly not punt and compromise my democracy with their whims.

tell us, what are CAP’s intentions on energy security, water security, public transport, taxes and education? what will you do about same sex unions? what about seeking ACT representation in national sporting competitions (A-league, AFL, etc)? what will you do for community arts? what leadership will the ACT have in what issues of national significance?

how will the ACT look in ten years time with CAP playing a significant role in its future? and without it??

why should we vote for someone who wants to be voted for? aren’t they always going to make the worst politicians?

Mike Crowther said:

Mike Crowther said :

It’s all very easy for those who weren’t affected to say “just move on..” , but we are a community … This attitude of “stuff Thawa, it’s their fault if they want to live out there,,,” “stuff bike riders, they’re all suicide jockey’s”…. “stuff schools, if people want to have kids that’s not my problem..” does nothing to enhance life for all of us. Do you want to live in a community or a corporation? I lived in NSW inc. under Greiner and I can promise you it was no fun.

OK, I wholeheartedly agree with you here. Now, if you are going to highlight this tendency we’ve grown into, to focus on selfish, narrow interests at the expense of the community as a whole, then I think you might be on to something. I think there’s a general feeling around of being tired of governments pandering to greed and self-interest at the expense of the community as a whole. I reckon that a party highlighting this, and giving an alternative, might provide a viable option to the older parties.

Even the new federal Labor government is following Howard’s Way, focussing on a certain group (I dare not speak its name) and promising buckets of shekels for them. This certain group would benefit much more from that money being spent on public utilities and services rather than being funnelled into their pockets.

If CAP’s policies reflect in a cohesive way this viewpoint, then CAP might be a real force at the next election.

to Ingeegoodbee: Your assumption that CAP is a ‘policy free zone’ is incorrect. I repeat ‘CAP will reveal all when it is appropriate which may or may not be soon’ which means that policies will be forthcoming.

CAP will reveal all when it is appropriate which may or may not be soon

So its a policy free zone.

Cambrus – thanks for that. It’s not impatience, just wondering why the CAP is bothering to run up what amounts to a blank flag and seeing if anyone salutes it. Bad timing – bearing in mind that the election is only a few months away.

But my first question hasn’t been answered. To rephrase it – the Assembly has 17 seats. Say the ALP and the Libs get 7 each, CAP gets two and Foskey is inexplicably re-elected. Who does CAP get behind? Is it predetermined (ie, a de facto coalition) or is it based on the proportion of the popular vote or who is prepared to adopt most of CAP’s nebulous/nonexistent policies or who offers the CAP members the best inducements by way of ministries, speakerships etc? Or are we going to have new Chief Minister every week, as CAP sways in the breeze? The fence is pretty narrow, and CAP is going to have to get off it at some time. Until CAP answers this stuff, it won’t be able to be taken seriously.

Thumper — on the suggestion that “most people agree that Stanhope should go”. I can’t recall a survey – can you identify when it was taken and published?

For mine (a) Stanhope is not the greatest talent in the universe but (b) no-one on his side or the other is within coo-ee of him. This probably means the ALP is dead meat when he chucks it in, but it doesn’t mean that we should get rid of him now because there is no replaceent – Barr or Seselja might eventually show some adult characteristics, but Corbell, Gallagher, Smyth, Stefaniak? Never. Forget the rest of the majors. Mulcahy might be ok for the board of a local bowls club. Foskey – just don’t.

I have seen a little of Catherine Carter from the Property Council on the news lately. While fairly one-dimensional and predictable, she seems articulate and across her brief. Surely she would be better than pretty well the entire Lib team announced recently?

To VicePope and the other impatient bloggers, as stated, CAP will reveal all when it is appropriate which may or may not be soon. Like ‘Topsy’ in ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’ political parties are not born fully grown.

To Ingeegoodbee, Such comments as ‘pretty simple, you build a bridge and then get over it’ is no help to somebody whose house is gone, whose bank account is empty and whose insurance policy is a day out of date. It is just like telling an accident victim with two broken legs to ‘take up your bed and walk’.

Also please read my comments again that ”The Community Alliance Party evolved from the original group that protested Stanhope’s foray into influencing the justice system…. The CAP amounts to more than being the remnants of the bushfire debacle’. These comments do not mean that the CAP’s reason for being is because some of its members had their homes destroyed in 2003. It also does not mean that bushfires are going to be the central plank in CAP’s policy platform. The key words in my comments were ‘evolved’ and ‘remnants’. As you should know ‘evolve’ is a process of development and change and ‘remnants’ is the residual appendix in the evolutionary march to the mess we are in today.

Yeah well I was affected by the fires too and I haven’t had any problem mving on – it’s pretty simple, you build a bridge and then get over it. The hand-wringers who want to draw it out are welcome to their lot in life, but it sure dosn’t warrant a political party.

While by no means a supported of the Standope government, I never had a problem with the legal challenges to the coronial inquiry as I certainly believed that Doogan was going on some sort of fishing expediation rather than concentrating on the task at hand.

Mike Crowther/Cambrus – no discourtesy is intended, it’s simply that, after 5 years, a couple of intervening elections and a couple of inquiries including one of the longest inquests ever, it’s probably better government for all to leave the fire behind, having learnt what we can.

My main point was, and continues to be, that it is not reasonable to expect people to vote for personalities rather than policies, and that the CAP has been very quiet on the latter issue. Some fine people have been elected on the basis of their personal attributes – but so was Hitler. (I am not, for the record, suggesting that the CAP is the Nazi party in drag or that any of its members are in any way similar to people associated with the lamentable Third Reich. It’s just that I don’t want to buy a pig in a poke and have it turn out to be rancidly loony).

Can we take it from Cambrus’ personal comments about Mr Stanhope that, if the CAP wound up with the balance of power, it would suppport a Liberal minority government? If so, people should know in advance.

It’s very easy to say to fire victims ‘move on’ when you haven’t been affected. We were and it was very traumatic and we are still trying to ‘move on’. The Community Alliance Party evolved from the original group that protested Stanhope’s foray into influencing the justice system. Because the group members actually dared to express their concerns, they were exposed to the tyrannical side of ACT politics. The group’s experience with the Stanhope Government’s arsenal of dirty tricks was the driving force behind the formation of the Party. I joined CAP as I have also been on the receiving end of the Government’s maladministration, misfeasance, malice, misstatements and it chronic misanthropy, if you will forgive the alliterations. The CAP amounts to more than being the remnants of the bushfire debacle. CAP policies are in the pipeline and will be released when it is appropriate, not when the media or you petulant motor mouthed bloggers demand it.

ACT governance was not designed to be ruled by a majority government, otherwise a senate would have been included in the self government goodies. If voters want more of the same, God forbid, just vote the same mob in and get what you deserve. Perhaps a statue of Stanhope will eventuate. What is needed is to arouse the Rip-Van-Winkle Liberal opposition with support from our elected CAP members or, otherwise to cull the tyrannical tendencies of the Stanhope Government with a little bondage and discipline. You choose! Caroline Ambrus

sexynotsmart, I’ll try and field that Q. (Though I was not a bushfire victim.) Implementation of the findings of the inquiry may be a nice start. (Ask any firey what they think of this government). A guarantee that no Government will ever again spend loads of public money on legal challenges to try and stop a coronial inquest for face saving reasons …investigation of a possible cancer cluster …just to mention a few.

It’s all very easy for those who weren’t affected to say “just move on..” , but we are a community. This attitude of “stuff Thawa, it’s their fault if they want to live out there,,,” “stuff bike riders, they’re all suicide jockey’s”…. “stuff schools, if people want to have kids that’s not my problem..” does nothing to enhance life for all of us. Do you want to live in a community or a corporation? I lived in NSW inc. under Greiner and I can promise you it was no fun.

James, I understand your point of not announcing policy ahead of time. But the question earlier in the thread about “victims of the 2003 Bushfires” hasn’t been answered. What is CAP seeking?

Those who suck too early often end up spitting out what looked like a lolly and turned out to be ….. something not as nice. Hence my caution.

Ant, Vicepope;

As Pam once once said to Tommy, I think i’ll suck it and see.

Well said, VicePope. In a nutshell, claiming to be Different is all very well, but we’ve seen this before, conglomerations running on a touchstone issue, but the individuals who got elected turned out to be a very mixed bag, with some very “interesting” personal beliefs and axes to grind.

If such a party is to be successful, it needs to work out what it stands for on all the issues (listed by VicePope), to present a viable alternative to the established parties.

I am sure we’d all love a real government of Canberra people who want Canberra to work, rather than Federal Politician wannabes and trainees, but they have to be viable (and preferably sensible).

It’s always good to see someone having a go. Eventually, though, the spotlight shines and the glistening new party has to say what it wants, so people can work out if they really like what it stands for. Ideally not just replacing the current lot of drones with either the Lib drones or some new drones of its own.

Some thoughts. The fires – happened five years ago. A terrible time, to be sure, with some terrible losses and maybe some things could have been done better. But perhaps its time for the comunity to move on. bread and circuses (eg dragways, burnout tracks) – for or against? Taxes and charges – up, down or the same? ACT governance – do we need what we have or something smaller or bigger? Smoking, gambling and alcohol controls – for or against, at what level? ACT public sector – is it value for money? Green energy? Heritage v housing development? Water rationing? The right size population for the city? Infill? High levels of unserviced construction in Civic? Hospitals and schools – struggle on or outsource?

You see, once you start to take a view on any of these things or hundreds of others, two things happen. First, the punters get an informed choice. Second, there are massive hissy fits within the party (and it’s not just the CAP – see what the NSW ALP is doing about electricity privatisation). People say rude things and walk away. It’s not enough to say you’re sane and different – so are most people. A “party” where everyone says and does what they want on pretty much anything isn’t a party – it’s an incoherent cluster of independents looking only for power or influence.

‘keep the bastards honest’ still works for me.

better than a majority any day.

What makes you think if we had Val on our ticket we would have a chance?

Mate if you don’t understand that, then you might want to start refunding any donations you guys might have solicited. The reality of the ACT electoral system is such that candidate recognition is crucial, particularly when you don’t have a party machine behind you – dredging up a handful of home-spun muppets or as you like to spin them – grass roots candidates – simply clutters the ballot paper.

It also dosn’t help that the CAP is a policy free zone. All the parties do health, education, environment and loaw and order – what makes you lot believe that you could do a better job – or do you simple want to harp on from the sidelines like the Democrats or the Greens, like dags hanging from a sheeps bum.

We need some alternatives – sounds good to me.

I distrust politicians, and those who aspire to become them are twice as worse

does this make Troy Williams the least distrusted? he must be the only newbie to have had a good chance of election in 2008 (according to the Crimes) and decide not to, spending his time doing business type stuff where you get to work with grown-ups. every other loony has put their hand up so far.

What exactly do you stand for?

All I’ve heard so far is:

-2003 Bushfires: why is that still relevant enough to base a party on?
-will work with both major parties: so why should I vote for you then?

Well come on then, let’s see the policies, and I expect if there’s any crazed far righters or weirdos, you’ll mention it, too.

Apart from the fact he is as helpful as a frozen turd, you do have to feel for a CM of a principality that cant generate an income.

stable, productive and efficient – I hope you’re not referring to the current gubmint. Wht we need is a local council not a bunch of grandstanding wankers.

Someone who is prepared to have a go. Well let’s see what you got over the next couple of months and see if you can stick to a few promises you make. Stanhopes promises are about as watertight as a seive and he blows cash on anything that takes his fancy whilst neglecting the ACT and focusing on ‘world issues’. The guys a joke and I would vote for a turnip before him in the next election.

A decent alternative to the to two majors? Bring it on!

Keep us updated, guys.

You really ought to get that Tourettes looked at.

Ingeegoodbee, Happy to dream on.

You put it in print it can now come back to bite us all. It is really pleasing to hear that it would be hard to find someone who didn’t know about the CAP. Except for S4anta, oh and anyone else who has posted so far, or reads this and doesn’t know what you mean.

What makes you think if we had Val on our ticket we would have a chance?

Where did the touchy feely bit come from?

You contradict youreslf when you say that everyone knows about the CAP, but then say unknown means unloved. Obviously you need time to adjust to new ideas like realising that there are things in this big wide world you know very little about.

Have a nice day
Vote 1 CAP

Until earlier today you most likely had never heard of the CAP

Dream on sunshine, its a small town, I’d actually be surprised if I came across someone who didn’t know about the CAP.

I wouldn’t flatter yourself if you lot have managed to speak to a few MLAs and party officials it’t pretty meaningless unless you have a seat at the table and the voting system dosn’t favour touchy-feely grass roots douche-bags. You might get a look in if you get Val Jeffreys on your ticket but its a sad reality that unknown means unloved – you’ll just end up dividing the anti-Labor vote.

Ingeegoodbee,
Nice to see you can make an argument without resorting to personal abuse.
(“you tools”). And so brave of you to put your real name to it too!

What we ‘brand’ ourselves is irrelevant. We either represent a good cross section of the Community or we don’t. If we don’t we’ll sink into oblivion. If we do we win seats. I am in a better position to gauge that because I’m in, and your not.

I’m not here trying to convince anyone how they should vote, I was simply correcting an inaccurate statement that we are a single issue party.

Ingeegoodbee, wait for a call?

What if calls have already been made, and not just the Libs?

You are entitled to your view and I am sure that you are not alone. No one has been asked to cast a vote as yet. Until earlier today you most likely had never heard of the CAP before and therefore probably have nothing to compare.

James,

Thanks for that mate.

As I said in the original post, good luck to all concerned! I look forward to seeing what comes of it.

Nice try Mike, but every issue you raise is a legitimate concern of the ACT Liberals – why the hell would any respectable Canberra piss their vote into the breeze hoping that a bunch of newbie amateurs would have any better chance of changing any of that? Anyone, anyone, Bueller? …. tumble weed rolls by ….

The sad reality is that any group trying to brand themselves as a broad cross-section of the Canberra community representing a diverse range of backgrounds, interest and political persuasions is really just a recipe for disaster as competing egos strive to choke the b’jesus out of each other while the financial backers watch helplessly from the sidelines as the whole tawdry mess goes down the toilet.

Zed’s not going to jump into bed with you tools, partly because the Liberal machine wont stand for it, and partly because its smarter to sit it out and see if you lot can win a seat – if your relevant after the election you’ll no doubt get a call but don’t waste your time sitting by the phone before then.

All fair comments S4anta.

And that distrust of politicians has been part of the catalyst that has brought people together to form the CAP.

There is deliberately very little released on the net about the CAP at this stage, so your inability to find much is completely understandable. Now imagine how you would feel if you were a Lib/Labor party staffer tasked with finding dirt or something to fight off. With very little available they are restricted in what lies to make up.

This is a new Party and something completely new to ACT politics. Policy is not based around promising what will buy votes and not about grandiose schemes to inflate the ego of the all powerful leader. This is a grassroots party representing people to act in the best interests of the ACT as a whole.

Who are the community? Just look around, even in old RiotACT posts about the dissatisfied people of the ACT. Yes, I may have spoken out first but there are regular posters on here who know a lot more than I can say at this stage

There is still six months of campaigning to take place (yes sorry we will all have to endure more political advertising and MLA pictures in the paper, keen to get press for attending the opening of an envelope). Plenty of opportunity for proper analysis of all parties platforms.

I am far from a supporter of stanhope. i hope that he doesnt get re-elected, same goes for liberals in the ACT. Before you continue this castigation, i would like to see where it is that you stand, and what alternatives you have for us all.

As for Canberra Governance… no comment.

Strewth S4anta! Where are you getting your information, the Stanhope foundation for goodtruth ?
Never having been prepared to commit to a political party in my life, I joined this new party at it’s inception. It contains people interested in all facets of Canberra governance. Fed up with what is being served up to us. This government said they wouldn’t close schools and after the last election they did. They promised they’d build a Dragway and they reneged on it. They decided to spend up on a luxury gaol that will cost us $20Mil per year as opposed to the previous $10Mil we were paying NSW. They raise rates and charges (though we are constantly in surplus), they commit to build an arboretum while appendix burst in hospital waiting areas, the current workers compensation act has enough holes to drive a truck through, buildings collapse on cars while the Workcover approval ink is still dry, money is splashed out on important art (like statues of disgraced politicians) while we don’t have enough cops to respond to….ahhh, yeah, must be a single issue party…..someone said so.

And why so much agro towards the Bushfire victims? For gods sake, this current government tried to nobble a coronial inquest!
Doesn’t that bother anyone just slightly?

As an aside James, when you mention of the groundswell of support, i distrust politicians, and those who aspire to become are twice as worse. No offence my friend but after dealing with these bodies for the best of ten year, if i could get a buck for the amount of time I have heard those same words in my short life, not even the Sultan of Brunei could make that bet.

Hence the reluctance to quote Mssr Hingee’s statement.

I sincerely hope you are correct JAMES. My albeit quick search found very little information on CAP, and as noted in a previous comment, I look forward to seeing what you all table closer to the election. Here’s hoping the ground swell of anti Lib/Labor sentiment works in your favour.

Hingee is a whinger on the same thing. Boring. Has Reynolds joined the party yet?

There might be a few here regretting that they spoke before finding out any facts.

If you only knew!!!

The Community Alliance Party is most surely is not a single issue party. As the name implies it is an alliance of ACT communities. Let’s all hope that S4ANTA and Sonic are of the same mindset. Because even as the one source S4ANTA relied upon noted the party membership (those prepared to put their money where their mouth is) include all sectors of the ACT Community. If you refer way back as far as page B3 of last Saturday’s Canberra Times you will see that this well supported, well organised and well funded group will work with both parties (something neither Libs or Labor do with eachother)and as far as splitting the Lib vote, even the Canberra Times are already billing them as Zed’s greatest chance by demonstrating that he can work with them.

Perhaps it might also be that Labor’s only chance might be to work with the Party which really does represent the people of the ACT.

People in droves have given up on both the major parties in the ACT. They want people to come before party policy.

I hope if elected their first policy will be to pay back all the charity that was given to them by the generous citizens of Canberra.

To think if these morons had home insurance there would be no issue.

I believe CAP plans on being far from a single issue party.

Single issue, waste of time. We need a broad-based group of sensible, committed people who want to look right across the territory. Even if this bushfire mob get someone in, they could turn out to be a crazed far right nightmare who holds the government to ransom for all kinds of things (married women not allowed to work, compulsory breeding, 6 cylinder cars mandatory and cats for all).

Thats the bueaty of a democracy my friend. It all depends on how many votes they can get. I reckon we’ll have to wait to see which electorates they choose to contest, and what the rest of the policy statements look like. Either way these little single issue parties make it easier for the more established parties (lib, labor democrats, greenouts etc) to get up under the hare clark system.

S4anta: what, all of them? Will they each take a turn in the seat or all pile on at once?

Another whinging minority group looking for a handout and believing that their pathetic circumstances somehow make them special … in reality they’ll dilute the anti-Labor vote ensuring that Labor get back in again – good on ya douche-bags.

A seat in the Legislative Assembly it appears.

So what are the bushfire victims after anyway? A complete acceptance of responsibility by the govt? A payout? An apology?

smashed the second link. Much apologies over lords. will neck and draw blood from a chicken in lieu of your wrath.