28 September 2012

Watt’s the answer

| Advertising Feature
Join the conversation
238
watts

My name is Matt Watts and I am a Liberal Candidate for Ginninderra in the October 20 Assembly election.

Regular readers would know me as the first candidate to donate Lego and participate in the RiotACT’s Candidate Lego Challenge (link). You may also have seen me at a shopping centre or at your front door, spreading the word that I’d be an effective local MLA.

I asked the RiotACT team to leave the comments functionality switched on so that we can have an open dialogue. The RiotACT team advised me that they’ll have to moderate anything that’s off-topic, yet I’m happy to answer general questions about my beliefs, background, policies, etc.

If you want the official Canberra Liberals policies, head here. Now – about me:

I was born in Sydney. My mum’s a teacher and my dad was trained as an electrical engineer, starting his career at the Sydney County Council before a couple of moves to now work for Boral. One grandfather was a plumber, and the other grandfather was a manager at Sunbeam back when they made quality products in Australia. I mention this background to enforce that, whilst I am an established public servant, and proud of the service I have performed for the community through my work, I wasn’t spawned within the APS bio-dome.
I joined the Department of Immigration as an APS 1 in 1999, straight after completing my HSC, with a view to supporting my studies via the APS. I commenced a Bachelor of Arts at Sydney Uni in 2000, with which I was mightily unimpressed (and it me, probably), so I soon got over that distraction and stayed with Immigration. I moved to Canberra in 2003.

I was involved in Immigration’s response to the Palmer and Comrie reports and, with my interest in administrative matters piqued, I resumed study and obtained my Master’s in Public Policy (specialising in social policy) from the ANU.

Work has taken me on deployments to remote areas; most recently I spent six months as a director on Christmas Island. I haven’t travelled much, but I enjoy experiencing new environments. My first overseas trip took me to Canberra’s Friendship City, Dili, and I was amazed at certain correlations between our two cities!

I am a Hash House Harrier, both locally and whenever I travel. It keeps me relatively fit and I’ve met people of really diverse backgrounds. I also enjoy reading widely including history, magazines on current affairs and comics, supporting live local music, whisky tasting, walking (which is handy because I’ve never had a driver’s license), reading and TV shows like Doctor Who.

At various levels over the years I’ve been a member of the Belconnen Community Council, the Australian Privacy Foundation, Neighbourhood Watch, the Australian Institute of Administrative Law, the Institute of Public Administration Australia, ACT Light Rail, Music ACT, Friends of the (Australian War) Memorial and Electronic Frontiers Australia. I was even involved in the CPSU at one stage. I’m also a Justice of the Peace. Being involved in my community is important to me.

I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state. I ran as a candidate for Ginninderra in 2008 and as Senator Humphries’ running mate in 2010 (I am likely to have been a Senator if I didn’t save Gaz from the path of a speeding van as we were crossing Northbourne Ave!).

I am especially interested in improved local service delivery, planning and infrastructure, liquor licensing, higher quality community consultation and strengthening the quality of public administration within the ACT Government, particularly with regards to unintended consequences. For example, the feel-good plastic bag “ban” has led to more non-biodegradable bag use in landfill and increased litter in our streets; government intervention is rarely a panacea. Government should serve the Canberra community more than it tries to socially engineer it.

If you want to meet me in person, I will be at the October Hall Markets in the afternoon, and I am at the Jamison “Trash and Treasure” every Sunday morning until the election.

Over to you…!

[authorised by stephen doyle – liberal party canberra]

Join the conversation

238
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

lostinbias said :

maxblues said :

I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.

Good. Ever since the Woolies Liquor became BWS it’s like they’ve done away with even the illusion of choice. I just hope that the Dickson Liquor store and the Local Liquor next to O’Neils get a bit of extra sales if this happens…

Good. As Mikey Robins said in his joint venture with Canberra goddess Helen Razer, the book that I have tried to live my life by…’3 Beers and a Chinese Meal’…”Think global, drink local”.
Dickson is indeed a perfect Canberra place to drink an odd number of beers and eat Asian.

maxblues said :

I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.

Good. Ever since the Woolies Liquor became BWS it’s like they’ve done away with even the illusion of choice. I just hope that the Dickson Liquor store and the Local Liquor next to O’Neils get a bit of extra sales if this happens…

Congratulations to Matt for getting this thread started. Will there be a 250th post party? Maybe Henry will invite us all over to his well-stocked basement. Unfortunately my basement is full of bodies. It’s tough being a serial killer and not being able to afford to recharge my electric car (do you think they will let me take bodies on the Electric Light rail?).
Whilst I’m ‘fessin up, I shall admit that I actually voted for Julia Gillard… but after much self analysis I now place this in the same regret/bad decision basket as when I voted for Mark Latham, seriously.
Anyway, who will get the magic 250th post? Maybe Noel Towell(sounds like a Christmas gift) can make a prediction. Gotta go, a serial killers work is never done.

maxblues said :

HenryBeerGuzzler did you miss the point that the breweries have stated that the carbon tax effect will not be applied until NEXT February?

Hang on, the bottlo owners have come back in time from next February when the carbon tax has forced everybody to live in caves and they have closed their bottlos NOW because they can’t afford to pay their electricity bills that they got next february before they came back in time.

Please confirm my understanding of Lalaliberal Land is correct?

maxblues said :

HenryBG said :

Gungahlin Al said :

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Turnbull is living proof you don’t have to be retard to be in the Liberal Party.

So much for the nutters in the Liberal Party and their alarmism:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/cost-of-carbon-tax-less-than-estimated-20121024-285se.html

“THE carbon tax has boosted the cost of living scarcely at all. Despite dire talk of an ”almost unimaginable” increase (Tony Abbott) and $100 for a Sunday roast (Barnaby Joyce) the first official consumer price figures show a far lower impact than predicted by the Treasury.
Last July, Treasury said the tax would push up the consumer price index 0.70 percentage points, adding $9.90 per week to average household costs. In return, households were given compensation averaging $10.10 per week.
But 0.70 percentage points looks like being an overestimate. Inflation figures for the September quarter – the one that encompasses almost all of the electricity and gas price rises – show them adding 0.44 points to the CPI. It’s a big figure, but not that much bigger than the usual September quarter slug.
Melbourne households have endured a 13.6 per cent increase in electricity prices – unwelcome but well short of previous September quarter jumps of 19 per cent and 21 per cent.
Advertisement
Nationwide, electricity and gas price rises have added 0.25 and 0.33 points to the consumer price index in the past two September quarters. Treasury expected the gas and electricity price hikes to account for only half of the 0.70 boost, the rest being accounted for by businesses that passed them on.
But Commonwealth Bank senior economist Michael Blythe makes the point that if the electricity and gas impact is about half what was expected, it is likely the total impact will be, too.
”It is looking as if the Treasury’s figure will be an overestimate rather than an underestimate,” he said.

HenryBeerGuzzler did you miss the point that the breweries have stated that the carbon tax effect will not be applied until NEXT February? Then frothy consumers will bearing the burden, landlords will begin using to increase leases (automatic in most commercial leases) and of course this too will be passed onto the consumer.
Probably nothing to do with the carbon tax, but I believe IGA Campbell will no longer sell liquor. It’s becoming a thirsty argument…

I don’t think you’re actually taking in the information you’re being provided with: this year’s electricity price rise is the lowest electricity price rise in 4 years.

And frankly, while it sadly isn’t legal for us to stockpile assault rifles and ammo in our cellars, I am however prepared for the coming bottlocalypse and have more than enough alcohol in my cellar and in my basement to last me several years.

HenryBG said :

Gungahlin Al said :

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Turnbull is living proof you don’t have to be retard to be in the Liberal Party.

So much for the nutters in the Liberal Party and their alarmism:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/cost-of-carbon-tax-less-than-estimated-20121024-285se.html

“THE carbon tax has boosted the cost of living scarcely at all. Despite dire talk of an ”almost unimaginable” increase (Tony Abbott) and $100 for a Sunday roast (Barnaby Joyce) the first official consumer price figures show a far lower impact than predicted by the Treasury.
Last July, Treasury said the tax would push up the consumer price index 0.70 percentage points, adding $9.90 per week to average household costs. In return, households were given compensation averaging $10.10 per week.
But 0.70 percentage points looks like being an overestimate. Inflation figures for the September quarter – the one that encompasses almost all of the electricity and gas price rises – show them adding 0.44 points to the CPI. It’s a big figure, but not that much bigger than the usual September quarter slug.
Melbourne households have endured a 13.6 per cent increase in electricity prices – unwelcome but well short of previous September quarter jumps of 19 per cent and 21 per cent.
Advertisement
Nationwide, electricity and gas price rises have added 0.25 and 0.33 points to the consumer price index in the past two September quarters. Treasury expected the gas and electricity price hikes to account for only half of the 0.70 boost, the rest being accounted for by businesses that passed them on.
But Commonwealth Bank senior economist Michael Blythe makes the point that if the electricity and gas impact is about half what was expected, it is likely the total impact will be, too.
”It is looking as if the Treasury’s figure will be an overestimate rather than an underestimate,” he said.

HenryBeerGuzzler did you miss the point that the breweries have stated that the carbon tax effect will not be applied until NEXT February? Then frothy consumers will bearing the burden, landlords will begin using to increase leases (automatic in most commercial leases) and of course this too will be passed onto the consumer.
Probably nothing to do with the carbon tax, but I believe IGA Campbell will no longer sell liquor. It’s becoming a thirsty argument…

Gungahlin Al said :

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Turnbull is living proof you don’t have to be retard to be in the Liberal Party.

So much for the nutters in the Liberal Party and their alarmism:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/cost-of-carbon-tax-less-than-estimated-20121024-285se.html

“THE carbon tax has boosted the cost of living scarcely at all. Despite dire talk of an ”almost unimaginable” increase (Tony Abbott) and $100 for a Sunday roast (Barnaby Joyce) the first official consumer price figures show a far lower impact than predicted by the Treasury.
Last July, Treasury said the tax would push up the consumer price index 0.70 percentage points, adding $9.90 per week to average household costs. In return, households were given compensation averaging $10.10 per week.
But 0.70 percentage points looks like being an overestimate. Inflation figures for the September quarter – the one that encompasses almost all of the electricity and gas price rises – show them adding 0.44 points to the CPI. It’s a big figure, but not that much bigger than the usual September quarter slug.
Melbourne households have endured a 13.6 per cent increase in electricity prices – unwelcome but well short of previous September quarter jumps of 19 per cent and 21 per cent.
Advertisement
Nationwide, electricity and gas price rises have added 0.25 and 0.33 points to the consumer price index in the past two September quarters. Treasury expected the gas and electricity price hikes to account for only half of the 0.70 boost, the rest being accounted for by businesses that passed them on.
But Commonwealth Bank senior economist Michael Blythe makes the point that if the electricity and gas impact is about half what was expected, it is likely the total impact will be, too.
”It is looking as if the Treasury’s figure will be an overestimate rather than an underestimate,” he said.

maxblues said :

Gungahlin Al said :

maxblues said :

…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close.

Carbon tax comes in (for top handful of polluters). Bottleshops close. Therefore bottleshops closed because of carbon tax.

Wood floats. Ducks float. Therefore ducks are made of wood.

Because correlation ALWAYS equals causation…not.

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Twice in a month I’m agreeing with HenryBG. WTF?

First let’s acknowledge the sad passing of Jimmy from the Wood Duck Inn. RIP
Secondly let’s mention the universally acknowledged effect the carbon tax will have on the CPI (higher than expected rise in September) which is used to calculate the twice yearly excise rise on your stubby of beer. No wood ducks about it, the carbon tax will increase the amount of excise the government extracts out of your stubbie. At the last beer price rise, on 1 Aug, the breweries made it clear in their correspondence that it was a normal excise/cost rise and that the effects of the carbon tax won’t kick in until the next excise rise on 1 Feb.
Thirdly, the unprecented number of bottleshops closing, is only happening since the introduction of the carbon tax. ‘Gold-plating’ has been going on for years with lack of regulation by the government but in the ten years prior to the introduction of the carbon tax, I can only think of one Canberra bottleshop closing and that was George’s at Braddon who I believe was offered a shitload by a wholesale baker who then turned it over to Ronald McDonald for a McCafe.
I would go on, but I have to duck off…

Thats a long post just to prove Gungahlin Al’s point.

Gungahlin Al said :

maxblues said :

…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close.

Carbon tax comes in (for top handful of polluters). Bottleshops close. Therefore bottleshops closed because of carbon tax.

Wood floats. Ducks float. Therefore ducks are made of wood.

Because correlation ALWAYS equals causation…not.

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Twice in a month I’m agreeing with HenryBG. WTF?

First let’s acknowledge the sad passing of Jimmy from the Wood Duck Inn. RIP
Secondly let’s mention the universally acknowledged effect the carbon tax will have on the CPI (higher than expected rise in September) which is used to calculate the twice yearly excise rise on your stubby of beer. No wood ducks about it, the carbon tax will increase the amount of excise the government extracts out of your stubbie. At the last beer price rise, on 1 Aug, the breweries made it clear in their correspondence that it was a normal excise/cost rise and that the effects of the carbon tax won’t kick in until the next excise rise on 1 Feb.
Thirdly, the unprecented number of bottleshops closing, is only happening since the introduction of the carbon tax. ‘Gold-plating’ has been going on for years with lack of regulation by the government but in the ten years prior to the introduction of the carbon tax, I can only think of one Canberra bottleshop closing and that was George’s at Braddon who I believe was offered a shitload by a wholesale baker who then turned it over to Ronald McDonald for a McCafe.
I would go on, but I have to duck off…

NoImRight said :

Holden Caulfield said :

I’m confused. Is a wood duck made of wood or duck?

How much wood would a wood duck duck if a would duck could duck wood?

I can’t even say that, let alone read it….

Just let it run from your tongue like splinters off a duck’s back.

Ouch!

colourful sydney racing identity3:50 pm 31 Oct 12

maxblues said :

thebadtouch said :

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

If the Greens are forming sub-committees of non-elected peeps to help Ratso do his thinking, then maybe there is yet a role for Matt to play in the political process…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close. The electricity bill for your average bottleshops is around $2000 A MONTH (more in some cases) this in unsustainable and I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.
Most of us enjoy a cold frothy but if something isn’t done about runaway power prices we will end up drinking hot ales POMMY style…blech!

moron.

Holden Caulfield said :

I’m confused. Is a wood duck made of wood or duck?

How much wood would a wood duck duck if a would duck could duck wood?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd3:28 pm 31 Oct 12

Holden Caulfield said :

I’m confused. Is a wood duck made of wood or duck?

more importantly, would you rather eat a wooden duck or fail to duck some wood( make what you will of the term wood)

Holden Caulfield3:13 pm 31 Oct 12

I’m confused. Is a wood duck made of wood or duck?

Gungahlin Al said :

Wood floats. Ducks float. Therefore ducks are made of wood.

Some ducks are made of wood. Decoy ducks. This interesting point has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change.

Gungahlin Al2:55 pm 31 Oct 12

maxblues said :

…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close.

Carbon tax comes in (for top handful of polluters). Bottleshops close. Therefore bottleshops closed because of carbon tax.

Wood floats. Ducks float. Therefore ducks are made of wood.

Because correlation ALWAYS equals causation…not.

You need to do a search on “carbon tax gold plating” and read up a bit on where the lion’s share of electricity price rises is going, and what electricity wholesalers are doing while they have the cover of the carbon tax to be pegged with the blame by people who know no better. And shockjocks on 2UE who do know better but choose to seldom let facts get in the way of a full-on beat-up. Even Malcolm Turnbull agrees: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/goldplating-lifts-power-prices-turnbull-20120811-2410x.html

Twice in a month I’m agreeing with HenryBG. WTF?

Geez…

Henry: argument/ debate. Whatever – I stand by my view that humans have made a significant impact on climate change!

NoImRight: merely commenting on how a closure of Bottle-Os will affect more than those who like cold beer at home, in reference to another’s comment. Relax champ, not making a climate change scare campaign.

HenryBG said :

Matt_Watts said :

He actually said that the debate was absolute crap, if I recall correctly, and the fact I can’t point out a simple fact that climate change has always existed whilst also stating that HUMANS HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT and still be attacked as a “denier” leads me to suspect he may have been onto something 🙂

He said “The argument is absolute crap” in a context clearly referring to the scientific realities as “the argument”.

I’d be very interested in finding out what this “debate” is that you refer to.

Would this be the “debate” between every scientific organisation in the world versus The Australian?

This is like going to a dinner party and shortly after the main course, somebody starts extolling the mystic virtues of the pyramid and notable UFO encounters they’ve read about….

Ah…HenryBloodyGreen you obviously attended the ACTUAL full-day Greens workshop where they spent the whole day trying to come up with a message for aliens of the space variety but failed. It’s sad when you set yourself a low standard but fail to achieve it,

Matt_Watts said :

maxblues said :

thebadtouch said :

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

If the Greens are forming sub-committees of non-elected peeps to help Ratso do his thinking, then maybe there is yet a role for Matt to play in the political process…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close. The electricity bill for your average bottleshops is around $2000 A MONTH (more in some cases) this in unsustainable and I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.
Most of us enjoy a cold frothy but if something isn’t done about runaway power prices we will end up drinking hot ales POMMY style…blech!

That’s worse news than you’d think… Many small on-license venues purchase certain products from bottle-Os… think bottles of scotch, etc. Those drink at home and at venues are affected.

The thing is, I was involved in issues before the election, and I’ll be involved afterwards.

Bottle shops are closing because of the Carbon Tax? And the follow up tragedy is other business will now suffer….somehow not made clear apart from a vague reference to scotch. Geez at least try to make a sane argument of it.

Matt_Watts said :

He actually said that the debate was absolute crap, if I recall correctly, and the fact I can’t point out a simple fact that climate change has always existed whilst also stating that HUMANS HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT and still be attacked as a “denier” leads me to suspect he may have been onto something 🙂

He said “The argument is absolute crap” in a context clearly referring to the scientific realities as “the argument”.

I’d be very interested in finding out what this “debate” is that you refer to.

Would this be the “debate” between every scientific organisation in the world versus The Australian?

This is like going to a dinner party and shortly after the main course, somebody starts extolling the mystic virtues of the pyramid and notable UFO encounters they’ve read about….

maxblues said :

thebadtouch said :

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

If the Greens are forming sub-committees of non-elected peeps to help Ratso do his thinking, then maybe there is yet a role for Matt to play in the political process…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close. The electricity bill for your average bottleshops is around $2000 A MONTH (more in some cases) this in unsustainable and I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.
Most of us enjoy a cold frothy but if something isn’t done about runaway power prices we will end up drinking hot ales POMMY style…blech!

That’s worse news than you’d think… Many small on-license venues purchase certain products from bottle-Os… think bottles of scotch, etc. Those drink at home and at venues are affected.

The thing is, I was involved in issues before the election, and I’ll be involved afterwards.

thebadtouch said :

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

If the Greens are forming sub-committees of non-elected peeps to help Ratso do his thinking, then maybe there is yet a role for Matt to play in the political process…like start an inquiry into why so many bottleshops are closing since the introduction of the carbon tax…Candamber has closed its Bunda St shop, Cox Kelly seem to have closed their doors and I hear the bottleshops next to LJ Hooker at Kippax is set to close. The electricity bill for your average bottleshops is around $2000 A MONTH (more in some cases) this in unsustainable and I think we will even see Woolworths close one of its BWS stores at Dickson after Christmas.
Most of us enjoy a cold frothy but if something isn’t done about runaway power prices we will end up drinking hot ales POMMY style…blech!

thebadtouch said :

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

Milk it matt,and who knows there could be a cup coming your way!

Matt, your 15 minutes of fame have passed. Let it go and move on. This thread has become redundant!

HenryBG said :

Matt_Watts said :

If you want to maintain the ideological divide, rather than focus on outcomes, that’s your choice.

This would be the ideological divide between those who accept reality and those who believe what they read in The Australian, right?

Tony Abbott himself said, “Climate Change is crap”. A very clear-cut case of denial – the word ‘denial’ being the technical term for somebody who rejects reality and the most apt way to describe his views.

Your views don’t appear much better: “Climate Change has always existed”. What’s that got to do with anything?
When a friend says, “my doctor says I have cancer”, do you give him, “Cancer has always existed”?
How does this red herring “focus on outcomes”?
Answer: it doesn’t. Like anybody with an untenable ideeology, you contradict yourself.

The science (not the ideology) says that a doubling of CO2 will result in around 3 degrees of warming. This is up there with the planet’s previous mass-extinction events.
We’re already 40% of the way to that doubling now.

He actually said that the debate was absolute crap, if I recall correctly, and the fact I can’t point out a simple fact that climate change has always existed whilst also stating that HUMANS HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT and still be attacked as a “denier” leads me to suspect he may have been onto something 🙂

Matt_Watts said :

If you want to maintain the ideological divide, rather than focus on outcomes, that’s your choice.

This would be the ideological divide between those who accept reality and those who believe what they read in The Australian, right?

Tony Abbott himself said, “Climate Change is crap”. A very clear-cut case of denial – the word ‘denial’ being the technical term for somebody who rejects reality and the most apt way to describe his views.

Your views don’t appear much better: “Climate Change has always existed”. What’s that got to do with anything?
When a friend says, “my doctor says I have cancer”, do you give him, “Cancer has always existed”?
How does this red herring “focus on outcomes”?
Answer: it doesn’t. Like anybody with an untenable ideeology, you contradict yourself.

The science (not the ideology) says that a doubling of CO2 will result in around 3 degrees of warming. This is up there with the planet’s previous mass-extinction events.
We’re already 40% of the way to that doubling now.

HenryBG said :

DrKoresh said :

Masquara said :

HenryBG said :

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Anyone who uses the term “climate change denier” is no supporter of science.

Get real Masquara, anyone who still claims the evidence for climate change is inconclusive is no supporter of science. They are in denial of the science which makes them deniers, so I’d like to see the “logic” behind your statement.

I would’ve voted Liberal is Watts hadn’t woken me up to the fact that Abbott & Minchin are not exceptions within that Party.

Maybe when the Libs throw out the retards and join the rest of us in the 21st Century I’ll consider voting for them.

There are pretty much only 3 countries outside the ex-soviet world where climate denialism still has any credibility: The USA, Canada, Australia. The rest of the world has moved on. The Tories in the UK have introduced carbon pricing. Scandinavia started implementing carbon pricing almost 30 years ago. Australia has never had much credibility in the global intellectual stakes (some notable exports notwithstanding) and this climate-denialism which is such a feature of Australian society at the moment, being a core belief of one of our two major political parties, makes as look like a bunch of dunces.

Well, I’m sorry you feel that way, as I clearly stated that humans have made a significant impact on climate change.

I don’t think the term climate change denier is useful, though. Climate change has always existed. I would simply like the debate to move beyond the name calling.

If you want to maintain the ideological divide, rather than focus on outcomes, that’s your choice.

DrKoresh said :

Masquara said :

HenryBG said :

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Anyone who uses the term “climate change denier” is no supporter of science.

Get real Masquara, anyone who still claims the evidence for climate change is inconclusive is no supporter of science. They are in denial of the science which makes them deniers, so I’d like to see the “logic” behind your statement.

I would’ve voted Liberal is Watts hadn’t woken me up to the fact that Abbott & Minchin are not exceptions within that Party.

Maybe when the Libs throw out the retards and join the rest of us in the 21st Century I’ll consider voting for them.

There are pretty much only 3 countries outside the ex-soviet world where climate denialism still has any credibility: The USA, Canada, Australia. The rest of the world has moved on. The Tories in the UK have introduced carbon pricing. Scandinavia started implementing carbon pricing almost 30 years ago. Australia has never had much credibility in the global intellectual stakes (some notable exports notwithstanding) and this climate-denialism which is such a feature of Australian society at the moment, being a core belief of one of our two major political parties, makes as look like a bunch of dunces.

Masquara said :

HenryBG said :

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Anyone who uses the term “climate change denier” is no supporter of science.

Get real Masquara, anyone who still claims the evidence for climate change is inconclusive is no supporter of science. They are in denial of the science which makes them deniers, so I’d like to see the “logic” behind your statement.

rosscoact said :

Matt,

bad luck, you fought the good fight. My leanings are just left of centre and yours appear to be just right of centre and in conversation we are in agreement more that we are at odds.

I’m sorry you didn’t get a spot, you would make a great MLA I’m sure.

So, what’s next?

Cheers. I’ll be back to work, like a normal person!

Matt_Watts said :

FioBla said :

You might win the Mully Cup.

I think I missed out to Pocock, dammit.

(and a shame the LDP aren’t smashing him)

+1

Matt,

bad luck, you fought the good fight. My leanings are just left of centre and yours appear to be just right of centre and in conversation we are in agreement more that we are at odds.

I’m sorry you didn’t get a spot, you would make a great MLA I’m sure.

So, what’s next?

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

Effluent of a similar ilk, conveyed in an open-top container that differs from the previous one.

Come on Duffbowl, there’s no need for that. Why can’t a candidate openly say he doesn’t know the detail about a particular policy (in this case, a policy from Melbourne), and ask for more info about it?

Fair call, and I’ll wear that one. My cynicism stems from your use of a phrase that was all too familiar when I worked in a certain department.

Understandable… One thing I’ve noticed especially in this forum is that if you say something as a politician, there’s a certain automatic level of cynicism from punters. I’ve made comments here in a personal capacity previously (different name – have had it for years) and the the responses are quite different!

Frankly I was hoping for some new blood in the assembly, from all political persuasions. I think Matt would have brought a new enthusiasm and ideas, as will some of the new ALP members, whenever we finally get around to working out whom it will be.

Counting still continues. Whilst I’m out, I think you’ll be pleased with some of the new blood in both major parties.

FioBla said :

You might win the Mully Cup.

I think I missed out to Pocock, dammit.

(and a shame the LDP aren’t smashing him)

Good on you Matt. It’s rare (unheard of?) for a political candidate to swim in waters like these, and I admire your courage in doing so. I think you’ve sounded pretty sensible in the views you’ve expressed here.

Better luck next time. 🙂

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

Effluent of a similar ilk, conveyed in an open-top container that differs from the previous one.

Come on Duffbowl, there’s no need for that. Why can’t a candidate openly say he doesn’t know the detail about a particular policy (in this case, a policy from Melbourne), and ask for more info about it?

Fair call, and I’ll wear that one. My cynicism stems from your use of a phrase that was all too familiar when I worked in a certain department.

You might win the Mully Cup.

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

Effluent of a similar ilk, conveyed in an open-top container that differs from the previous one.

Come on Duffbowl, there’s no need for that. Why can’t a candidate openly say he doesn’t know the detail about a particular policy (in this case, a policy from Melbourne), and ask for more info about it?

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

Effluent of a similar ilk, conveyed in an open-top container that differs from the previous one.

poetix said :

I thought you were quite brave, Matt, going first with the Lego. But remember in future: Disney Princesses are your friends.

Thanks Poetix, but I’ll leave the Disney princesses to my niece!

It was interesting doing the Lego reatively early in the campaign, prior to many of our policy announcements having been made public, but I wanted to get in early. I couldn’t even point out the existence of a green bin in Hall 🙂 but it was all part of a great experience.

Matt_Watts said :

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Postalgeek said :

Matt, a further transport question, do you support allowing motorbikes/scooters to park legally on pavements as long as they do not obstruct general passage, as is the case in the Melbourne CDB?

Happy to look at it. I actually don’t know much about that Melbourne situation. How do they administer it? I mean, what if one bike or scooter is parked, and it isn’t obstructing… then a whole heap of bikes come up and crowd it, meaning the footpath is blocked by all of them – what happens then?

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/ParkingTransportandRoads/Parking/WhereToPark/Pages/Motorcycleparking.aspx

I thought you were quite brave, Matt, going first with the Lego. But remember in future: Disney Princesses are your friends.

Duffbowl said :

Matt_Watts said :

Postalgeek said :

Matt, a further transport question, do you support allowing motorbikes/scooters to park legally on pavements as long as they do not obstruct general passage, as is the case in the Melbourne CDB?

Happy to look at it. I actually don’t know much about that Melbourne situation. How do they administer it? I mean, what if one bike or scooter is parked, and it isn’t obstructing… then a whole heap of bikes come up and crowd it, meaning the footpath is blocked by all of them – what happens then?

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Solutions focussed, mate. Happy to look at it.

Matt_Watts said :

Well, as everyone would now know I wasn’t successful in my attempt to win a seat in Ginninderra. I’m not overly upset with the result, given my budget, and it was certainly a better result than last time.

I’m in the process of thanking my volunteers.

I’d also like to thank the RiotACT for the opportunity to engage with the readers – it was a lot of fun!

Thanks all!

Keep your name out there, and good luck for next time!

Matt_Watts said :

Postalgeek said :

Matt, a further transport question, do you support allowing motorbikes/scooters to park legally on pavements as long as they do not obstruct general passage, as is the case in the Melbourne CDB?

Happy to look at it. I actually don’t know much about that Melbourne situation. How do they administer it? I mean, what if one bike or scooter is parked, and it isn’t obstructing… then a whole heap of bikes come up and crowd it, meaning the footpath is blocked by all of them – what happens then?

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

Answered like a true politician: don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions!

Well, as everyone would now know I wasn’t successful in my attempt to win a seat in Ginninderra. I’m not overly upset with the result, given my budget, and it was certainly a better result than last time.

I’m in the process of thanking my volunteers.

I’d also like to thank the RiotACT for the opportunity to engage with the readers – it was a lot of fun!

Thanks all!

Postalgeek said :

Matt, a further transport question, do you support allowing motorbikes/scooters to park legally on pavements as long as they do not obstruct general passage, as is the case in the Melbourne CDB?

Happy to look at it. I actually don’t know much about that Melbourne situation. How do they administer it? I mean, what if one bike or scooter is parked, and it isn’t obstructing… then a whole heap of bikes come up and crowd it, meaning the footpath is blocked by all of them – what happens then?

I’m sure they have some rules… Do you have ready access them? Cheers.

steele_blade11:46 am 18 Oct 12

chewy14 said :

simsim said :

Matt, the argument that Marriage should be removed from the realm of law seems like a compromise … except that in that case, the 66.9% of marriages performed by civil celebrants in this country would then become invalid. Is that really what you’re arguing in favour of?

I’m pretty sure the government would be able to pass one of those law thingys to transfer already married people over to a civil union or simply grandfather current marriages.

Not content with denying gays the right to marry, you now want to prevent heterosexual couples the right to marry except in a religious ceremony? That’s the net effect of Matt’s proposal.

Thanks for the clarification Matt. Thought if I want to get another word in, I’d better chime in again before someone brings up Dogman or Mr Gillespie asks you about your position on tripling our rates 🙂

I’m actually not unsympathetic to the “what difference will our 40% make to climate change” argument, if you frame it as narrowly as some have here. The thing is, there’s way more to it than that, when we start talking about the co-benefits:

– Reduce emissions through energy efficiency – we save on energy bills, can better afford to keep our homes comfortable in summer/winter.
– Reduce emissions through improving public transport – Canberra is an easier place to get around, we can save money by leaving the car at home.
– Reduce emissions by using more renewable energy – electricity prices actually go down (as we’ve recently seen with wind in South Australia) and fewer of our fellow humans get screwed over by e.g. coal mine dust or coal seam gas messing up their land and water.

(There’s a cartoon that’s done the rounds online: a honcho at the ‘Climate Summit’ is standing in front of a slide with a big list of stuff (liveable cities, energy independence, healthy children, green jobs, etc etc). Someone at the back sticks up their hand and asks, “What if it’s all a hoax and we create a better world for nothing?” )

Then there’s the ‘co-benefit’ of showing the rest of Australia (I’d say the world, but there are plenty of places well ahead of us) that reducing our emissions in line with the science is not only possible but good for us too.

So, if you’re not tired of fielding all these questions, could you please elaborate on why you don’t support the 40% target? (I didn’t realise it was a ‘movement’…)

Mr Gillespie said :

There is still no proof that climate change is real, ….

You’re clearly a crank.

Matt_Watts said :

Climate Change is certainly real. It has always existed as a result of all manner of influences.

I believe mankind has become an increased influence since the industrial revolution.

It’s a shame you think weaselly understatement is necessary in order to placate those of your supporters who fall into the crank camp.

CO2 ppm in the atmosphere has increased from 280 to just about 400 now, in the space of not much more than 100 years. It hasn’t been at this level since many hundreds of thousands of years ago, well before our species evolved.
In other words, humans have caused a change in the atmosphere’s composition that is very significant.

Basic physics says that this increased concentration will result in the Earth accumulating heat due to the imbalance in incoming versus outgoing radiation until equilibrium.

The current state of science says that equilibrium will be reached with a 3-degree increase in average temperature,
That temperature increase is also unprecedented in our species’ existence on this planet.

AND, we haven’t stopped emitting CO2, meaning the equilibrium temperature will continue to increase as CO2 concentrations continue to increase.

In the history of this planet, these kinds of climate changes coincided with mass extinction events. It seems very unlikely that this episode of climate change, a man-made one this time, will be any different on that score.

So if you think we shouldn’t care about being the instigators of this planet’s 8th mass extinction event in 3 billion years, then by all means, carry on appeasing the cranks by playing down the issue and our responsibility in it.

As far as I am concerned, your prevarication has done your chances of getting my vote.

poetix said :

chewy14 said :

I’m pretty sure the government would be able to pass one of those law thingys to transfer already married people over to a civil union or simply grandfather current marriages.

I’m not marrying my grandfather. Particularly as he’s dead.

Bigot

chewy14 said :

I’m pretty sure the government would be able to pass one of those law thingys to transfer already married people over to a civil union or simply grandfather current marriages.

I’m not marrying my grandfather. Particularly as he’s dead.

colourful sydney racing identity9:56 am 18 Oct 12

HenryBG said :

T_S said :

One of the questions was, “Do you believe in man-made climate change?”

All other candidates (Labor, Green and Liberal): “Yes.”
Matt Watts: “This question doesn’t do justice to the topic”

What’s the story? !

I’d like to echo that.

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Keep it nice – Matt has been good enough to answer questions on this forum, you can at least be polite.

Matt, a further transport question, do you support allowing motorbikes/scooters to park legally on pavements as long as they do not obstruct general passage, as is the case in the Melbourne CDB?

simsim said :

Matt, the argument that Marriage should be removed from the realm of law seems like a compromise … except that in that case, the 66.9% of marriages performed by civil celebrants in this country would then become invalid. Is that really what you’re arguing in favour of?

I’m pretty sure the government would be able to pass one of those law thingys to transfer already married people over to a civil union or simply grandfather current marriages.

Mr Gillespie said :

There is still no proof that climate change is real,

Just like there’s no proof that World War 2 actually happened.

HenryBG said :

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Anyone who uses the term “climate change denier” is no supporter of science.

Mr Gillespie said :

HenryBG, you are ignoring the question by putting your own twist on my logic.

There is still no proof that climate change is real, you have been reading too many apocalyptic scenarios and there is no use just trying to stop it with your own 2 hands so you can feel good about it.

Anyway, let’s get back to the questions I put to our guest, instead of making him have to trawl through pages and pages of arguing.

I would call on the Speaker to ask that the interjecting cease, and the questioner and the candidate for Ginninderra are given the call. He has been kind enough to take some time out of the election trail just days out from the election, to take some questions from the electorate.

Mr Matt Watts, Liberal candidate for Ginninderra, thankyou for taking the time to talk to us today. I would like to ask you a couple of questions:

1. What is your position on the shopping bag issue?

2. What is your position regarding the needle exchange idea for the prison?

3. What issues with regards to law and order do you feel need work on?

4. What strategies do you propose with regards to Canberra’s transport and roads?

1. Recently answered.

2. Against it.

3. The sentencing situation in the ACT is a bit of a joke. That’s my main focus (and, in support of that, we need a more efficient public prosecutions office).

4. I don’t drive (yes, that makes it difficult to campaign) so I’m an avid user of public transport yet I still support cars. That’s why I’ve been kicking up a fuss about car parking within the Belconnen Town Centre (ie the govt keeps selling off car parks).

At present, the govt is carrying on as if there’s a “carrot and stick” approach to transport, where ACTION is the carrot and parking is the stick. In reality, ACTION needs so much improvement that what the govt is really managing is a “stick and stick” approach. I’ve met with a few drivers and they realise the flaws in the system, and we need to work on the management culture within ACTION.

Active transport is a great idea, and the community will be relatively healthier as a result. Unfortunately, there’s a catch… It’s true that the average 70 year old might one day be as healthy as the average 50 year old a couple of generations ago, yet death is certain. Old age, no matter the literal age, will still exist (unless the ALP/Greens bring in some sort of Soylent Green solution), so you can’t realistically expect society to abandon their cars, especially with an ageing population. Then there’s the practicalities, even without old age, of someone carrying their new plasma TV home on the back of bicycle.

You will always need car parks at shops, although the main pressure points for transport are those associated with work. We need better integrated park and rides, and better bus routes (ie stop adding stops to the Red Rapid!). It might be the case we will soon be moving to a situation where more and more people work at home, which would be beneficial to the congestion problem, yet we still need to focus on town centre parking to make up for the combined increase in office space and shops and the reduction in car parks.

We’ve annouced the duplication of several roads. I think we need to revisit the project management approach currently implemented within the ACT. For example, if you know you will need to duplicate a road at some point, it’s more efficient to build the necessary second bridge at the same time you’re building the first bridge both from a traffic management and a project management perspective.

Finally, planning ahead is crucial, and the government should be open with the community about their plans.

Mr Gillespie said :

…..

1. What is your position on the shopping bag issue?…..

Shopping bags are only an issue for people who are too stupid to remember to take bags with them to the shops.

Whats so hard? I am going to the shops…I need to take some method of payment, I need some bags, I need to make sure I have pants on before leaving the house.

Do you often forget your wallet or pants? If you remember them you can remember to take bags.

Oh wait…we are talking to Mr G here. Whilst he sees bags as a right, pants are probably optional in his world.

Deckard said :

So, what do you think about cyclists Matt? 😉

At risk of initiating some sorta RiotACT war, here’s my comment on cyclists:

I have nothing against cyclists. I have nothing against drivers of vehicles, either. Many people alternate between those two roles.

What I am against is idiots.

Idiot cyclists or idiot drivers, I don’t care. I’m against you. Idiot pedestrians, too.

In the vast majority of circumstances cyclists, pedestrians and drivers peacefully coexist, and that’s the way I like it.

I don’t cycle too often yet, when I do, I choose to use the bike paths. In fact, when I chose the route for the Hash House Harriers’ “Tour de Pisse” a few years ago, I deliberately chose a route that was mostly bike paths.

PS – I don’t support a registration system for cyclists because it was cost too much to administer.

Mr Gillespie said :

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

For that reason I refuse to support 40% (or any emissions target), as there are better things in life to deal with, that actually have an impact on our lives, like the health system, roads, rates, taxes, etc.

Mr Watts, I know a lot of people think this issue is worth ignoring because it’s so small, but because it affects me directly each time I get the groceries, what is your stance on the plastic bag issue?

I think I’ve previously posted that I support the Liberals’ approach to plastic bags. That is, overturn the so-called “ban”. I’m informed the Productiity Commission is against the bag ban and in practice people just purchase bags they require which are now less likely to be biodegradable.

I personally try to carry a little tote bag around with me in case I need to do some unexpected shopping.

It’s not that we’re pro-unnecessary plastic bags; it’s just that the current policy is ineffective. In any event without the “ban” Canberra had been trending away from plastic bags for some time.

I don’t think the 40% movement is realistic for Canberra.

T_S said :

Hi Matt,

Firstly, thank you for making the effort to respond to so many questions on this thread!

I thought I’d try and enliven it again because I have another one:

I was looking through the new edition of the normally-ignored City Chronicle (aka The Chronic) and saw a profile of you among other aspiring candidates (it’s online here for anyone who’s interested – p.14: http://canberra.realviewtechnologies.com/?index=ciindex.djvu)

One of the questions was, “Do you believe in man-made climate change?”

All other candidates (Labor, Green and Liberal): “Yes.”
Matt Watts: “This question doesn’t do justice to the topic”

What’s the story? Since you’ve got more space here, perhaps you’d be able to elaborate?

While you’re at it, perhaps you could account for the Liberals’ lack of support for our 40% emissions reduction target, and their lack of any policies to reduce emissions this election?

Thanks again!

Climate Change is certainly real. It has always existed as a result of all manner of influences.

I believe mankind has become an increased influence since the industrial revolution.

Matt, the argument that Marriage should be removed from the realm of law seems like a compromise … except that in that case, the 66.9% of marriages performed by civil celebrants in this country would then become invalid. Is that really what you’re arguing in favour of?

Mr Gillespie9:00 pm 17 Oct 12

HenryBG, you are ignoring the question by putting your own twist on my logic.

There is still no proof that climate change is real, you have been reading too many apocalyptic scenarios and there is no use just trying to stop it with your own 2 hands so you can feel good about it.

Anyway, let’s get back to the questions I put to our guest, instead of making him have to trawl through pages and pages of arguing.

I would call on the Speaker to ask that the interjecting cease, and the questioner and the candidate for Ginninderra are given the call. He has been kind enough to take some time out of the election trail just days out from the election, to take some questions from the electorate.

Mr Matt Watts, Liberal candidate for Ginninderra, thankyou for taking the time to talk to us today. I would like to ask you a couple of questions:

1. What is your position on the shopping bag issue?

2. What is your position regarding the needle exchange idea for the prison?

3. What issues with regards to law and order do you feel need work on?

4. What strategies do you propose with regards to Canberra’s transport and roads?

So, what do you think about cyclists Matt? 😉

Eight guys beating up one guy. One guy thinks ” I could stop hitting this guy but Im only one person and the others will just keep going anyway. How does me stopping help?” Or…..One guy stops, second guy thinks “well if he stopped maybe I can to”. Eventually they all stop.

Doesnt even require maths.

chewy14 said :

I fully believe in climate change but your garbage analogy doesn’t cut it.

It’s not meant as an analogy, it’s a reference to the well-known logical blunder Mr G has made.

In any case, it would apply as an analogy regardless of whether or not your neighbours are actually making the same logical mistake as you are making.

The whole, “oh, what difference can I make? Therefore I won’t bother” is precisely why these things need to be sorted out collectively when we assign our decision making to government.

I’m starting to have second thoughts about the Libs now, are these idiots so retarded they’re still trying to pander to the climate conspiracy cranks? Or are they actually cranks themselves?

Looks like the ALP missed an opportunity here….

Come Matt, crank or not crank, we’re very keen for an answer?

Mr Gillespie said :

it would make next to no difference WHEN COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE …!!!

DO YOUR MATHS

WHAT IS 7 BILLION DIVIDED BY 400,000?

How many people live in your house, Mr G?

DO THE MATHS

WHAT IS 400,000 DIVIDED BY 1?

WHAT’S THE POINT OF COLLECTING YOUR piddling amount of GARBAGE, eh?

Luckily, the sane amongst us have decided they will continue to empty your bin every week, even though collecting it makes not one jot of difference to the total amount of garbage collected every week from the other 399,999 Canberrans, (to use your figures)

Personally, I believe that at a local level the money should be spent on adaptation strategies – putting systems and infrastructure in place to shield our city from the worst effects of climate change, such as investing in food and water security, improving our bushfire protection and response systems, and ensuring our housing stock is suitable for extreme heat conditions.

As much as Mr Gillespi is a stupid idiot, he has made sort of a point. Emissions reductions are something best dealt with at a federal level, because it is only at the national and international level that meaningful reductions will be made. At this stage in the game stopping climate change isn’t going to happen. That doesn’t mean we should give up on meeting reduction targets, undoubtedly we should, but we also need to be investing seriously in adaptive measures.

Federal spending and policy should focus primarily on achieving reductions, while local spending and policy should focus primarily on building our city’s resilience to the changes that will occur. Obviously there is room for both levels to do both things, but that is where I think the priorities should be.

HenryBG said :

Mr Gillespie said :

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

Ditto with garbage collection – collecting the garbage from Mr Gillespie’s street doesn’t make one iota of difference to the total amount of garbage collected in Canberra over the course of the year so we might as well cancel the garbage collection to that street.

Honestly, are there *still* people so stupid and careless with their reputations that they are willing to publicly own up to being a climate conspiracy theorist?

Get with the program, Mr G, you’ve been fed a bunch of propaganda by the energy companies who don’t want to lose the benefits of the externalised cost that is CO2 emission – *any* passing analysis of the supposed “arguments” against climate change instantly reveal those arguments to be a massive pile of total steaming bullshit.

The facts are incontravertable: CO2 in the atmosphere is going up, and isotopic analysis shows that CO2 is coming from the burning of fossil fuels.

The laws of physics are not about to be overturned – CO2 traps heat that would otherwise be escaping more quickly into space. Therefore the Earth will continue to heat up until escaping radiation reaches equilibrium with incoming radiation from the Sun – currently there is an imbalance, with more radiation coming in than going out. That radiation imbalance is what is heating up the planet.

This is all very basic science together with observable fact – the only reason anybody would consider any of it controversial would be if they were gullible enough to believe the easily-spotted lies of the energy lobby.

I fully believe in climate change but your garbage analogy doesn’t cut it.

It’s more like me thinking I can make a difference to total garbage by spending money to reduce my own usage whilst most of my neighbours, who produce the majority or garbage, refuse to do anything to reduce their garbage. Without my neighbours involvement, the results will be negligible.

We need to base anything we do on sensible targets that don’t unnecessarily hamper our city for no tangible gain.
If the desired outcome is simply to reduce our reliance on polluting fossil fuels, then they should say that and not hide behind climate change.

Mr Gillespie6:31 pm 17 Oct 12

HenryBB (#165)

You missed the part about the ACT being a small jurisdiction, and instead read into what I said only as a mere denial of climate change.

It is irrelevant whether man has caused it. Even if the ACT completely stopped putting out CO? (including the entire population breathing out), it would make next to no difference WHEN COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE GLOBE!!!

DO YOUR MATHS

WHAT IS 7 BILLION DIVIDED BY 400,000?

Mr Gillespie6:27 pm 17 Oct 12

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Colourful Sydney Racing Identity up to his old tricks again, deliberately misquoting what I say. Not much better than a troll

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd6:12 pm 17 Oct 12

Hate to be one to jump on a henrybg bandwagon, but god damn, son, you nailed those two last posts.

steele_blade4:54 pm 17 Oct 12

Mr Gillespie said :

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

For that reason I refuse to support 40% (or any emissions target), as there are better things in life to deal with, that actually have an impact on our lives, like the health system, roads, rates, taxes, etc.

Mr Watts, I know a lot of people think this issue is worth ignoring because it’s so small, but because it affects me directly each time I get the groceries, what is your stance on the plastic bag issue?

Your refusal to support any emissions target is noted and the electorate can take that into account when you run for office. In the meantime, perhaps the candidate could reply with something meaningful.

T_S said :

One of the questions was, “Do you believe in man-made climate change?”

All other candidates (Labor, Green and Liberal): “Yes.”
Matt Watts: “This question doesn’t do justice to the topic”

What’s the story? !

I’d like to echo that.

What’s the @$%^#en story? You’re not a denier are you, Matt? It’s a simple enough question, and the answer has been known to science for about 180 years, so what’s your story?

Mr Gillespie said :

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

Ditto with garbage collection – collecting the garbage from Mr Gillespie’s street doesn’t make one iota of difference to the total amount of garbage collected in Canberra over the course of the year so we might as well cancel the garbage collection to that street.

Honestly, are there *still* people so stupid and careless with their reputations that they are willing to publicly own up to being a climate conspiracy theorist?

Get with the program, Mr G, you’ve been fed a bunch of propaganda by the energy companies who don’t want to lose the benefits of the externalised cost that is CO2 emission – *any* passing analysis of the supposed “arguments” against climate change instantly reveal those arguments to be a massive pile of total steaming bullshit.

The facts are incontravertable: CO2 in the atmosphere is going up, and isotopic analysis shows that CO2 is coming from the burning of fossil fuels.

The laws of physics are not about to be overturned – CO2 traps heat that would otherwise be escaping more quickly into space. Therefore the Earth will continue to heat up until escaping radiation reaches equilibrium with incoming radiation from the Sun – currently there is an imbalance, with more radiation coming in than going out. That radiation imbalance is what is heating up the planet.

This is all very basic science together with observable fact – the only reason anybody would consider any of it controversial would be if they were gullible enough to believe the easily-spotted lies of the energy lobby.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd4:36 pm 17 Oct 12

Mr Gillespie said :

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

For that reason I refuse to support 40% (or any emissions target), as there are better things in life to deal with, that actually have an impact on our lives, like the health system, roads, rates, taxes, etc.

Mr Watts, I know a lot of people think this issue is worth ignoring because it’s so small, but because it affects me directly each time I get the groceries, what is your stance on the plastic bag issue?

Haha

colourful sydney racing identity4:24 pm 17 Oct 12

Mr Gillespie said :

herp derp plastic bags herp derp

Mr Gillespie3:47 pm 17 Oct 12

TS, the 40% target is a meaningless piece of symbolism, Canberra is not in a place to stop the world’s climate from changing. The electorate (especially for a jurisdiction this small in size) shouldn’t be judging a candidate on their views on allegedly man-made climate change.

For that reason I refuse to support 40% (or any emissions target), as there are better things in life to deal with, that actually have an impact on our lives, like the health system, roads, rates, taxes, etc.

Mr Watts, I know a lot of people think this issue is worth ignoring because it’s so small, but because it affects me directly each time I get the groceries, what is your stance on the plastic bag issue?

Hi Matt,

Firstly, thank you for making the effort to respond to so many questions on this thread!

I thought I’d try and enliven it again because I have another one:

I was looking through the new edition of the normally-ignored City Chronicle (aka The Chronic) and saw a profile of you among other aspiring candidates (it’s online here for anyone who’s interested – p.14: http://canberra.realviewtechnologies.com/?index=ciindex.djvu)

One of the questions was, “Do you believe in man-made climate change?”

All other candidates (Labor, Green and Liberal): “Yes.”
Matt Watts: “This question doesn’t do justice to the topic”

What’s the story? Since you’ve got more space here, perhaps you’d be able to elaborate?

While you’re at it, perhaps you could account for the Liberals’ lack of support for our 40% emissions reduction target, and their lack of any policies to reduce emissions this election?

Thanks again!

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Matt_Watts said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

fbarons said :

Hi Matt

You said in reply to another writer’s question that… “for some reason you are 100% opposed to abortion” (I have to write quickly while my two year old runs around my chair and I can’t work out how to cut and paste your response properly). Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose? Although abortion laws are not on the table to me this is a fundamental question (and broader than just about abortion) about whether or not you would be the right person to represent me in the Assembly. These are the kind of issues that get me worried about nanny state type intervention into personal choice, rather than whether I can get a free plastic bag at the supermarket or not.

Regards

Fiona, Scullin

Abortion laws could be on the table – it really depends how you vote. Does anyone have a list of anti choice candidates?

As far as I am aware Coe, Seselja and Dunne are anti-choice. Hargraves was so I assume his protege Maftoum is also anti-choice. WIll cheerfully withdraw if incorrect.

Hi both,

I support the woman’s right to choose in law.

In the earlier post, I was merely making clear my position as a private individual. I guess it’s a bit like my stance on religion; I am not an athiest, yet I believe in the separation of church and state.

Cheers

Many thanks for clarifying Matt!

Any time!

colourful sydney racing identity4:20 pm 16 Oct 12

Matt_Watts said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

fbarons said :

Hi Matt

You said in reply to another writer’s question that… “for some reason you are 100% opposed to abortion” (I have to write quickly while my two year old runs around my chair and I can’t work out how to cut and paste your response properly). Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose? Although abortion laws are not on the table to me this is a fundamental question (and broader than just about abortion) about whether or not you would be the right person to represent me in the Assembly. These are the kind of issues that get me worried about nanny state type intervention into personal choice, rather than whether I can get a free plastic bag at the supermarket or not.

Regards

Fiona, Scullin

Abortion laws could be on the table – it really depends how you vote. Does anyone have a list of anti choice candidates?

As far as I am aware Coe, Seselja and Dunne are anti-choice. Hargraves was so I assume his protege Maftoum is also anti-choice. WIll cheerfully withdraw if incorrect.

Hi both,

I support the woman’s right to choose in law.

In the earlier post, I was merely making clear my position as a private individual. I guess it’s a bit like my stance on religion; I am not an athiest, yet I believe in the separation of church and state.

Cheers

Many thanks for clarifying Matt!

colourful sydney racing identity said :

fbarons said :

Hi Matt

You said in reply to another writer’s question that… “for some reason you are 100% opposed to abortion” (I have to write quickly while my two year old runs around my chair and I can’t work out how to cut and paste your response properly). Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose? Although abortion laws are not on the table to me this is a fundamental question (and broader than just about abortion) about whether or not you would be the right person to represent me in the Assembly. These are the kind of issues that get me worried about nanny state type intervention into personal choice, rather than whether I can get a free plastic bag at the supermarket or not.

Regards

Fiona, Scullin

Abortion laws could be on the table – it really depends how you vote. Does anyone have a list of anti choice candidates?

As far as I am aware Coe, Seselja and Dunne are anti-choice. Hargraves was so I assume his protege Maftoum is also anti-choice. WIll cheerfully withdraw if incorrect.

Hi both,

I support the woman’s right to choose in law.

In the earlier post, I was merely making clear my position as a private individual. I guess it’s a bit like my stance on religion; I am not an athiest, yet I believe in the separation of church and state.

Cheers

Still waiting on a response to my question about Lib plans for CIT. Given the deafening silence and actions taken by your interstate counterparts, I’m left to assume that rumors of a 30+% cut to the budget are worth taking seriously.

colourful sydney racing identity3:18 pm 16 Oct 12

fbarons said :

Hi Matt

You said in reply to another writer’s question that… “for some reason you are 100% opposed to abortion” (I have to write quickly while my two year old runs around my chair and I can’t work out how to cut and paste your response properly). Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose? Although abortion laws are not on the table to me this is a fundamental question (and broader than just about abortion) about whether or not you would be the right person to represent me in the Assembly. These are the kind of issues that get me worried about nanny state type intervention into personal choice, rather than whether I can get a free plastic bag at the supermarket or not.

Regards

Fiona, Scullin

Abortion laws could be on the table – it really depends how you vote. Does anyone have a list of anti choice candidates?

As far as I am aware Coe, Seselja and Dunne are anti-choice. Hargraves was so I assume his protege Maftoum is also anti-choice. WIll cheerfully withdraw if incorrect.

Hi Matt

You said in reply to another writer’s question that… “for some reason you are 100% opposed to abortion” (I have to write quickly while my two year old runs around my chair and I can’t work out how to cut and paste your response properly). Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose? Although abortion laws are not on the table to me this is a fundamental question (and broader than just about abortion) about whether or not you would be the right person to represent me in the Assembly. These are the kind of issues that get me worried about nanny state type intervention into personal choice, rather than whether I can get a free plastic bag at the supermarket or not.

Regards

Fiona, Scullin

No worries Matt, thanks for giving your answer.

Spitfire3 said :

Hi Matt.

Thanks for making clear your views on gay marriage. As an atheist, a supporter of marriage equality and someone who has a strong dislike for religion having any sway in politics and law, your position (remove marriage entirely from the realm of law) seems equitable. I imagine the effect of it would be that everyone who is currently married in the eyes of the law in the ACT, would become “civilly united” in the eyes of the law instead, and this would no doubt have many seeing red.

If there were a vote along the lines of “legalise gay marriage in the ACT, yes or no?”, how would you vote?
I would expect you would abstain from such a vote, as both the yes and no camps are inconsistent with your stated view. Is that what you would do?

Thanks Spitfire3.

I do expect to abstain in such a situation, but I can’t see that exact question coming up for a vote.

In reality, what I’d vote for or against would come down to the wording.

I was recently asked by a magazine to answer that question with a yes or no answer, and I couldn’t do it. Always difficult when pressed for space. I stated I believed in equality, but didn’t have space to explain my situation.

Hi Matt.

Thanks for making clear your views on gay marriage. As an atheist, a supporter of marriage equality and someone who has a strong dislike for religion having any sway in politics and law, your position (remove marriage entirely from the realm of law) seems equitable. I imagine the effect of it would be that everyone who is currently married in the eyes of the law in the ACT, would become “civilly united” in the eyes of the law instead, and this would no doubt have many seeing red.

If there were a vote along the lines of “legalise gay marriage in the ACT, yes or no?”, how would you vote?
I would expect you would abstain from such a vote, as both the yes and no camps are inconsistent with your stated view. Is that what you would do?

Girt_Hindrance said :

Hi Matt, can you tell us if the station wagon towing Zed’s trailer-signs is his vehicle? If so, why does it have NSW plates? Do you think that’s a bit weird?
Cheers.

The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind……..

Maybe Jesus loaned him the vehicle – after all, Zed seems to consult Jesus fairly regularly for all the big policy decisions.

Girt_Hindrance12:15 pm 09 Oct 12

Thanks Matt, for understanding my question and for giving your personal opinion in your response.
Cheers.

How did you go with looking into the details of Lib plans for CIT Matt?

I honestly have no idea who or whose car was diving that trailer, nor do I care.

Girt_Hindrance said :

Masquara, you are failing to cover this issue up- ‘we’ haven’t established anything, and if you read the part of my last post that you personally quoted, it includes the word ‘Owner’. Clearly, and follow this logical progression closely, if he has hired the vehicle, then he isn’t the owner. Simple stuff.
Why is it a hard question to get an answer for?

Girt – what answer are you looking for? “I hired it”, “I own it”, “I borrowed it” – now, which of those answers is an issue? You appear to be attempting to sniff out some fantastical story that Zed has fraudulently registered a trailer in New South Wales rather than the ACT in order to save on registration fees. Just supposing that it IS registered in Zed’s name: In order to register a trailer in New South Wales, Zed would have to own property there. In general, I would have thought, if you have a rural property in NSW that is where you will usually be using a large trailer, rather than in your suburban house. Bringing your NSW registered trailer into the ACT to use it locally for a few weeks is not going to alarm the authorities. If the trailer is insured as housed in New South Wales, whatever the insurance policy states regarding disclosure would need to be followed. However, you have not established that the trailer is registered in Zed’s name. You have not dismissed the likelihood that he has borrowed or hired the trailer. It sounds as though your issue is more likely to be with a local hire company “saving on registration fees”. What do you base that on? What national hire company would do such? Presumably a national hire company arranges with the authorities just how they will manage their registrations, and then presumably under sound management they will be followed (if for nothing else, in order to not risk insurance premiums).
In order to back up your claim that there is some issue, you would need to have evidence that said hire company didn’t “just happen” to have NSW plated trailer in stock because it happened to have arrived from a hirer who had been in New South Wales and picked up said trailer from a different hire company franchise.
So what exactly is the issue here that pertains to Zed and the election campaign?

Ok you two, that’s enough on this one.

Girt_Hindrance2:00 pm 07 Oct 12

Masquara, you are failing to cover this issue up- ‘we’ haven’t established anything, and if you read the part of my last post that you personally quoted, it includes the word ‘Owner’. Clearly, and follow this logical progression closely, if he has hired the vehicle, then he isn’t the owner. Simple stuff.
Why is it a hard question to get an answer for?

Girt_Hindrance said :

I’m aware that vehicles should be registered in their owners Primary address, I’m assuming that’s most probably where Zed is campaigning. Why is it not then?

You are saying that ACT residents should be required to purchase and register rather than hire, an item they need for some four weeks? Say you have to sand your floors at some time – would you purchase a heavy-duty floor sander for $20,000 and then put it in your garage? Or would you hire it for a couple of hundred dollars? Now, apply the same thinking to Zed’s trailer. We have established that he might already own it, legitimately, interstate. Or he may have borrowed it from friends or family. If neither of those options were available, you appear to be saying he should have to buy and register his trailer, use it for four weeks, and then pay the cost of storage until the next election, or sell it. second-hand? I’m not aware of any requirement that ACT residents must not hire or borrow from their community or local business. Sorry, but I think you are digging yourself a hole and should hop out or explain yourself differently maybe, if I am not understanding your gist?

Girt_Hindrance1:31 pm 07 Oct 12

Thanks again Masquara, perhaps you should start your own RA comments thread and see how many people would rather you answer their questions directed to the Candidates.
It’s a simple question, although it’s becoming covered in the usual political obfuscation. If the rental car thing is true, it won’t be hard one for Matt or Zed to answer.
I don’t begrudge people for owning two properties, but then I can see why the Rates scaremongering is being pushed so hard.
I’m aware that vehicles should be registered in their owners Primary address, I’m assuming that’s most probably where Zed is campaigning. Why is it not then?
Simple questions.
Masquara, won’t you please step aside and allow a sensible answer from the person it is requested from. Surely it would be up to the politicians to decide the ‘value’ of the questions being asked of them.

Girt_Hindrance said :

Thanks Masquara, you’ll know next time when I’m asking you, because I’ll write “Hi Masquara…”
My question stands. It strikes me as weird that this vehicle towing signs for a person who seeks to be Elected in the ACT, to represent the people of the ACT, has one of his most highly visible campaign vehicles registered out of state.
What does that say to the Electorate, if even someone with a ‘clear lack of analytical skills’ such as myself is aware that this vehicle costs less to register over the border. Why would the Libs allow the question to be asked?
It’s a legitimate question for a thread where a potential ‘Poli to be’ has asked for thoughtful interaction with the Electorate.

Ummm Girt have you never hired an item from the local office of a national hire company? Never hired a car in Canberra? Never noticed that hire cars in Canberra will have plates from all over the country? Never noticed that large machinery on hire offer in the ACT may have NSW plates? You were trying to cook up an issue. Give us a break!
To recap: If there is hire company branding on Zed’s trailer, he has hired it. If it doesn’t have hire company branding, see my post above. Borrowed – or owned locally in NSW.
Or do you have an issue with Canberrans owning holiday houses down the coast, or rural properties outside the ACT, and contributing to the regional economy as well as the local one?

Girt_Hindrance12:14 pm 07 Oct 12

Thanks Masquara, you’ll know next time when I’m asking you, because I’ll write “Hi Masquara…”
My question stands. It strikes me as weird that this vehicle towing signs for a person who seeks to be Elected in the ACT, to represent the people of the ACT, has one of his most highly visible campaign vehicles registered out of state.
What does that say to the Electorate, if even someone with a ‘clear lack of analytical skills’ such as myself is aware that this vehicle costs less to register over the border. Why would the Libs allow the question to be asked?
It’s a legitimate question for a thread where a potential ‘Poli to be’ has asked for thoughtful interaction with the Electorate.

Girt_Hindrance said :

Hi Matt, can you tell us if the station wagon towing Zed’s trailer-signs is his vehicle? If so, why does it have NSW plates? Do you think that’s a bit weird?
Cheers.

Hmmmm …. Girt, let me supplement your clear lack of analytical skills … if it has NSW plates then Zed has either borrowed it from friends or relatives in Queanbo or down the coast, or owns a property in NSW himself. Or he may have hired it from a Queanbeyan firm.

Woody Mann-Caruso8:33 am 07 Oct 12

People who send their children to private schools pay taxes too, and it is less of a burden on the ACT taxpayer for more children to be sent to private schools.

And people who drive new Audis to work pay taxes too, and are less of a burden on the ACT public transport system. I look forward to the new Liberal policy subsidising their choices with cheaper parking and a fuel subsidy.

(Not that a Liberal government would ever interfere in the operation of the free market, because that’s socialism. I mean, next you’ll be saying the government should be able to tell banks what their lending rates should be, and that anything less is a failure of leadership.)

Girt_Hindrance11:04 pm 06 Oct 12

Hi Matt, can you tell us if the station wagon towing Zed’s trailer-signs is his vehicle? If so, why does it have NSW plates? Do you think that’s a bit weird?
Cheers.

Matt_Watts said :

pierce said :

Maybe you missed my question among the gun debate so I’ll pop it up again Matt.

Can you please explain why the ACT Liberals propose to spend $3.6 billion on education (with no mention of CIT) whereas the current education budget is around $4 billion (including CIT)

What is the official policy on CIT should the Libs win government?

I’ll get bck to you re detail. Cheers

Thanks Matt, I look forward to hearing something.

poetix said :

Matt_Watts said :

Masquara said :

Matt – I have a Dorothy Dixer for you! : )

What’s your response to the ACT Greens’ (IMO anti-growth, anti export) food policy? Do you think the ACT region would be better served by growing opportunities to export foodstuffs to other regions, rather than the Greens’ “eat local”? Or do you agree with them that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be well spent in devising ways to limit Canberrans to locally grown produce? (e.g. chard greens and mangel wurzel for Canberrans all winter, presumably no coffee, ever, and no mangos, ever?)

There is only so much I can comment on the Greens’ policies. Not everybody has a backyard in O’Connor in which they can grow their own food.

Yes, I am bringing in a few thousand peasants from Asia to tend to the expanses of my vast and fertile O’Connor plantation, in which my tiny two bedroom house is as insignificant as a flea on a green elephant. If they don’t grow mangoes, they don’t get rice. But your sentence actually worried me. Aren’t you playing the envy/sneering card a little?

I note you picked on an area outside your own electorate, rather than say, Aranda, where they have big blocks, and where the odd organic foodstuff can be grown. You are obviously brighter than your party’s leader.

Growing food is a nice idea, and community gardens will allow access to soil for those benighted souls struggling along outside O’Connor. I am too lazy to garden myself, but I do support buying locally where possible. Quite recently I bought a locally harvested truffle, for example. (Self deprecating humour is always best…)

I like O’Connor, but it was a reference to the Greens leader’s suburb. Not playing on envy, just an off the cuff response to practicality.

chewy14 said :

I know there’s a reason for it but is 11 posts in a row a record or something?

Well I did miss out on the Mully.

But surely Crazy Chester had some form in frequent postings?

Matt_Watts said :

Masquara said :

Matt – I have a Dorothy Dixer for you! : )

What’s your response to the ACT Greens’ (IMO anti-growth, anti export) food policy? Do you think the ACT region would be better served by growing opportunities to export foodstuffs to other regions, rather than the Greens’ “eat local”? Or do you agree with them that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be well spent in devising ways to limit Canberrans to locally grown produce? (e.g. chard greens and mangel wurzel for Canberrans all winter, presumably no coffee, ever, and no mangos, ever?)

There is only so much I can comment on the Greens’ policies. Not everybody has a backyard in O’Connor in which they can grow their own food.

Yes, I am bringing in a few thousand peasants from Asia to tend to the expanses of my vast and fertile O’Connor plantation, in which my tiny two bedroom house is as insignificant as a flea on a green elephant. If they don’t grow mangoes, they don’t get rice. But your sentence actually worried me. Aren’t you playing the envy/sneering card a little?

I note you picked on an area outside your own electorate, rather than say, Aranda, where they have big blocks, and where the odd organic foodstuff can be grown. You are obviously brighter than your party’s leader.

Growing food is a nice idea, and community gardens will allow access to soil for those benighted souls struggling along outside O’Connor. I am too lazy to garden myself, but I do support buying locally where possible. Quite recently I bought a locally harvested truffle, for example. (Self deprecating humour is always best…)

pierce said :

Maybe you missed my question among the gun debate so I’ll pop it up again Matt.

Can you please explain why the ACT Liberals propose to spend $3.6 billion on education (with no mention of CIT) whereas the current education budget is around $4 billion (including CIT)

What is the official policy on CIT should the Libs win government?

I’ll get bck to you re detail. Cheers

I know there’s a reason for it but is 11 posts in a row a record or something?

Maybe you missed my question among the gun debate so I’ll pop it up again Matt.

Can you please explain why the ACT Liberals propose to spend $3.6 billion on education (with no mention of CIT) whereas the current education budget is around $4 billion (including CIT)

What is the official policy on CIT should the Libs win government?

wildturkeycanoe said :

Matt, can I ask you for an explanation as to why the Liberal party is promising to spend tens of millions of dollars on private schools in the ACT? I have read the official line about keeping pace with our neighboring state’s funding, but I ask you this – if private schools are supported by the fees paid by the students’ parents, why should the government sponsor any money towards these self-funding facilities? If that money were spent on public infrastructure [which is declining so miserably], then the parents who cannot afford tens of thousands per year, per child, would see a fairer education for their offspring. Instead, typically for Liberals, the wealthy are catered for with extra money to make things easier whilst the hard working and lower paid of society get dragged back closer to poverty without assistance from the government. Give our kids a chance and if parent’s want their own to achieve more in life, let them spend their own money to achieve that, DO NOT waste my taxes paying to have a rich kid get an ergonomic chair, or new laptop, or the best Spanish teacher in the world.
I have always seen the policies of the Liberal party pander to business, the APS and wealthy Australians, whilst making life more difficult for the working class. This kind of expenditure just drives the point home even more.

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. People who send their children to private schools pay taxes too, and it is less of a burden on the ACT taxpayer for more children to be sent to private schools. It should be remembered government schools receive far more taxpayer dollars than private schools.

We’re promising to provide more school counsellors, teacher training and public school infrastruture funding – we’ve not neglected government schools.

Jethro said :

Darkfalz said :

Jethro said :

Could it be that at heart you are simply another social conservative who is only against the nanny state when it comes to red tape governing businesses, but completely in favour of it when it comes to moralising and telling people how they can or cannot live their lives?

Do you recognise there is a difference between not telling people how to live and not specifically changing constructs to allow them to feel better about their lifestyle choices?

You don’t need to outlaw behaviours, but you don’t need to cater to them either. Particularly when they are not in the best interests of greater society.

Euthanasia and drug laws are outlawed. These laws are the very definition of telling people how to live; they remove the individual’s ultimate sovereignty over their body and place that sovereignty in the hands of lawmakers. People who choose to exercise the sovereignty they should have over their own bodies face the very real risk of prosecution.

You can try and spin it how you like, but laws that remove an individual’s sovereignty over their own body are anathema to the principles of individual liberty that our society is supposed to be based upon. This is not simply ‘changing constructs” to make someone feel better about their lifestyle choices, but removing laws that criminalise those lifestyle choices.

I applaud you for sticking to your guns, but I really think these are beter suited in the federal policy arena.

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

Regarding a dragway, we haven’t announced anything yet I’m on the record from 2008 as supporting it (ie not banning it) yet I don’t think government funds should be used to prop it up. If someone wants to build one, please contact me.

As for the tripling of rates vs abolition of stamp duty, I agree there are merits; it’s just that, on balance, from my point of view and the point of view of the Canberra Liberals, these are outweighed by the negatives you pointed out. As I’ve stated, I believe the current government’s rates proposal is regressive.

pepmeup said :

Three quick questions mate.

1) given it is most likely only two libs will get elected in ginnenderra would you prefer to be elected with Vicky or Alistair

2) if three libs get elected in Molonglo and we assume Hanson and Dozspot get up who do you want to come third?

3) in Brindibella libs are hoping for three, so smyth and zed, then who do you hope comes third?

Would really like to know the insiders opinion, it also helps to show what type of liberal you are. Cheers mate, well done so far in the answering of the questions more candidates should have the minerals to do it.

Yeah, I can see how a public pronouncement of who I would prefer would indicate to some level the type of Liberal I am. I guess I can only respond with the claim that I’m practical, ie without knowing who will be elected on October 20, the last thing I’d want to do is put any one of my team off-side, especially if we have to work together for the next four years.

Sorry I couldn’t be more open!

JC said :

Matt_Watts said :

Of course there will be avenues open to smuggling drugs into the AMC. Yet, we shouldn’t facilitate it. End of story.

No it’s not the end of the story. If you accept that no matter what drugs will get into the AMC, which is seems you have (wonder if Zed knows you’ve admitted this) then if you are in power then you will have to do something about controlling them when they are inside, if for no reason than the OH&S welfare of the employee’s and other inmates.

It’s precisely the OHS welfare of employees and other inmates that inspires us to crack down on these potential weapons.

JC said :

Jethro said :

Not overly impressed with your responses.

You skirt around a number of issues that multiple people have raised, and which are therefore clearly important to the community. In some cases you say think there is room for reform but you aren’t going to do anything about it.

He is a party politician, no way in the world would ANY (including Labour) be allowed to come to a website like this and actually say what they really think. All the responses thus far have been stock answers to select questions or views, which is exactly what you would expect.

I’d reject the claim my answers are stock by any means… Clearly, for example, my views that marriage should be decoupled from the law isn’t generally held by the Liberal Party.

steele_blade said :

Matt_Watts said :

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”.

Thanks for the transparency Matt, very transparent in fact. Care to comment on this quote from here http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-nanny-state/
The use of the word nanny-state to belittle policies which care for citizens reveals a deep and underlying prejudice about the role women have played in society and politics.”
Or would you prefer to distance yourself from Tony Abbott and Alan Jones in the details, while firmly blowing on their dog whistle?

Well, “The derisive use of the term nanny state is deliberately sexist”. That’s the auhor’s opinion. In any event, I didn’t create the term, and I use it because that seemed easier than inventing my own.

Martlark said :

Are you a Liberal or liberal? Seems like you’re just another slick conservative intent on telling us what you want us to do. You’ll be down the bottom of my list with the Greens.

Labels are difficult.

I consider myself liberal in my practical outlook. For example, whilst I have been completely open about the fact I am personally against abortion (and I knew I’d cop a bit of flack for that in this forum), I’m also open about the fact I would never vote to ban it. I don’t see this as a contradiction; I believe I am measured in my approach to what government should be – for all Canberrans.

As for the drug issue, I have stated there needs to be law reform. Yet I believe if we were to legalise everything tomorrow, our existing integrated systems of government would not be aligned; for example, Customs might cause trouble for drug-using Canberrans, as would NSW Police for drug-using Canberrans on NSW roads, etc. We have to look at the entire system.

In the meantime, I consider a higher priority to be fixing our schools, roads, planning, liquor laws and hospitals. I know that won’t be popular for everyone.

schmeah said :

Matt_Watts said :

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

Sheesh… Have you been to a Labor party meeting lately?

I’m doorknocking. I also have a great team of volunteers (who I thank).

How would you know what happens at ALP meetings Matt? You do realise the ALP has multiple meeting venues Canberra to the Libs, what is it .. 2.. All I’m asking is that with such a limited membership base .. how do you identify ‘volunteers’.

I have a couple of supporters who are helping me out instead of the Labor party who they normally support. One of these persons is actually a member of the Labor Party. Another is a former Labor branch treasurer. I don’t see the need to differentiate between Liberal members and non-members if they are volunteering to assist me. Anyway, I prefer to do my doorknocking myself.

Masquara said :

Matt – I have a Dorothy Dixer for you! : )

What’s your response to the ACT Greens’ (IMO anti-growth, anti export) food policy? Do you think the ACT region would be better served by growing opportunities to export foodstuffs to other regions, rather than the Greens’ “eat local”? Or do you agree with them that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be well spent in devising ways to limit Canberrans to locally grown produce? (e.g. chard greens and mangel wurzel for Canberrans all winter, presumably no coffee, ever, and no mangos, ever?)

There is only so much I can comment on the Greens’ policies. Not everybody has a backyard in O’Connor in which they can grow their own food.

urchin said :

I second the request for an elucidation of how you would vote on gay marriage and *why* you would vote that way. No meaningless “I believe a marriage is a union between a man and a woman” – that’s an opinion not a reason. If you are against it, please state why it is in society’s best interests to prohibit gay marriage in concrete terms based in fact.

Note – I consider this to be a federal issue. Nonetheless, you are asking me to support marriage between a man and a woman, when I believe in the separation of church and state.

I believe government should recognise civil unions between man and woman, and woman and woman, and man and man…. It would then be up to any religion whether they allow “marriage” of any type within their church.

wildturkeycanoe7:39 am 03 Oct 12

Matt, can I ask you for an explanation as to why the Liberal party is promising to spend tens of millions of dollars on private schools in the ACT? I have read the official line about keeping pace with our neighboring state’s funding, but I ask you this – if private schools are supported by the fees paid by the students’ parents, why should the government sponsor any money towards these self-funding facilities? If that money were spent on public infrastructure [which is declining so miserably], then the parents who cannot afford tens of thousands per year, per child, would see a fairer education for their offspring. Instead, typically for Liberals, the wealthy are catered for with extra money to make things easier whilst the hard working and lower paid of society get dragged back closer to poverty without assistance from the government. Give our kids a chance and if parent’s want their own to achieve more in life, let them spend their own money to achieve that, DO NOT waste my taxes paying to have a rich kid get an ergonomic chair, or new laptop, or the best Spanish teacher in the world.
I have always seen the policies of the Liberal party pander to business, the APS and wealthy Australians, whilst making life more difficult for the working class. This kind of expenditure just drives the point home even more.

rosscoact said :

kakosi said :

If I was feeling sarcastic I’d ask if it was the Liberals or Labor who blew up the Royal Canberra Hospital leaving the city in a perpetual state of not having enough hospital beds to meet the needs of its citizens?

Just yesterday I was told by a woman that she had to wait to get into hospital for urgent dialysis because she was informed that 60 people were ahead of her waiting for beds at the hospital. This isn’t the fault of any system in the hospital, it’s simply the fault of not having enough beds for the ever growing population. The hospitals we have are stretched to the limit.

I’m not sure that bed shortage is an infrastructure problem. My understanding that the there is physical space for beds but there are not enough healthcare professionals employed to look after people.

So therefore, hire more nurses and doctors and more beds come online.

Happy to be proved wrong but that’s my understanding.

The wards are overflowing in Canberra Hospital at the moment. I think you may have been correct about the situation a few years ago but now it’s and infrastructure problem as well.

CanberraChristina10:48 pm 02 Oct 12

EvanJames said :

Darkfalz said :

CanberraChristina said :

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

A dragway is always going to be a NIMBY issue. Who wants to hear that horrible noise, seriously? It’s bad enough when one goon tears down a nearby street making sure that everyone for 5 blocks knows what a tosser he is, imagine that being every 60 seconds. As for being a “worthwhile” hobby, to each their own I suppose, but I can’t imagine a bigger waste of time and money.

Well said. They want Thuh Guvvermint to provide them with a dragstrip, but are strangely reluctant to have it located near where they live. They want it a long way away from them. And motor “sport” is noisy… the poor folk at the Ridgeway cop the raceway noise, and when the wind’s right, much of Qbn do too. A dragway would be ten times as loud, due to the nature of the vehicles and their engines. A bit like having the Summernats over the road, 365 days a year.

I am pleased to see, however, that a working knowledge of written English is no longer necessary for lawyers.

Yup, you got me there. Brace yourself for another late night, unproofed post full of s***ty grammar and spelling.

A motorsport facility would be loud, and I certainly wouldn’t want one within hearing distance of my house. Believe it or not, there is land outside of Canberra / suburbs that still falls within the ACT.

Good luck, Matt – although I do have to say that I believe your party has no chance of running the ACT while they continue to be such a ineffective, lazy, stupid and inept opposition.

I reckon ACT Labor could have a blowfly as Chief Minister, and most the current bunch of ACT Liberals would still have trouble landing any decent political blows against them!

(Actually, now that I think of it, ACT Labor do have a blowfly as leader!)

EvanJames said :

poetix said :

EvanJames said :

Officer Lymangood?

I don’t look at this picture and think ‘Matt Watts has a doppelganger’:

http://blog.betdsi.com/bellator-74-wrap-up/

Try this one:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085255/

I know, I just liked aspects of the photo…

Darkfalz said :

Jethro said :

Could it be that at heart you are simply another social conservative who is only against the nanny state when it comes to red tape governing businesses, but completely in favour of it when it comes to moralising and telling people how they can or cannot live their lives?

Do you recognise there is a difference between not telling people how to live and not specifically changing constructs to allow them to feel better about their lifestyle choices?

You don’t need to outlaw behaviours, but you don’t need to cater to them either. Particularly when they are not in the best interests of greater society.

Euthanasia and drug laws are outlawed. These laws are the very definition of telling people how to live; they remove the individual’s ultimate sovereignty over their body and place that sovereignty in the hands of lawmakers. People who choose to exercise the sovereignty they should have over their own bodies face the very real risk of prosecution.

You can try and spin it how you like, but laws that remove an individual’s sovereignty over their own body are anathema to the principles of individual liberty that our society is supposed to be based upon. This is not simply ‘changing constructs” to make someone feel better about their lifestyle choices, but removing laws that criminalise those lifestyle choices.

And it was only a hundred years ago that society decided to start telling people what drugs they could take.

How thrilling that political debate has now reached the point that when someone disagrees with a person eager to represent them they get a response of “rubbish”. Its great we have a whole new generation of pollie coming through that has learnt from the mistakes of the current batch and provides sensible thought out replies to the people he is reaching out to.

poetix said :

EvanJames said :

Officer Lymangood?

I don’t look at this picture and think ‘Matt Watts has a doppelganger’:

http://blog.betdsi.com/bellator-74-wrap-up/

Try this one:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085255/

Darkfalz said :

CanberraChristina said :

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

A dragway is always going to be a NIMBY issue. Who wants to hear that horrible noise, seriously? It’s bad enough when one goon tears down a nearby street making sure that everyone for 5 blocks knows what a tosser he is, imagine that being every 60 seconds. As for being a “worthwhile” hobby, to each their own I suppose, but I can’t imagine a bigger waste of time and money.

Well said. They want Thuh Guvvermint to provide them with a dragstrip, but are strangely reluctant to have it located near where they live. They want it a long way away from them. And motor “sport” is noisy… the poor folk at the Ridgeway cop the raceway noise, and when the wind’s right, much of Qbn do too. A dragway would be ten times as loud, due to the nature of the vehicles and their engines. A bit like having the Summernats over the road, 365 days a year.

I am pleased to see, however, that a working knowledge of written English is no longer necessary for lawyers.

Thinking about it, it’s Advertising Feature who deserves the Mully, not Matt. Well done!

The Mully has been awarded and Matt is devastated to have missed out to Philip Pocock.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd10:35 am 02 Oct 12

460cixy said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Golden-Alpine said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

The term motor sport is misleading. It’s not a legitimate sport, hell it’s not even a sport.

Your name says it all….

Explain.

Think what there saying mate is get a life

I don’t see what that has to do with the discussion at hand.

“the Australian constitution outlines marriage as a federal issue.”

…is what I meant to say. Typos.

vauxhall said :

Matt_Watts said :

vauxhall said :

The candidate’s comments on gay marriage are disappointing, and ending them with a throw-away “It’s time to be outcomes-focussed” insulting to those who seek it as a basic human right.

Too many contradictions in basic stances here – against nanny state, but want to regulate against gay marriage and for strong regulation of abortion. Tries to dodge gay marriage on basis that it’s ‘for the Feds’ and then argues the ACT should be strongly involved in other areas of Federal responsibility. A bizarre reversion to talking about Federal Labor when asked about thoughts on religion’s role in policy.

Seems a nice enough guy, but inconsistent and clearly way too undercooked for this election.

Rubbish, frankly (oh, aside from the comment about me being a nice guy, I suppose!). In no way am I inconsistent. I’ve been completely open regarding my views. My proposals are focussed on outcomes. If you wish to suggest an alternative, please, by all means, submit it.

How on earth is what I said rubbish? You’ll need to get a thicker skin if you want to be in politics. The alternative on gay marriage is allow it to occur – there is an extremely clear inconsistency in your stated rhetoric of being against a nanny state and then wanting to regulate for it to not apply to homosexuals, not to mention the inconsistencies in your repeated comments about being against the influence of religion in matters of state and then saying that you want to let religions determine who they marry.

Being open about your views does not prevent you having logical inconsistencies with them, and leaves you wide open for voting unpredictably (should you not just be voting against party lines).

I think Jethro summed it up quite nicely too.

No, Matt was right. What you said was total rubbish. There were no contradictions in what Matt said, and he deferred to the federal government on marriage laws because the Australian constitution makes outlines marriage and a federal issue. You should have known that before making your comments.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Golden-Alpine said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

The term motor sport is misleading. It’s not a legitimate sport, hell it’s not even a sport.

Your name says it all….

Explain.

Think what there saying mate is get a life

Jethro said :

Could it be that at heart you are simply another social conservative who is only against the nanny state when it comes to red tape governing businesses, but completely in favour of it when it comes to moralising and telling people how they can or cannot live their lives?

Do you recognise there is a difference between not telling people how to live and not specifically changing constructs to allow them to feel better about their lifestyle choices?

You don’t need to outlaw behaviours, but you don’t need to cater to them either. Particularly when they are not in the best interests of greater society.

CanberraChristina said :

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

A dragway is always going to be a NIMBY issue. Who wants to hear that horrible noise, seriously? It’s bad enough when one goon tears down a nearby street making sure that everyone for 5 blocks knows what a tosser he is, imagine that being every 60 seconds. As for being a “worthwhile” hobby, to each their own I suppose, but I can’t imagine a bigger waste of time and money.

CanberraChristina said :

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

Stamp duty needs to go, but tripling rates is not the answer. The whole point of buying a house is that you own it outright, not having to pay a slightly cheaper version of rent. Rates should cover actual property expenses, not be a revenue raiser for the government. That’s what GST is for.

I’d like to see the caps for FHB stamp duty exception raised or removed all together. You can then scrap the FOHG for all I care. If you can’t save for a house deposit you shouldn’t be gifted it, but stamp duty is another matter. It’s highway robbery when you can least afford it, and one of the reasons that people stay put in places they’d rather not be any more rather than putting another place on the market.

earthrepair said :

“For some reason I’m personally 100% against abortion”. If policy is your forte and I guess as a politician it should be then saying “for some reason” as if you don’t know the reason is dumb. Perhaps drop the 100%. What about a woman that has been raped with a down’s syndrome child, would you accept her right to an abortion?

He sounds pretty cogent here. My opinion of abortion is that it’s distasteful, but it’s one of society’s necessary evils. Ron Paul said it best in one of the GOP debates, that the increased abortion rate / need for abortion is an adjustment to a change (lessening) of morals in society, not the cause of it. You need to address the root cause (in this case, impulsive unprotected sex) rather than what it results in. With our increasingly “hedonism is a virtue” society (almost everyone under the age 30 thinks and behaves like this) we are well and truly past fixing this, so there’s not much point in trying.

earthrepair said :

I can understand why the Lesbian and Gay community would be offended by your stance on gay marriage.

Is there anything that wouldn’t offend them other than hook, line and sinker acceptance of their demands? The “Civil unions are not good enough” attitude reveals it’s got nothing to do with equal rights and everything to do with scoring some kind of social victory. It’s interesting too because I am sure there are plenty of gay couples who’d be perfectly happy with a civil union, but much like those who agree polygamists should also be able to marry, they’re told to shut up to give the illusion of a unified front.

Not sure what Matt Watts is trying to achieve here. The Labor plugging has been heavy handed the last few months, so it’s clear where JB’s allegiances lie. Most of the posters here are die hard lefties who start to foam at the mouth whenever they hear someone admit they don’t agree with gay marriage (an almost non-issue in my opinion which seems to have hijacked all intelligent political debate over the last few years).

Despite it being much closer than usual, it would still be a miracle for Labor to be turfed out after what seems liked decades of having to put up with Stanhope and Gallagher. I’m much more interested in the Federal election next year.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:55 pm 01 Oct 12

Golden-Alpine said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

The term motor sport is misleading. It’s not a legitimate sport, hell it’s not even a sport.

Your name says it all….

Explain.

Golden-Alpine9:12 pm 01 Oct 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

The term motor sport is misleading. It’s not a legitimate sport, hell it’s not even a sport.

Your name says it all….

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd8:36 pm 01 Oct 12

CanberraChristina said :

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

The term motor sport is misleading. It’s not a legitimate sport, hell it’s not even a sport.

CanberraChristina6:24 pm 01 Oct 12

LSWCHP said :

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

+1 I’m a mid 20s female lawyer who also happens to be a gun owner and occasional hunter, though its more the husband’s hobby than mine. He’s a fisher too. Our gun laws are fine, and quite sensible IMO. A home cooked meal of freshly killed and butchered wild venison or eating fish so fresh that was swimming in the Murrumbidgee hours before makes me pretty damn pleased to be a redneck. Red wine and berry jus, anyone?

At the risk of really pegging myself as a redneck – Matt, I would like to know what the liberals view on the long promised but never delivered dragway / motorsport facility for the ACT? Motorsport is a legitimate sport and, IMO having grown up with alot of young men who are into cars and mechanics, a very worthwhile hobby for young men to dedicate their energy and funds too.

Just as a bit of general feedback, I too disappointed with the liberal campaign focusing on labor “tripling rates”. I feel that the campaign is negative, misleading and insults the intelligence of voters. Stamp duty is well acknowledged to be one of the most inefficient and uneconomical taxes and phasing it out over a 20 year period is one of the soundest (and bravest) policies I have seen around for a long time. Despite having nothing to gain and everything to loose from the change as someone who has already paid stamp duty (more than once) and pays rates (on more than one property), I strongly support it because I think it makes very good economic sense.

Three quick questions mate.

1) given it is most likely only two libs will get elected in ginnenderra would you prefer to be elected with Vicky or Alistair

2) if three libs get elected in Molonglo and we assume Hanson and Dozspot get up who do you want to come third?

3) in Brindibella libs are hoping for three, so smyth and zed, then who do you hope comes third?

Would really like to know the insiders opinion, it also helps to show what type of liberal you are. Cheers mate, well done so far in the answering of the questions more candidates should have the minerals to do it.

steele_blade said :

Matt_Watts said :

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”.

Thanks for the transparency Matt, very transparent in fact. Care to comment on this quote from here http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-nanny-state/
The use of the word nanny-state to belittle policies which care for citizens reveals a deep and underlying prejudice about the role women have played in society and politics.”
Or would you prefer to distance yourself from Tony Abbott and Alan Jones in the details, while firmly blowing on their dog whistle?

That’s got to be one of the silliest articles and assertions I’ve read in a while.

Calling it the nanny state has nothing to do with sexism (unless you’re implying that nannys can’t be male) and everything to do with the government trying to protect citizens from themselves.

And only an imbecile could think that rejecting a welfare state has anything to do with gender.

kakosi said :

If I was feeling sarcastic I’d ask if it was the Liberals or Labor who blew up the Royal Canberra Hospital leaving the city in a perpetual state of not having enough hospital beds to meet the needs of its citizens?

Just yesterday I was told by a woman that she had to wait to get into hospital for urgent dialysis because she was informed that 60 people were ahead of her waiting for beds at the hospital. This isn’t the fault of any system in the hospital, it’s simply the fault of not having enough beds for the ever growing population. The hospitals we have are stretched to the limit.

I’m not sure that bed shortage is an infrastructure problem. My understanding that the there is physical space for beds but there are not enough healthcare professionals employed to look after people.

So therefore, hire more nurses and doctors and more beds come online.

Happy to be proved wrong but that’s my understanding.

Matt,

On the announcement of the 20th September of the duplication of Horse Park Drive this was received well on our Facebook Page however questions were raised around timing and the missing link.

I emailed info@canberraliberals.org.au asking for clarification. Disappointingly, to date I have not received a response back. I will pose the questions to you here hopefully you can answer the questions.

What is the proposed time frame of the completion of the duplication?

Does this include completing and duplicating the missing link of Horse Park Drive?

Mark

If I was feeling sarcastic I’d ask if it was the Liberals or Labor who blew up the Royal Canberra Hospital leaving the city in a perpetual state of not having enough hospital beds to meet the needs of its citizens?

Just yesterday I was told by a woman that she had to wait to get into hospital for urgent dialysis because she was informed that 60 people were ahead of her waiting for beds at the hospital. This isn’t the fault of any system in the hospital, it’s simply the fault of not having enough beds for the ever growing population. The hospitals we have are stretched to the limit.

JC said :

He is a party politician, no way in the world would ANY (including Labour) be allowed to come to a website like this and actually say what they really think. All the responses thus far have been stock answers to select questions or views, which is exactly what you would expect.

Of course I mean labor. Bloody spell checker always wanting to spell words right.

Matt_Watts said :

Of course there will be avenues open to smuggling drugs into the AMC. Yet, we shouldn’t facilitate it. End of story.

No it’s not the end of the story. If you accept that no matter what drugs will get into the AMC, which is seems you have (wonder if Zed knows you’ve admitted this) then if you are in power then you will have to do something about controlling them when they are inside, if for no reason than the OH&S welfare of the employee’s and other inmates.

Jethro said :

Not overly impressed with your responses.

You skirt around a number of issues that multiple people have raised, and which are therefore clearly important to the community. In some cases you say think there is room for reform but you aren’t going to do anything about it.

He is a party politician, no way in the world would ANY (including Labour) be allowed to come to a website like this and actually say what they really think. All the responses thus far have been stock answers to select questions or views, which is exactly what you would expect.

EvanJames said :

Officer Lymangood?

I don’t look at this picture and think ‘Matt Watts has a doppelganger’:

http://blog.betdsi.com/bellator-74-wrap-up/

I think it takes a lot of guts to make a post like this, but you’re too conservative for my liking. And *shock horror* I don’t really have any big issues with the way labour have been running Canberra. If its not broken for you, don’t fix it.

steele_blade12:17 am 01 Oct 12

Matt_Watts said :

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”.

Thanks for the transparency Matt, very transparent in fact. Care to comment on this quote from here http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-nanny-state/
The use of the word nanny-state to belittle policies which care for citizens reveals a deep and underlying prejudice about the role women have played in society and politics.”
Or would you prefer to distance yourself from Tony Abbott and Alan Jones in the details, while firmly blowing on their dog whistle?

Officer Lymangood?

poetix said :

Matt deserves the Mully for doing this. I just couldn’t vote Liberal, but I would love to see him win an award for his efforts here.

(She said, totally disinterested.)

Perhaps he’ll be rewarded with a seat coz he doesn’t deserve a mully.

Matt deserves the Mully for doing this. I just couldn’t vote Liberal, but I would love to see him win an award for his efforts here.

(She said, totally disinterested.)

LSWCHP said :

And as for my voting intentions, JB said a while ago that Zed has been “stunningly inert” in opposition, and I agree with that, but I’m going to vote Liberal anyway, just because the current crew seem so rotten. There needs to be a house cleaning in ACT government.

The problem seems to be that Libs have had to be inert because if Zed actually said anything he would either reveal himself as an unelectable hyperconservative or put him self at risk of being exposed as such after an election while making himself out as a moderate Lib to win said election. By being quiet and not doing anything for three years, he can come out as the hard-core conservative he is after the election and no one can call him a liar.

Matt_Watts said :

kakosi said :

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”

and

“I’m running to improve basic services that will benefit everyone.”

There is a contradiction in your statements. However this may simply indicate you will make a good politician 🙂

I’ve never claimed to be an anarchist. Yet it is true we have suffered from too much red tape.

Guess it’s good you don’t advocate violent overturn of institutions. But what’s that got to do with saying things about a nanny state in relation to the other side of politics and then saying you’re for services when that’s clearly not a liberal party ideal?

And, how is a global statement about “red tape” meaningful as to what you stand for and what you would do in government? If you expect to be elected you need to be specific about exactly what you want to achieve.

Good on you for the transparency Mr Watts.

Can you please explain why the ACT Liberals propose to spend $3.6 billion on education (with no mention of CIT) whereas the current education budget is around $4 billion (including CIT)

Given the attitudes of neighbouring states to TAFE, can you accept that it is hard to put too much faith into a generic pledge that it will be supported should the Libs form government?

What is the official position on CIT?

Thanks

Matt_Watts said :

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

I just spent a pleasant couple of hours at the range with my eldest son and three high powered guns. I was disheartened to read that past, and pleased by Matt’s response.

We certainly have strong gun laws in the ACT, they just need to be enforced, and I’m all in favour of that. And I’m a tertiary educated professional person with job, house, children etc. If I qualify as a red neck then the term needs to be redefined.

And as for my voting intentions, JB said a while ago that Zed has been “stunningly inert” in opposition, and I agree with that, but I’m going to vote Liberal anyway, just because the current crew seem so rotten. There needs to be a house cleaning in ACT government.

DrKoresh said :

Zed irks me, probably on some kind of emotional, visceral level that has nothing to do with his politics

I got over my “Zed irk” (and I had it) some time ago. Perhaps when Labor public service appointee Andrew Cappie-Wood, having spent hours at a forum preaching to Canberrans that we must go medium-density, was made to confess that he – hypocritically – lives on a suburban-margins acreage himself. Or perhaps when Katie was busted fudging about her relationship with the hospital numbers-fudger. Or maybe it was when Stanhope bypassed due process regarding the Fitters Workshop. Perhaps it has been Katie Gallagher’s over-indulgence toward druggie losers (“We need to take account of the views of the drug-injecting community”). Or the shambolic, piecemeal Canberra Centenary “planning”. I can’t pinpoint when I got over this Labor government. I reserve a likelihood that my vote would return to Labor after they’d had a period in opposition and reflected on their disrespect for ordinary voters. But for this election, I’m pretty much unswayable, and every larding-on of a bit of Labor pork only annoys me more.

460cixy said :

I dont see why folk here are so keen on pandering to drug addicts euthanasia is one thing that I am for how ever when a pet is dieing in pain we do the right thing a human is no different

Punctuation is your friend.

Spellen is a dieing art how ever aswell!

Damn, I’m disappointed that I won’t have the opportunity to vote for Mr. Watts. His frankness has been a breath of fresh air, but I don’t think I can bring myself you put Zed in the top spot, I really just don’t like the guy. Why must we be forced to choose between a douche and a turd-sandwich? Oh well, maybe in 3 years time, there’ll be a liberal leader (heck, maybe even Mr. Watts) that I can stomach supporting.

Not that I’m sticking up for Labor at the moment, I’m pretty disappointed with Katy too, but Zed irks me, probably on some kind of emotional, visceral level that has nothing to do with his politics

460cixy said :

I dont see why folk here are so keen on pandering to drug addicts euthanasia is one thing that I am for how ever when a pet is dieing in pain we do the right thing a human is no different

Punctuation is your friend.

Wow, did that first post come with a translation? Or is James Joyce alive and among us?

Matt_Watts said :

farnarkler said :

Matt, reading your views on drugs at the AMC, what are your thoughts on the statement that has been made that there is no way to stop illegal drugs being taken into AMC? I seem to be one whose idea always falls on deaf ears and that idea is to keep a number of drug detecting dogs at AMC. Surely it wouldn’t cost a huge amount to have two of these dogs so that every visitor, contractor and staff member can be tested. We all know airports have bomb detector gear and can request anyone to be tested so there’s no risk of discrimination.

Of course there will be avenues open to smuggling drugs into the AMC. Yet, we shouldn’t facilitate it. End of story.

My blurry eyes read this as smuggling dogs into AMC! Now, there’s an idea!

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:14 am 30 Sep 12

Jethro said :

Not overly impressed with your responses.

You skirt around a number of issues that multiple people have raised, and which are therefore clearly important to the community. In some cases you say think there is room for reform but you aren’t going to do anything about it.

What does ‘outcomes based’ even mean?

To me, some incredible outcomes of this election would be to see the trial of legalised cannabis in the ACT and the ACT introducing voluntary euthanasia laws.

If you are indeed in favour of small government and against the nanny state intruding in our lives, why are these things not on your agenda? People who have witnessed a loved one slowly but surely die over a period of months in absolute pain, and watched those people beg to be allowed to die, would say voluntary euthanasia would be a very big and positive outcome for this city.

Could it be that at heart you are simply another social conservative who is only against the nanny state when it comes to red tape governing businesses, but completely in favour of it when it comes to moralising and telling people how they can or cannot live their lives?

Good point. Matt, you cannot be against nanny state but also be against people being allowed to smoke pot, euthanise themselves, have abortions or marry the same sex.

I dont see why folk here are so keen on pandering to drug addicts euthanasia is one thing that I am for how ever when a pet is dieing in pain we do the right thing a human is no different

Whatever your ideology we really need smart people at the helm and I think despite your admirable transparency you fail in that regard, so far.

“For example, the feel-good plastic bag “ban” has led to more non-biodegradable bag use in landfill and increased litter in our streets”. Have you audited that to prove your point? It sounds nonsense.

“For some reason I’m personally 100% against abortion”. If policy is your forte and I guess as a politician it should be then saying “for some reason” as if you don’t know the reason is dumb. Perhaps drop the 100%. What about a woman that has been raped with a down’s syndrome child, would you accept her right to an abortion?

Re Euthansia, if it is a serious point you are making then you don’t want to prevent your friend from killing himself by lion but you don’t want to argue the point effectively whether a person should have access to barbituates if they are terminally ill. You say you are against a nanny state and pro personal choice?

I can understand why the Lesbian and Gay community would be offended by your stance on gay marriage.

Re needle exchange : I doubt you have looked carefully at the evidence if you are making comments like “What I can’t understand is these academics trying to ban alcohol for law-abiding citizens at the same time they are calling for taxpayer funded drugs to be provided to prisoners.”
Taxpayer funded drugs are there. There would be a lot of prescription drugs available there supplied by the taxpayer. No serious academic is suggesting a return to prohibition re alcohol.

“Of course there will be avenues open to smuggling drugs into the AMC. Yet, we shouldn’t facilitate it. End of story.”
Another poorly researched position?
How does the community facilitate drugs being smuggled into prisons?

End of story..

Matt_Watts said :

vauxhall said :

The candidate’s comments on gay marriage are disappointing, and ending them with a throw-away “It’s time to be outcomes-focussed” insulting to those who seek it as a basic human right.

Too many contradictions in basic stances here – against nanny state, but want to regulate against gay marriage and for strong regulation of abortion. Tries to dodge gay marriage on basis that it’s ‘for the Feds’ and then argues the ACT should be strongly involved in other areas of Federal responsibility. A bizarre reversion to talking about Federal Labor when asked about thoughts on religion’s role in policy.

Seems a nice enough guy, but inconsistent and clearly way too undercooked for this election.

Rubbish, frankly (oh, aside from the comment about me being a nice guy, I suppose!). In no way am I inconsistent. I’ve been completely open regarding my views. My proposals are focussed on outcomes. If you wish to suggest an alternative, please, by all means, submit it.

How on earth is what I said rubbish? You’ll need to get a thicker skin if you want to be in politics. The alternative on gay marriage is allow it to occur – there is an extremely clear inconsistency in your stated rhetoric of being against a nanny state and then wanting to regulate for it to not apply to homosexuals, not to mention the inconsistencies in your repeated comments about being against the influence of religion in matters of state and then saying that you want to let religions determine who they marry.

Being open about your views does not prevent you having logical inconsistencies with them, and leaves you wide open for voting unpredictably (should you not just be voting against party lines).

I think Jethro summed it up quite nicely too.

Matt_Watts said :

vauxhall said :

The candidate’s comments on gay marriage are disappointing, and ending them with a throw-away “It’s time to be outcomes-focussed” insulting to those who seek it as a basic human right.

Too many contradictions in basic stances here – against nanny state, but want to regulate against gay marriage and for strong regulation of abortion. Tries to dodge gay marriage on basis that it’s ‘for the Feds’ and then argues the ACT should be strongly involved in other areas of Federal responsibility. A bizarre reversion to talking about Federal Labor when asked about thoughts on religion’s role in policy.

Seems a nice enough guy, but inconsistent and clearly way too undercooked for this election.

Rubbish, frankly (oh, aside from the comment about me being a nice guy, I suppose!). In no way am I inconsistent. I’ve been completely open regarding my views. My proposals are focussed on outcomes. If you wish to suggest an alternative, please, by all means, submit it.

Not overly impressed with your responses.

You skirt around a number of issues that multiple people have raised, and which are therefore clearly important to the community. In some cases you say think there is room for reform but you aren’t going to do anything about it.

What does ‘outcomes based’ even mean?

To me, some incredible outcomes of this election would be to see the trial of legalised cannabis in the ACT and the ACT introducing voluntary euthanasia laws.

If you are indeed in favour of small government and against the nanny state intruding in our lives, why are these things not on your agenda? People who have witnessed a loved one slowly but surely die over a period of months in absolute pain, and watched those people beg to be allowed to die, would say voluntary euthanasia would be a very big and positive outcome for this city.

Could it be that at heart you are simply another social conservative who is only against the nanny state when it comes to red tape governing businesses, but completely in favour of it when it comes to moralising and telling people how they can or cannot live their lives?

farnarkler said :

Matt, reading your views on drugs at the AMC, what are your thoughts on the statement that has been made that there is no way to stop illegal drugs being taken into AMC? I seem to be one whose idea always falls on deaf ears and that idea is to keep a number of drug detecting dogs at AMC. Surely it wouldn’t cost a huge amount to have two of these dogs so that every visitor, contractor and staff member can be tested. We all know airports have bomb detector gear and can request anyone to be tested so there’s no risk of discrimination.

Of course there will be avenues open to smuggling drugs into the AMC. Yet, we shouldn’t facilitate it. End of story.

Martlark said :

Are you a Liberal or liberal? Seems like you’re just another slick conservative intent on telling us what you want us to do. You’ll be down the bottom of my list with the Greens.

It’s disappointing you haven’t looked at my actual comments. But hey – up to you.

schmeah said :

Matt_Watts said :

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

Sheesh… Have you been to a Labor party meeting lately?

I’m doorknocking. I also have a great team of volunteers (who I thank).

How would you know what happens at ALP meetings Matt? You do realise the ALP has multiple meeting venues Canberra to the Libs, what is it .. 2.. All I’m asking is that with such a limited membership base .. how do you identify ‘volunteers’.

I have a couple of volunteers who are actually ALP members. That’s how I know the way ALP meetings are conducted. The Libs’ meetings are quite well attended.

460cixy said :

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Our gun laws are not weak. The use of the term “red necks” doesn’t help anyone.

kakosi said :

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”

and

“I’m running to improve basic services that will benefit everyone.”

There is a contradiction in your statements. However this may simply indicate you will make a good politician 🙂

I’ve never claimed to be an anarchist. Yet it is true we have suffered from too much red tape.

vauxhall said :

The candidate’s comments on gay marriage are disappointing, and ending them with a throw-away “It’s time to be outcomes-focussed” insulting to those who seek it as a basic human right.

Too many contradictions in basic stances here – against nanny state, but want to regulate against gay marriage and for strong regulation of abortion. Tries to dodge gay marriage on basis that it’s ‘for the Feds’ and then argues the ACT should be strongly involved in other areas of Federal responsibility. A bizarre reversion to talking about Federal Labor when asked about thoughts on religion’s role in policy.

Seems a nice enough guy, but inconsistent and clearly way too undercooked for this election.

Rubbish, frankly (oh, aside from the comment about me being a nice guy, I suppose!). In no way am I inconsistent. I’ve been completely open regarding my views. My proposals are focussed on outcomes. If you wish to suggest an alternative, please, by all means, submit it.

LABOR POLICY 2011-2012
TRANSPORT PLANNING and ROAD SAFETY

3. Provide leadership in training and preparation of new vehicle controllers to ensure their fitness to
control the chosen mode of transport (e.g. Truck, 4WD, Motorcycle, or bicycle)
…..-(i thought that was what obtaining your licence covered)

6. Improve road side barriers to align with international best practice in relation to that improve
safety outcomes for powered two and three wheeled vehicles
…… (we want to put more crap on the roads for you to look out for)

1. Establish a Canberra Transport Authority (CTA)
2. Recognising the transport inefficiencies in Canberra that arise from a dependence on the private
motor vehicle, prepare a comprehensive transport plan, with wide public consultation, to serve
the ACT to the year 2020…..
.(we would like you to stop using your car, and use your bike or the bus, and we will conduct a fool ‘consultation with the public’…..if they chance upon us in the mall or however we choose to consult the public.

3. Ensure that in developing a transport plan the CTA will adopt an integrated sustainable transport
model based on: Walking Cycling, Motorcycling, and an effective and efficient public transport
system that meets the infrastructure and service requirements of the ACT community.
…..(eg cars now have to give way to pedestrians and cyclist crossing the road around Lake Ginnenderra)

2. Implement parking and motor vehicle policies that redress the adverse environmental and
economic impact of inappropriate vehicle usage
……. (we have determined that the majority of Canberrans use their car in a way we don’t approve of so we might just piss you off with less parking places and more cyclists on the roads to encourage you to change your habits )
b) Setting fees and charges to reflect the economic and environmental costs and benefits
associated with each mode of transport .
…..(In accordance with our Pricing Policy) (we want your all on the bus or on a bike and we will charge you to kingdom come if you don’t comply)

The candidate’s comments on gay marriage are disappointing, and ending them with a throw-away “It’s time to be outcomes-focussed” insulting to those who seek it as a basic human right.

Too many contradictions in basic stances here – against nanny state, but want to regulate against gay marriage and for strong regulation of abortion. Tries to dodge gay marriage on basis that it’s ‘for the Feds’ and then argues the ACT should be strongly involved in other areas of Federal responsibility. A bizarre reversion to talking about Federal Labor when asked about thoughts on religion’s role in policy.

Seems a nice enough guy, but inconsistent and clearly way too undercooked for this election.

“I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party since I was sixteen because I’ve never liked the nanny state.”

and

“I’m running to improve basic services that will benefit everyone.”

There is a contradiction in your statements. However this may simply indicate you will make a good politician 🙂

rosscoact said :

460cixy said :

What are we going to do about the shooting of all these kangaroos Matthew some one must think of the animals they have rights too

They have the right to get into my belly

That wouldent be so bad but there just wasted

Are you a Liberal or liberal? Seems like you’re just another slick conservative intent on telling us what you want us to do. You’ll be down the bottom of my list with the Greens.

rosscoact said :

460cixy said :

What are we going to do about the shooting of all these kangaroos Matthew some one must think of the animals they have rights too

They have the right to get into my belly

That would not be so bad but there just wasted

460cixy said :

What are we going to do about the shooting of all these kangaroos Matthew some one must think of the animals they have rights too

They have the right to get into my belly

Masquara said :

Matt – I have a Dorothy Dixer for you! : )

What’s your response to the ACT Greens’ (IMO anti-growth, anti export) food policy? Do you think the ACT region would be better served by growing opportunities to export foodstuffs to other regions, rather than the Greens’ “eat local”? Or do you agree with them that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be well spent in devising ways to limit Canberrans to locally grown produce? (e.g. chard greens and mangel wurzel for Canberrans all winter, presumably no coffee, ever, and no mangos, ever?)

Are you two married or something? (-:

Matt_Watts said :

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

Sheesh… Have you been to a Labor party meeting lately?

I’m doorknocking. I also have a great team of volunteers (who I thank).

How would you know what happens at ALP meetings Matt? You do realise the ALP has multiple meeting venues Canberra to the Libs, what is it .. 2.. All I’m asking is that with such a limited membership base .. how do you identify ‘volunteers’.

Well Matthew what’s your opinion on weapons in Canberra. I know I don’t like the idea of red necks owning high powered guns in canberras suburbs are you or your party looking at tightening our weak gun laws?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:05 pm 29 Sep 12

Thanks for the response matt. I also agree you are a touch too conservative for my liking but thanks for the well put comments and no party propaganda thrown in.
On illicit drugs, my main concern is marijuana. Why are you against that besides the fact it’s illegal? It does far less harm to the community than booze, something you seem to be keen on.

I’m not a labour voter either, and if given the chance to ask Kevin Rudd the same way you have given us the chance to ask you, then damn straight I’d be asking him the same thing about religion being involved in legislation.

Again, thanks for the comments, it’s a pleasant surprise to hear some honesty from a polli

Matt – I have a Dorothy Dixer for you! : )

What’s your response to the ACT Greens’ (IMO anti-growth, anti export) food policy? Do you think the ACT region would be better served by growing opportunities to export foodstuffs to other regions, rather than the Greens’ “eat local”? Or do you agree with them that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be well spent in devising ways to limit Canberrans to locally grown produce? (e.g. chard greens and mangel wurzel for Canberrans all winter, presumably no coffee, ever, and no mangos, ever?)

Matt, reading your views on drugs at the AMC, what are your thoughts on the statement that has been made that there is no way to stop illegal drugs being taken into AMC? I seem to be one whose idea always falls on deaf ears and that idea is to keep a number of drug detecting dogs at AMC. Surely it wouldn’t cost a huge amount to have two of these dogs so that every visitor, contractor and staff member can be tested. We all know airports have bomb detector gear and can request anyone to be tested so there’s no risk of discrimination.

@ Matt White

Given your views on abortion and euthanasia you’re too conservative for my liking but it matters not seeing that we are in different electorates.

460cixy said :

What are we going to do about the shooting of all these kangaroos Matthew some one must think of the animals they have rights too

No changes slated for that area.

What are we going to do about the shooting of all these kangaroos Matthew some one must think of the animals they have rights too

I’ll give Mr Watts this, at least he’s had the guts to put himself out here on RA where he can get attacked.

And I must admit I do like his ideas regarding pubs and clubs, ie, support small pubs rather than souless pokie filled clubs lining the coffers of the ALP.

Having said that, I’m also interested in what the libs are going to do for animal welfare as it appears that no-one really seems to care about it, least of all the greens who know appear to have very little to do environmental issues, oh, except trashing the CSIRO.

What areas of animal welfare do you believe should be improved (aside from, say, funding of the RSPCA)? I had a great experience with the RSPCA three years ago… My mate Paul Smith passed away unexpectedly and I was attempting to locate his cat. The staff were very professional, and knew all about cats (they informed me that Paul’s habit of feeding his cat duck eggs was extremely unhealthy). I adopted the cat, although he resides with my mate Gordo who is more of a cat person.

What I remember from that time is the police responding to my queries regarding the cat, before I touched base with the RSPCA, with “it’s just a cat”. Sure, humans are more valuable than animals if you have to look at things through a hierachy, yet I was disappointed with the attitude. I’m sure it was a personal attitude rather than a cultural one, and I’m not sure to what extent government can change it. Happy to hear ideas.

poetix said :

Matt_Watts said :

poetix said :

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Haha… I’m heavily into Laphroaig, but don’t have a favourite.

At the moment the Matt Smith Doctor really appeals to me because of the Fez hat. Long story.

Matt, tell your tale. You can leave your fez on. (Just remove those glasses.)

Also, do you ever read poetry, or are you illiterate?

I’ve dabbled with poetry. I remember a number of years ago, when I was active in the Young Liberals, I came across a South Australian book reading club – there was a bit of poetry, but wasn’t for me. The SA Young Libs were a bit like that… I remember speeding along in a motor boat on the Gold Coast, with a bunch of SA YLs singing from Gilbert and Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore. Memorable but, again, not for me.

I once organised a Hash House Harrier run from the Phoenix at the same time there was a poetry slam. Interesting night.

Good luck to Mr Watts,
It’s great to see the candidates put themselves out there in the community.

I like his statements, if you concentrate on delivering services and treat the LA like a town council you’ll win a lot of votes. Leave the human rights, gay marriage and euthanasia stuff to the Feds.

M0les said :

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

I once ran into Gary Humphries at my door. At the time I was wearing a red T-shirt with a gigantic yellow hammer and sickle on the front (True story). The conversation was brief and non-threatening.

I have a Che Guevara T-shirt…

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

QUESTIONS!!!

Matt, please talk about these:

Drug reform views?

Gay marriage views?

100% open and transparent government?

Stopping dole bludger welfare culture?

Police creating a us and them mentality and how to stop it?

Why is the hospital system so poor and how can it be fixed?

Religious views being incorporated into legislation(zed)?

A woman’s right to have a abortion and a very sick persons right to be euthanised?

These eight topics are major concerns for me. Please discuss. Please note ant single answer containing * durrrrr labour and greens bad, liberals good durrr* will be dis regarded. Don’t tow the party line, sir, speak your mind.

( perhaps a bit much to ask?)

Why is it too much to ask?

Drug reform views?
I am personally against the use of illicit drugs, yet I believe there is scope for some drug reform (and that is a personal view, not an official view of the Liberals – I don’t believe there are any plans for reform in either direction). Having said that, I am dead against any needle exchange in the prison. What I can’t understand is these academics trying to ban alcohol for law-abiding citizens at the same time they are calling for taxpayer funded drugs to be provided to prisoners. Nuts.

Gay marriage views?
For as long as the Feds have the capacity to override the ACT’s legislation, I consider this to be a Federal issue. Nonetheless, I believe in the separation of church and state, and I’m against the current black vs white framing of the issue. Ideally (and this, again, is a personal viewpoint and not official Lib policy), the only officially recognised union would be a civil union, and any “marriage” would be conducted by a religion as per their own rules. I have spoken to a few people about this, and I’m told this is akin to the German model (happy to be corrected). The end result would be equality under law for all unions, and religions can decide who marries within their church. It’s time to be outcomes-focussed.

100% open and transparent government?
Yes… If elected to government, we’re establishing the Public Administraton Commissioner. This is very important to me; several years ago I assisted in the Palmer and Comrie enquiries and a few resultant projects, so I realise the importance of organisational culture. There should never again be a situation where someone feels obliged to falsify health data, let alone conduct that fraud. I have a big interest in administrative law and 100% believe in open and transparent government. One thing that irks me about the ACT public service is that lack of service standards, and obviously I’ll be looking at implementing those.

Stopping dole bludger welfare culture?
There’s a big overlap with the Feds, but I want to see the ACT work with them to improve people’s capacity to assist themselves. I’m not happy with the present system; look at the situation of a person in public housing, on the dole. If they get a job, dependent on the amount of income, they are likely to lose part or all of their dole (Feds) AND pay market rent on their home (ACT). It’s a double whammy that discourages people from self-improvement, and I reckon there’s scope to gradate one’s payment to the Feds and the ACT.

We also need to ensure residents in public housing take care of their homes.

Police creating a us and them mentality and how to stop it?
Not sure to what extent this is happening, but it comes down to the law AND Ministerial accountability. Public servants often create self-serving statistics (I should know), and you need to have someone asking the right questions in Estimates and in the chamber. I think the cops do a good job given the laws they are administering.

Why is the hospital system so poor and how can it be fixed?
The problems stem from cultural failings; it starts at the top. We need to end the bullying, reduce the spin doctors and useless bureaucrats and start supporting those on the front-line. If you do that, people will want to work in the ACT hospital system.

Religious views being incorporated into legislation(zed)?
You’re obviously making a comment about Zed’s religion, yet despite all the policies that have been announced by the Libs during this campaign I can’t locate one that has incorporated religious views. I’d be interested in whether you asked the same thing of Labor when Kevid Rudd was leader. Anyway, I’ve already stated I’m in favour of separation of church and state.

A woman’s right to have a abortion and a very sick persons right to be euthanised?
There are no plans to amend the status quo in relation to either of these, so I’m not expecting a change.

Abortion – I’m not a doctor, I’m not a woman, and I’ve never had to experience such a decision. Yet everyone has a view. For some reason I’m personally 100% against abortion, although I recognise government is there for everyone and, if abortion were banned, more problems would be created given the nature of human behaviour. I’d never vote to completely ban it, but I believe there should be strict regulation.

Euthanasia for extremely sick people – personally against it, but wouldn’t legislate against it. This is going to be an increasingly important issue with the ageing population. A mate of mine says he wants to be eaten by a lion when he turns 80 (he’d like there to be a good story around it) – can we ban that? I doubt it. I note this is largely a federal issue given the NT situation several years ago.

I repeat – there are no Canberra Liberal plans to change the status quo for marriage, abortion or euthanasia. But I’ve provided my personal views as requested.

I’m running to improve basic services that will benefit everyone. With any change, I should point out that I support active community consultation; at present, consultation is a “tick-a-box” activity.

JC said :

Masquara said :

So good to know that the Liberal Party is committed to being what Canberra needs – basically a town council delivering services and keeping rates reasonable.

Note to ACT Labor: your current tv ads claim that the Liberals are using a “rejected” table of rates – but you aren’t specifying what you replaced the “rejected” table WITH. I’m up for believing the Liberals thanks.

Onyer Matt, Jeremy, Zed et al. Can’t wait to change my lifelong vote and turf Katie OUT.

Actually the adds do. As for keeping rates reasonable I take it then you are advocating loss of service then? Because you need money to pay for those services, roads, schools, hospitals etc etc etc

No dear. I think a government might start by auditing the public housing cheats – one “artist” has been occupying a three-bedroom freestanding house on his own in the inner south for the last 25 years – and has not worked on the books for any of that time (plenty of back pocket). Paying $40 a week for the privilege, at our expense. Has the house on the basis that he has two kids – they have stayed with him for a total of less than a fortnight all up, in all that time, and they are long grown up in any case. ACT Government must be aware of the situation. That ONE person, with the aid of the government, has cost us $600,000 with no end in sight. Oh and his ex partner is also occupying a double brick, corner block three-beddy on her own. Sans the kids since 2007. Did you know that public housing tenants who work on the books can still cook the books? This particular one ceases to work in her $80,000 plus job for the fortnight every six months when she is required to fill in the income form, and also pays the “dole minimum” for her house and has done since 1990. Make that $1,000,000 between them. Thanks Labor.
I can’t see the ACT Liberals allowing this.

dpm said :

Reply

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

Sheesh… Have you been to a Labor party meeting lately?

I’m doorknocking. I also have a great team of volunteers (who I thank).

Masquara said :

So good to know that the Liberal Party is committed to being what Canberra needs – basically a town council delivering services and keeping rates reasonable.

Note to ACT Labor: your current tv ads claim that the Liberals are using a “rejected” table of rates – but you aren’t specifying what you replaced the “rejected” table WITH. I’m up for believing the Liberals thanks.

Onyer Matt, Jeremy, Zed et al. Can’t wait to change my lifelong vote and turf Katie OUT.

Actually the adds do. As for keeping rates reasonable I take it then you are advocating loss of service then? Because you need money to pay for those services, roads, schools, hospitals etc etc etc

Matt_Watts said :

Thanks for the question. I hope my own approach, including being accessible via the RiotACT, indicates my respect for the Canberra voter. People can ask me anything in this forum.

The fact is the legislation to increase rates has been passed; many ratepayers are starting to notice it. The expected result, on average, is that rates will triple.

As a public servant, I understand the approach the government is taking; I don’t agree with it, though, because it’s unfair to those people who have already paid their stamp duty and it’s unfair to those on fixed incomes, such as pensioners, who may be forced out of their family home. The government’s so-called reforms are regressive.

I reject the claim that this is gutter politics. If Labor or the Greens hadn’t passed the legislation, you wouldn’t hear the Liberals informing the community about it. What do you expect us to do? Just let it slide? If you don’t agree with a policy, it’s your democratic right to fight it. Equally, if you agree with a policy, it’s your right to fight for it (not that we’ve been hearing much from Labor or the Greens on this rates/ stamp duty issue).

And, I should point out, we have plenty of positive policies out there. Just this morning I was at the Libs’ liquor licensing policy launch, which has been really well received. I’m quite proud of the policy because it reflects consultation with the community. Back in 2010 I in fact held some meetings with licensees and met with the Liberals and the Greens (Corbell wouldn’t meet me), and it’s nice to see us a step closer to the outcome we set out to achieve.

Of course rates will tripple! They will tripple if you get into power too. The question of course is over what time span will they tripple? That’s where the Libs add is quite cleaver because you infer it will be tomorrow and the world is going to come to an but you don’t ever say how long that will take. Same too with the figures about how things have gone up previously, no context what so ever as to over what time and how it relates to other thing such as income. So not a lie, but not really 100% truthful. I like PS0104 would call that gutter politics.

Anyway I can tell you that you or the libs won’t be getting my vote, despite you appearing to be a nice guy. Why well because your fearless leader has been carping on in recent weeks as to how he and the team have been working hard for the last 4 years. My memory is quite long and for the last 4 years all I’ve heard is whinging, to me that isn’t working hard.

I hope you get in but are in opposition for another 4 years and I hope that rather than whinging for those 4 years that from day 1 you start to give me reason to vote liberal again in the ACT (which incidentally is how I have voted in a couple of ACT elections in the past).

Little_Green_Bag5:43 am 29 Sep 12

If Watt’s the answer it must of been a helluva question (thank you Paul Keating).

I do realise that asking someone about their preferences on religion, gay marriage, euthanasia and abortion is a bit heavy, but you’re asking me to select you as a representative in my region, and I feel the above issues are major ones which are major pivotal points in regards to how I might vote.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

QUESTIONS!!!

Matt, please talk about these:

Drug reform views?

Gay marriage views?

100% open and transparent government?

Stopping dole bludger welfare culture?

Police creating a us and them mentality and how to stop it?

Why is the hospital system so poor and how can it be fixed?

Religious views being incorporated into legislation(zed)?

A woman’s right to have a abortion and a very sick persons right to be euthanised?

These eight topics are major concerns for me. Please discuss. Please note ant single answer containing * durrrrr labour and greens bad, liberals good durrr* will be dis regarded. Don’t tow the party line, sir, speak your mind.

( perhaps a bit much to ask?)

I agree with most of these questions, with the exception of the health system which I believe people blow way out proportion, and the 100% open and transparent government is a bit of a broad topic.

I second the request for an elucidation of how you would vote on gay marriage and *why* you would vote that way. No meaningless “I believe a marriage is a union between a man and a woman” – that’s an opinion not a reason. If you are against it, please state why it is in society’s best interests to prohibit gay marriage in concrete terms based in fact.

schmeah said :

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

I once ran into Gary Humphries at my door. At the time I was wearing a red T-shirt with a gigantic yellow hammer and sickle on the front (True story). The conversation was brief and non-threatening.

Matt_Watts said :

poetix said :

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Haha… I’m heavily into Laphroaig, but don’t have a favourite.

At the moment the Matt Smith Doctor really appeals to me because of the Fez hat. Long story.

Matt, tell your tale. You can leave your fez on. (Just remove those glasses.)

Also, do you ever read poetry, or are you illiterate?

I have enjoyed a beer at the Pot Belly with Matt and found him to be quite a reasonable bloke. Not only did he listen to my rantings on how to eliminate red-tape in areas from superannuation to liquor licensing, he also TOOK NOTES!
I had already decided to vote Liberal (FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE), but after finding out that Matt is a candidate, he will get my vote (forget the pork barrel – I’ll have a Coopers!).

Watt was the question?

doubleyoupea said :

I’ve seen you campaigning Matt, and I think you have a lot of great things to say.

I love that you are so accessible and that your views are so reasonable and well thought out. Ginninderra could (only) do a lot worse than you. Indeed I believe they absolutely could not do better.

Best of luck with the campaign.

Hahahaha! I love it when a ‘random’ member of the public comments on a thread like this on RA! It doesn’t matter if it’s a ‘Who’s the best hairdresser in Canberra?’, or a ‘Who can I go to to get good financial advice?’, or a thread like this one. Pretty soon you get classics like this. You could at least try to hide it a bit better! It’s just like a plant in a snake oil salesman crowd! ‘Wow, your miracle elixir saved my life!!’ Hahahaha!
Sorry, it’s been one of those days……!

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd7:52 pm 28 Sep 12

QUESTIONS!!!

Matt, please talk about these:

Drug reform views?

Gay marriage views?

100% open and transparent government?

Stopping dole bludger welfare culture?

Police creating a us and them mentality and how to stop it?

Why is the hospital system so poor and how can it be fixed?

Religious views being incorporated into legislation(zed)?

A woman’s right to have a abortion and a very sick persons right to be euthanised?

These eight topics are major concerns for me. Please discuss. Please note ant single answer containing * durrrrr labour and greens bad, liberals good durrr* will be dis regarded. Don’t tow the party line, sir, speak your mind.

( perhaps a bit much to ask?)

doubleyoupea6:55 pm 28 Sep 12

I’ve seen you campaigning Matt, and I think you have a lot of great things to say.

I love that you are so accessible and that your views are so reasonable and well thought out. Ginninderra could (only) do a lot worse than you. Indeed I believe they absolutely could not do better.

Best of luck with the campaign.

So good to know that the Liberal Party is committed to being what Canberra needs – basically a town council delivering services and keeping rates reasonable.

Note to ACT Labor: your current tv ads claim that the Liberals are using a “rejected” table of rates – but you aren’t specifying what you replaced the “rejected” table WITH. I’m up for believing the Liberals thanks.

Onyer Matt, Jeremy, Zed et al. Can’t wait to change my lifelong vote and turf Katie OUT.

Matt_Watts said :

Deref said :

Say hi to Mr Pocock from us all here at RiotACT.

Yeah… not sure I’ll ever have the pleasure of meeting him. I’m sure he’d appreciate it if you contacted him directly.

I doubt it, Matt. I probably would, though.

“or at your front door” … yeah right! Libs door-knocking! How can they manage that with NO volunteers and NO members!

You say you joined the Liberal Party because you are against the nanny state. Does this mean you would support proper drug reform in the ACT including the legalisation of cannabis, to be produced and supplied by licensed businesses?

.. Government should serve the Canberra community more than it tries to socially engineer it….

I presume that means you won’t support legislation that tells us what we are allowed to ingest, smoke or inject?

Rates: There needs to be sufficient income for operations. Otherwise we’ll end up like Spain, Greece, or Italy. Canberrans are wealthy people and should make a contribution to our cities operations and not expect money to float down from the skies.

Whoops! IT fail! 😛
#14 was in relation to this bit of #8 from Matt_Watts:
“The fact is the legislation to increase rates has been passed; many ratepayers are starting to notice it. The expected result, on average, is that rates will triple.”

AND the fact that he put himself out there for the Lego and kept the comments on says a lot about who he is, so rather than fire your assumptions at him, hive mind (which nooone has so far — much props), suspend disbelief and ask him a burning question rather than troll bait.

Pssst! His hash name is ‘Pollywaffler’ which he accepts and embraces with aplomb.

bundah said :

poetix said :

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Ah so what is his poison Jim,Jack or perhaps he prefers a Cougar?

That could be misconstrued!

But keep the questions coming in. I’ll answer some more tomorrow – running late for Chocky’s retirement drinks at Zierholz @ UC!

Deref said :

Say hi to Mr Pocock from us all here at RiotACT.

Matt’s actually a very decent guy and the polar opposite of Mr Poocock on many levels.

Matt knows they’ll be handing out sweaters along the River Styx the day I vote Liberal — and I can say that now that I’m not contracting to the electoral commission anymore! — but Matt’s got a lot going for him.

Firstly, I can’t think of anyone apart from Wayne Berry who I’ve seen over the years get out amongst in the community. Standing outside in the freezing cold on weekends at Jammo and Kippax, throwing himself in with both boots to grass-roots community groups and issues.

Like I said, I’m not physically able to tick his square, but if your blood runs blue, you should consider Matt.

I’m a Hasher too and Matt’s commitment to attending and running events for this amazing worldwide group is amazing. He’ll come from a public event, change into is kilt and waa-hey, he’s a-whey. Or keeps the shiny suit on if the events are co-located.

Love your work, Matt, if not your politics! 😉

poetix said :

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Ah so what is his poison Jim,Jack or perhaps he prefers a Cougar?

poetix said :

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Haha… I’m heavily into Laphroaig, but don’t have a favourite.

At the moment the Matt Smith Doctor really appeals to me because of the Fez hat. Long story.

ps0104 said :

Hi Matt, thanks for a really good outline of who you are and what has led you to be a candidate in the election. I hope some of the other candidates follow your lead.

I do have a question. In a previous thread, there was some discussion about the fact that the Canberra Liberals have been pushing the ‘Labor will triple your rates’ line in a far too sensationalist and ‘cheap politics’ way. In my post on that thread, I outlined that I am normally a Liberal voter, but the behaviour of the Canberra Liberals on this issue has absoloutely disgusted me to the point where I am now having a serious look at the other parties.

The question is- Do you think it’s about time the Canberra Liberals picked themselves up from the gutter politics and treated the ACT electorate with at least a little bit of intelligence rather than just screaming “But Labor will triple your rates!!!!!!” at every opportunity?

I’m not for a minute suggesting that the whole debate about rates is not an important one to have, but I would be interested to hear your views on the behaviour of your party on this because, judging by the other thread on this issue, I am not alone in my opinion.

Thanks for the question. I hope my own approach, including being accessible via the RiotACT, indicates my respect for the Canberra voter. People can ask me anything in this forum.

The fact is the legislation to increase rates has been passed; many ratepayers are starting to notice it. The expected result, on average, is that rates will triple.

As a public servant, I understand the approach the government is taking; I don’t agree with it, though, because it’s unfair to those people who have already paid their stamp duty and it’s unfair to those on fixed incomes, such as pensioners, who may be forced out of their family home. The government’s so-called reforms are regressive.

I reject the claim that this is gutter politics. If Labor or the Greens hadn’t passed the legislation, you wouldn’t hear the Liberals informing the community about it. What do you expect us to do? Just let it slide? If you don’t agree with a policy, it’s your democratic right to fight it. Equally, if you agree with a policy, it’s your right to fight for it (not that we’ve been hearing much from Labor or the Greens on this rates/ stamp duty issue).

And, I should point out, we have plenty of positive policies out there. Just this morning I was at the Libs’ liquor licensing policy launch, which has been really well received. I’m quite proud of the policy because it reflects consultation with the community. Back in 2010 I in fact held some meetings with licensees and met with the Liberals and the Greens (Corbell wouldn’t meet me), and it’s nice to see us a step closer to the outcome we set out to achieve.

ps0104

ps0104 said :

Hi Matt, thanks for a really good outline of who you are and what has led you to be a candidate in the election. I hope some of the other candidates follow your lead.

I do have a question. In a previous thread, there was some discussion about the fact that the Canberra Liberals have been pushing the ‘Labor will triple your rates’ line in a far too sensationalist and ‘cheap politics’ way. In my post on that thread, I outlined that I am normally a Liberal voter, but the behaviour of the Canberra Liberals on this issue has absoloutely disgusted me to the point where I am now having a serious look at the other parties.

The question is- Do you think it’s about time the Canberra Liberals picked themselves up from the gutter politics and treated the ACT electorate with at least a little bit of intelligence rather than just screaming “But Labor will triple your rates!!!!!!” at every opportunity?

I’m not for a minute suggesting that the whole debate about rates is not an important one to have, but I would be interested to hear your views on the behaviour of your party on this because, judging by the other thread on this issue, I am not alone in my opinion.

+1

From the OP: “Government should serve the Canberra community more than it tries to socially engineer it.” How is making people fear the future serving us in anyway at all? All I can see is it serves your Party, not the rest of the population. Way to manipulate people..

OK, Matt, what is your favourite whisky?

(He’ll go not too dear, you’ll see…There’s a reason for the in-sip-id question.)

Also, who is your favourite Doctor Who, and why?

Deref said :

Say hi to Mr Pocock from us all here at RiotACT.

Yeah… not sure I’ll ever have the pleasure of meeting him. I’m sure he’d appreciate it if you contacted him directly.

Hi Matt, thanks for a really good outline of who you are and what has led you to be a candidate in the election. I hope some of the other candidates follow your lead.

I do have a question. In a previous thread, there was some discussion about the fact that the Canberra Liberals have been pushing the ‘Labor will triple your rates’ line in a far too sensationalist and ‘cheap politics’ way. In my post on that thread, I outlined that I am normally a Liberal voter, but the behaviour of the Canberra Liberals on this issue has absoloutely disgusted me to the point where I am now having a serious look at the other parties.

The question is- Do you think it’s about time the Canberra Liberals picked themselves up from the gutter politics and treated the ACT electorate with at least a little bit of intelligence rather than just screaming “But Labor will triple your rates!!!!!!” at every opportunity?

I’m not for a minute suggesting that the whole debate about rates is not an important one to have, but I would be interested to hear your views on the behaviour of your party on this because, judging by the other thread on this issue, I am not alone in my opinion.

Say hi to Mr Pocock from us all here at RiotACT.

geoffappleby2:29 pm 28 Sep 12

I think you got it in one, Jungle Jim.

I didn’t need an excuse, but you just gave me one. I can’t think of a single reason NOT to vote liberal now.

If it didn’t require exercise I’d be a Hasher myself, me thinks.

The objectives of the Hash House Harriers as recorded on the club registration card dated 1950:

To promote physical fitness among our members
To get rid of weekend hangovers
To acquire a good thirst and to satisfy it in beer
To persuade the older members that they are not as old as they feel

Now this is something I can get behind!

Good on you, Matt. A nicely formed piece and it’s good to see some real transparency.

Best of luck on the 20th.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.