#nswvotes2019

[axvoter]

Index to the Blatantly Partisan Party Reviews, 2019 New South Wales edition

Here we are, two days from polling day in New South Wales. In my teenage years I watched NSW politics with a degree of disbelief and amusement from north of the border; since 2007 I have watched with even greater amounts of the same from south of the Murray. But now I am in New South Wales, about to vote in the state that gives us greater political dysfunction than any other. Say what you will about Queensland under Bjelke-Petersen, or South Australia and the Playmander, or Victoria pre-1955, no state has been more of a mess politically this current century than NSW. It does not matter what side of politics, it is here that you will find the most dysfunctional state branch of any party.

Anyway. On Saturday you will get two ballots. The smaller one is for the Legislative Assembly, where you elect one of 93 local representatives to the lower house of parliament. This is where the government is formed. You will also receive a large ballot for the Legislative Council, which is the house of review. The Legislative Council is elected by the state at large; 21 of its 42 seats come up for election every four years. This has two important implications: whoever you vote for gets eight years on the Legislative Council, and they only need to attain 4.55% of the statewide vote to get there.

To help you out, I have reviewed all the minor parties. I figure that if you are reading this blog you probably already have a decent idea about the Liberals, Nationals, the ALP, and the Greens. I have reviewed every minor party, the grouped independents, and the ungrouped independents, as well as the one independent standing in the lower house Division of Wollongong. If you are in a different lower house electorate and have an independent standing, I encourage you to Google them before casting your vote.

Without further ado, here are the parties I have reviewed. In brackets is an indication of their general ideology.

Advance Australia Party (anti-Berejiklian)

Animal Justice Party (animal rights)

Australian Conservatives (Christian fundamentalists)

Christian Democratic Party (Christian fundamentalists)

Flux NSW (direct e-democracy)

Keep Sydney Open (civil libertarian)

Liberal Democratic Party (right-libertarian)

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (dysfunctional racists)

Shooters, Fishers, and Farmers (gun nuts who, in the wake of Christchurch, can get absolutely and completely fucked)

Socialist Alliance (socialism)

Sustainable Australia (anti-immigration)

The Small Business Party (neo-liberal minimal taxation)

Voluntary Euthanasia Party (single issue / assisted dying)

Group G aka Seniors United Party of Australia (single issue / seniors’ rights)

Group H aka Monaghan and Monaghan (right-leaning grumpy Boomers)

Group L aka Jeremy Buckingham and Friends (Claytons Greens, i.e. the greens you have when you are not having The Greens)

Group S aka James Jansson’s “Team for NSW” (progressive futurists)

There are also eight ungrouped independents contesting the Legislative Council: part one and part two (the latter also reviewing the one independent running for Wollongong in the Legislative Assembly), plus some more general thoughts.

If you are curious about my past reviews, please check out the indexes for the 2013 federal election, 2014 Victorian election, 2016 federal election, and the 2018 Victorian election.

Thanks to those of you who have left feedback. It has been most appreciated. Enjoy your democracy sausages and have fun casting your vote this Saturday!

By the way, if you want to generate your own how-to-vote card, you can create one right here.

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review IX (NSW 2019): Shooters, Fishers, and Farmers Party

Prior reviews: 2013, 2014, 2016, 2018

What I said before: “This is a party of right-wing anti-environmentalism that has found some measure of success in rural NSW … Exactly what it says on the tin. The SFF will water down our successful gun control laws, support environmentally destructive policies, back the mining and logging industries, and be a brake on urgently-needed climate action.”

What I think this year: Perhaps the most interesting quality of the SFF is that they are no longer the reliable ally of the Liberal/National Coalition that they used to be. They have experienced success in winning former Coalition seats, and they have not always co-operated on policy in the Legislative Council.

This is not an endorsement, however. The only limits they would place on mining are when miners and farmers come into conflict, such as we see in the coal seam gas debate—otherwise this is a staunchly pro-coal party who favour new coal power plants and are hostile to practically any serious steps to mitigate climate change. SFF would let the planet burn.

The party name is the clue. Emotive blather about “green bureaucracy gone mad” defines their policies about fishing. It’s not as if it’s hard to go fishing for recreation, but marine parks and catch limits just get these nutters foaming. Their rhetoric veers between recreational and commercial fishing with limited clarity, and anyone who knows anything about marine life knows that the commercial fishing sector is responsible for extreme degradation of oceanic environments within a context of poor regulation and limited enforcement.

Also, I’d take their concern for regional communities a little more seriously if their transport policy were not literally just a roads policy. They describe public transport in regional areas as inadequate—and just leave it there. Instead of backing meaningful improvements in rail and other public infrastructure, SFF are completely in hock to outdated road-centric transport policy rather than the integrated multi-modal approach essential to maximise economic and social gains.

I drafted these comments before the tragic events in Christchurch. I am now all the more sure that it would be grossly irresponsible to let this party remain in parliament. Australia’s gun laws need to be tighter, not looser. SFF are a threat to public safety—not just long-term from climate change, but also in the short-term. Reject their appeals.

Website: https://www.shootersfishersandfarmers.org.au/

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review VIII (NSW 2019): Pauline Hanson’s One Nation

Prior reviews: 2013 and 2016

What I said before: “if you’ve paid even a smidgen of attention to Australian politics since the mid-nineties you know what One Nation stand for and how odious it is.”

What I think this year: I’ve spent enough time bagging Mark Latham in reviews of other parties that it’s about time I got to the party of our most famous wearer of dirty polo shirts. Yes, that’s right, ol’ boy Latho—the absolute disingenuous shitrag, the most idiotic rat in the history of politicised labour in Australia, the utter twatcandle himself—is heading up the One Nation state election ticket.

One Nation’s policies are idiotic. They are opposed to renewable sources of electricity; they want to strip all critical thinking from education policy; they think men are somehow discriminated against despite the fact men earn higher wages and are over-represented in positions of wealth and power; they blather on about giving Sydney “a breather” from immigration even though state governments do not control immigration policy. We need a breather from One Nation.

Perhaps the peak of One Nation’s stupidity, however, is that they are spouting off drivel about Aboriginal people getting DNA tests before they claim benefits. Welcome to Stupid, population: Pauline Hanson, Mark Latham, and Friends. Besides the fact that this is straight up early twentieth century eugenics, DNA tests are hardly reliable for what One Nation wants to prove, and Aboriginality is derived communally as well as genetically. It is breathtakingly rich for Latho to rant about “welfare rorters” when he receives a very generous parliamentary pension and shows absolutely no interest in doing anything for the impoverished, disadvantaged, unemployed, precariously employed, exploitatively employed, and unwillingly casualised. It is as if he learned nothing during his time in organised labour—or perhaps he suffered brain damage. The cognitive dissonance of this man, seriously.

It’s kinda funny that both One Nation and Australian Conservatives go on about “common sense”, whether it’s Bernardi proclaiming that “common sense lives here” (no it doesn’t) or One Nation insisting that they will be “putting common sense back into politics” (no they won’t). What’s the betting that even if Latho wins a seat, he defects from the party before the end of his term? That, and disqualification, are the ordinary fate of One Nation members; there are almost none, at state or federal level, who have served an entire, unbroken term of parliament.

The comments on Christchurch from Latho, Hanson, and their associated pond scum are not even worth my time. Suffice it to say that Kiwis such as myself see you, and we will not let you rest. Some of us are dual citizens and we intend full well to punish you at the ballot box. That is only the beginning.

This dysfunctional party and its knee-jerk racist policies represent the absolute scum of Australian politics and the sooner we are rid of this vile rhetoric the better.

Website: https://nsw.onenation.org.au/

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review VI (NSW 2019): Keep Sydney Open Party

Prior reviews: none, this is a new party

I’m not going to bullshit you here. Live music is my life. If I go to seventy gigs in a year, it’s been a quiet year. I’m better at standing in the audience than performing on stage, which is why I am a historian rather than a frontman or a guitarist in a band you might know. I have no idea what I would do or who I would be without live music—but I do know that I would be a lesser person in a worse place.

Moving from Melbourne, one of the world’s great music hubs, to NSW in order to chase my academic career has not been easy. This state does not make it easy for creative people to thrive. It lets that awful fucking casino get away with everything, while stigmatising the night-time economy. It’s moronic because it means what late-night events do exist—especially in a city like Wollongong, where I live—are the most absolute unsafe trash. Everybody with talent is moving to Melbourne and everybody who wants to see them is sitting on their arse at home rather than having a social life. If you want to start a music venue or run live events, you are going to find yourself up against a system that assumes violence is the default and does not give a shit about what a cultural life means for the community.

So, look, I’m entirely with this party’s objectives. I don’t like some of their rhetoric about the “nanny state”, which is usually a lazy crutch relied upon by right-wing whingers, but in general this party’s policies appeal to me. They are a bit narrow, a bit single-issue, despite gestures towards larger concerns, so they will not be at the top of my preferences. Parliaments handle a vast array of business, after all; I have emphasised in past elections my dislike for single-issue parties no matter how much I support the issue. But Keep Sydney Open have made some effort to address questions of small business, policing, cultural heritage, and social inclusion. They are new and they are galvanised by an important issue. Good on them.

Website: https://www.keepsydneyopen.com/

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review IV (NSW 2019): Christian Democratic Party aka Fred Nile Group

Prior reviews: 2013, 2016

What I said before: “New South Wales, why do you keep letting this crank and his mates hold office at state level? Please stop.”

What I think this year: When I finished writing my Australian Conservatives review, I thought to myself “phew, I’m sure the next party won’t be this disgusting”. I should have known better, the Australian micro-party scene being what it is. Let me put it to you simply: Fred Nile is a complete fucknozzle, and anyone who associates with him is a fucknozzle.

Now that I live in NSW I understand that this man and his acolytes are not as popular as I thought, as the barrier for entry to the Legislative Council is set so low. But the CDP sure do like advertising on Wollongong television, and I say this as somebody who watches very little TV so you know they’re going hard if I’ve caught their ads frequently. Bad ads are one thing; bad policy, of course, is much worse. On a heavily stained political canvas, Fred Nile & Co. somehow manage to stand out as one of the nastiest stains.

The CDP website right now says that “We exist to glorify God in government.” This is the language of exclusive theocracy. They preach the need for Australia to be a “Christian Commonwealth” with laws rooted in “the Judeo-Christian ethic”, which is a very recent confection that the lunatic religious right uses to exclude others. The CDP do not respect the rights or even the existence of those who do not share their narrow interpretation of scripture—with particular disdain reserved for the Muslim community. If you want to know from whence came the hatred that enabled the Christchurch terrorist attack, it is from bigoted and idiotic clash-of-civilisations rhetoric like this. The CDP are just one of the numerous groups with blood on their hand. I am absolutely not exaggerating or being emotive for effect.

You can take as read their opposition to abortion, euthanasia, fairness or equality for the LGBT community, etc., etc. Sound environmental policy does not live here. They have curious ideas of “Biblical principles concerning economics” and are impossible to take seriously when they yabber on about the alleged goodness of free enterprise or on economic policy more broadly. You often wonder if they have actually read the Bible.

Also, their “ten good reasons” to join the CDP are just bizarre. It’s a pitch that pretty much explains what the party gets out of you, rather than offering an attractive vision for society that you might want to participate in if you are ideologically inclined. Take, for example, reason 7: “You will be assisting Head Office with its administration and employment expenses.” In other words, you should join the CDP because it means you will be giving them money! Yeah! I always find it persuasive when I am encouraged to join something because it means I will be poorer!

This is way more than I intended to write, but if we are lucky the crowded field of candidates this year might mean the CDP’s Paul Green will fall short (Fred Nile himself, alas, has four years left on his current term). The CDP has no place in any serious parliament.

Website: https://www.cdp.org.au/

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Reviews: 2019 New South Wales State Election

I am reviving this Tumblr once again because it is that sacred and holy time for any political nerd: an election. It is an interesting one for me, as it is my first election in New South Wales. At state level, I have previously voted three times in Victoria and once in Queensland. At present it is safe to assume that the worst, most unsavoury, most dysfunctional branch of any given political party on any side of politics is its NSW branch. I am hesitant about wading into the cesspool that is NSW politics, but here goes.

As usual I will not be reviewing the Liberals, Nationals, ALP, or the Greens, because I assume that if you are reading this blog you probably already have some idea about where those parties stand and how you feel about them. I will review every other party contesting the election, plus all the independents contesting the Legislative Council.

These reviews are, as usual, an extension of my own notes to guide my personal vote. I continue to write from the green social democratic perspective that inspired the blog name. I am not, nor have I ever been, the member of any political party; note my use of a small-g green in the previous sentence—my politics are green, but I am not in The Greens. My reviews will be fairly concise, as they were for the 2018 Victorian state election, partly because of limited time, partly because I have reviewed these parties before at Victorian or federal level, and partly because I think the concise style last time worked well.

You might note a greater degree of anger this year. I am a dual citizen of New Zealand and Australia. I live in NSW today but New Zealand is my home, and the subject of many of my professional interests as a historian. The terrorist attack in Christchurch on Friday has not only absolutely wrecked me; it has redoubled my commitment to condemn vehemently those who would peddle hate or water down our gun control laws. Kia kaha to the Muslim community of New Zealand; kia kaha to every Kiwi grappling with this horror. Aroha nui.

In NSW, the Legislative Council—the upper house of parliament, the state version of the Senate—is elected by the entire state at large. 21 of its 42 members are up for re-election. This means that a candidate requires 4.55% of the vote to be elected. It’s ridiculously easy to get in compared to the federal Senate or Victoria’s Legislative Council. This is how a lunatic like Fred Nile holds onto his seat. But it also means more sane minor parties have a chance too.

The Legislative Council is the one that has the big voting paper. In NSW, there are two ways to vote for the Legislative Council. You can vote above the line, which means you are voting for a party and accepting their candidates in the order they are listed below the line. You must number 1 for your first preference, and then distribute as many preferences as you want. I recommend distributing as many preferences as you feel you can. Alternatively, you can vote below the line, which allows you to change the order of candidates as listed by parties and to also vote for ungrouped independent candidates, who do not get a square above the line. If you vote below the line, you must give a minimum of 15 preferences, and then you can keep preferencing as far as you want.

You will also vote in one of 93 local seats for the Legislative Assembly, the lower house, where government is formed. On the ballot for the Legislative Assembly, you must number 1 for your first preference, and can then distribute as many preferences as you want. Again, I recommend distributing as many preferences as you feel you can.

No party controls your preferences for either the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council. NSW’s form of preferential voting has smashed the business model of preference harvesters, so I do not need to give the vehement exhortations to vote below the line that I did last year in Victoria. What I will say is this: how-to-vote cards distributed by candidates are a suggestion only, and you should distribute preferences according to your personal opinions rather than accepting recommendations from a political party.

Now, on with the reviews!

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review XVII (NSW 2019): James Jansson “Team for NSW”

This party, which has previously run at federal level as the Future Party and the Science Party, will appear on the Legislative Council ballot as GROUP S because they are not currently registered as a political party with the NSW Electoral Commission.

Prior reviews: 2013, 2016

What I said before: “The Science Party are unashamed technophiles and have bold visions for the future. Some of it is unachievable but it sets an agenda whereby even half-hearted achievement would be a material advance for Australia. It is unfortunate that the party shows little appreciation for the contribution of non-scientific endeavours to the growth, richness, or value of Australia’s culture.”

What I think this year: What the hell is this. James Jansson and his Team for NSW are running as “candidates for humans”. No, really, that’s their tagline. Journalist Josh Butler tweeted that this reads as a Seinfeld-level piss-take. But what do Jansson and his terrible slogan offer?

I’ve got to be honest, I actually really like Jansson’s policies. As any progressive technophile would, he has policies for high-speed rail, a total shift to renewable energy, sustainable high-density living, etc., etc. His policies are environmentally conscious, such as a ban on logging from old-growth forests. Most importantly, however, he has focused policies for NSW.

Jansson now seems to appreciate the value of the arts, compared to previous tilts at federal office. Given the current social and political climate in NSW you will be unsurprised to learn that he is in favour of reviving Sydney’s nightlife and providing support to live music and the night-time economy. Moreover, he couples this with a desire to “blow up the pokies”. When I moved from Melbourne to NSW, I was shocked by the proliferation of pokies; in Melbourne I did not even have to make an effort to sustain my principle of not patronising any venue with pokies, while in NSW if I did this I would never drink out again.

Of course some of this is unrealistic. There are a lot of thought bubbles on Jansson’s website, floating amid a healthy amount of pie in the sky. But as much as I want to mock Jansson & Friends, in general I think this grouping has policies that point in the right direction.

Website: https://jj4nsw.org/

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review XIII (NSW 2019): Voluntary Euthanasia Party

Prior reviews: 2013, 2014, 2016, 2018

What I said before: “They support voluntary euthanasia. (WHO KNEW!)”

What I think this year: Victoria has approved voluntary euthanasia but NSW has not. Indeed, a bill for voluntary euthanasia failed by a single vote in November 2017. This party, therefore, remains an important part of the micro-party landscape. They are running on a campaign that tries to elevate the issue above partisan politics—though it is no secret voluntary euthanasia enjoys greater support on the left—by encouraging people to vote 1 for them and then 2 for their usual party of choice.

The VEP does not outline a broader platform except to state they are a “moderate progressive” party. Obviously they do not want to alienate potential supporters of their signature policy with anything else. But, of course, it alienates somebody like me: parliament faces a wide array of issues and the VEP’s raison d’être requires only one piece of legislation—what will their MP do for the rest of their four* years? Who knows! So, as much as I support the issue in question, other parties will receive higher preferences from me.

Website: https://www.vep.org.au/2019_nsw_election

*as one commenter notes, this should say eight years!