Your Voice

Seven candidates and one stand-in attended the Bennelong candidates forum organised by Citizens for Integrity in Government. Candidate in attendance were: Robyn Peebles for the Christian Democratic Party; Margherita Tracanelli for the Climate Change Coalition; David Allen, Independent; Graeme Cordiner, Independent(ish); David Leyonhjelm for the Liberty and Democracy Party; Peter Goldfinch for the Australian Democrats; and Lindsay Peters for the Greens.

Absent were: Gavin Spencer (Citizens Electoral Council); Victor Waterson (One Nation); Lorraine Markwell (Family First); Yusuf Tahir (affiliation unknown); John Howard (Liberal Party); and Maxine McKew (Australian Labor Party).

Maxine McKew's absence was complicated by the fact that she had previously confirmed her attendance. She pulled out to attend a "Your Rights at Work" forum that had been subsequently organised and conflicted, sending Michael Colnan, the ALP candidate for Berowra, in her place. This is somewhat poor form - for a candidate running in for a seat in the House of Representatives the local forum should come first. Nevertheless she has done better than the Prime Minister on this score - the Prime Minister has not attended any Bennelong Candidates forums this year, in 2004, and I suspect has not attended any in decades. The Prime Minister did not even send a stand-in for this one.

The performance of the candidates in presenting their positions was mostly good. Robyn Peebles (CDP) delivered a rambling speech that contained mostly irrelevant material, without reference to notes. Margaret Tracanelli (CCC) presented strongly and while, as I recall, she had notes, she did not refer to them often. David Allen (Independent) spoke confidently but raced through his material, leaving little time for the audience to absorb his points. His presentation was supported by notes, but not to an excessive degree. Graeme Cordiner (Independent(ish) used notes, referring to them intermittently but otherwise presenting strongly. David Leyonhjelm (LDP) spoke from notes, speaking strongly but a little too fast. Peter Goldfinch (Democrats) carried notes but did not refer to them, speaking smoothly and presenting well. Lindsay Peters (Greens) carried notes, referring to them periodically. His speaking strength has improved considerably, and although there were the occasional stalls while he sought to retrieve material, it was a strong performance. I commented on the improvement to him after the forum and he revealed that after seeing my previous assessment had been working on his presentation, and I suspect he may have even had some coaching. This demonstrates a valuable commitment to acquiring the skills he needs to get the job done.

Michael Colnan's (ALP) content was directed to some degree at ALP policy, which hopefully readers of this site are fairly well across by now. The interesting content was Colnan's recounting of his impressions of Maxine McKew - that her motivation for going into politics was to rebuild integrity in government, and that in particular she opposes the power to "disappear" people (a reference to recent anti-terrorism detention powers that was strongly supported by the audience).

Policy content in Robyn Peebles' (Christian Democrats) speech was thin. She hinted at the CDP's policies of restricting immigration and giving priority to Christians and groups that "integrate". My own impression of the policy content was that it contained a lot of "dog whistle" statements - things that might seem innocent on their face, but are directed at certain groups who understand them to mean something entirely different.

Margherita Tracanelli (CCC) described herself as a human rights advocate. She said that climate change would be catastrophic and that it was the single most important issue facing Australia and the world today. She also described the CCC as consisting of "John Lennon's dreamers". If she meant that literally this would indicate they believe in seeking to remove barriers between nations and working on forming a global government. I suspect it was not meant so literally.

David Allen (Independent) came across as rather eccentric. At the declaration of candidates he attempted to challenge John Howard's right to stand, not based on any legal argument, but based on the fact that the Prime Minister has allowed foreign debt to run up over the past 12 years. He claimed democracy was under threat due to feelings of disenfranchisement and futility among voters, and that most people do not turn up to fora such as this one. He also claimed there was too much corruption and that other countries were better on this score, particularly in Europe. As we already knew, he is running on the foreign debt issue. Allen also challenged the validity of an election process that involves a spending auction.

Graeme Cordiner's (Independent(ish)) content can be summarised as soft left positions. I say "Independent(ish)" because Cordiner is a member of the Australian Independents Coalition, which does have set policies but does not nominate candidates. I believe it was the late Peter Andren who described a party of independents as a contradiction in terms. Cordiner derided populism, paternalism and the quality of debate - reduced quality of debate is an artifact of campaigns conducted on Television, Radio and YouTube. He described the current system as an elected dictatorship and the current election campaign as an insult to the intelligence of ordinary voters. He claimed there is a crisis in confidence in democracy, a loss of freedom of the press, a lack of checks and balances by the Senate, excessive demonising of refugees and a lack of consultation at the top of politics. He nominated climate change as a pressing issue, claimed there was a crisis of fairness due to a wealth imbalance, a crisis of denial of history, and a crisis of community with communities having broken down. He offered as an example of the breakdown of community that fora such as this used to be the way politics worked.

David Leyonhjelm (LDP) described libertarianism, and covered the following specific libertarian positions: lower taxes; free market; removing business regulation; removing restrictions on gay marriage; removing restrictions on drug use; legalising voluntary euthanasia; removing restrictions on firearms; repealing terrorism detention powers; opposing compulsion on carrying the "access card"; supporting voluntary voting; providing for citizen initiated referenda; supporting private property rights; providing compensation where the government diminishes the value of property (presumably by building facilities under, over or near that property); supporting four year fixed terms; supporting recall votes (where a certain number of voters can force a referendum to dissolve Parliament and force a new election); supporting sunset clauses for all legislation on the theory that if the legislation is any good and still needed the Parliament can re-enact it; supporing free enterprise and capitalism with minimum regulation; and supporting civil rights. These are standard libertarian positions (except for the four year terms which is not intrinsically libertarian). One thing that can be said of libertarians is that they are ruthlessly consistent, and if you vote for the LDP you can be confident of what you will get.

Peter Goldfinch (Australian Democrats) curiously did not cover policy in his presentation. Instead he briefly spoke in support of proportional representation, then eulogised the late Peter Andren, the former independent member for Calare, saying that we need more like him in Parliament, and that Andren was a person of integrity. The subtext appears to be that the Democrats are, or at least aim to be, people in Andren's mode. Andren's death is certainly a tragedy for politics in Australia.

Lindsay Peters (Greens) attacked various government policies, and encouraged the audience to help restore balance in the Senate by re-electing Greens. He covered off a number of Greens policies: ending corporate political donations; strengthening freedom of information; enacting a bill of rights; ending mandatory detention, offshore processing of asylum seekers and temporary protection visas; introducing a climate change refugee visa; removing the citizenship test; making a treaty with indigenous peoples; saying sorry for and providing support and compensation to the stolen generation; improving indigenous health; providing self-determination to indigenous peoples; drastically reducing greenhouse gas; opposing Australia's reliance on coal, particularly for export; ratifying Kyoto so as to be involved in negotiating post Kyoto. He also noted that a first preference for the Greens in the lower house is a higher value vote that a first preference for either Liberal or Labor due to the way the preferential voting system works - this is true and I hope to cover this before election day.

After the presentations there were a number of audience questions - including a lot of dorothy dixers and otherwise partisan questions. I did not find any of the questions particularly noteworthy.