Election 2010: The Good…

This entry is part 2 of 4 in the series Election 2010 - the good , the bad, and the ugly

Continuing the series on the Australian Federal elections I have done a quick analysis of many of the minor parties contesting these elections, giving them a mark from A to F.

In this section I have listed what I believe are the best of them. These are mostly parties and individuals who are focused on good, constructive, and/or inovative governance.

The Australian Sex Party: B

It’s true: The Australian Sex party promotes sexual – and other – freedoms. And yes, It receives funding from the porn industry.

But let’s be honest – the big parties get money from big oil, big tobacco, and big banks. In the virtue stakes, I’m not sure how much difference there is.

The Australian Sex Party, however, also stands for things that would be very good for Australians, such as the separation of Church and State, strong opposition to the internet filter, government transparency, and individual freedom of choice.

And they have principles. Family First wanted to discuss a preference deal for the Senate such a deal could have worked significantly to The Sex Party’s advantage; however, the Sex Party turned Family First down because the two parties have completely divergent philosophies.

First on the Victorian Senate List for the Sex Party is Fiona Patten whose mark deserves an A mark.

Ms Patten is a very good operator who, from what I have seen of her, deals honestly and on principle. She has the personality, political/lobbying experience, and character to make an important contribution in Canberra.

Australian Democrats: A

That the Democrats are no longer in parliament is a great loss to Australia.

Before losing their way – and all their senate seats – the Democrats had a reputation for being some of the hardest working members in both houses of Parliament.

Their reason for their being was to sit between the two large parties in policy matters, and to weigh up each piece of legislation that came into the parliament. They would then determine the pros and cons and suggest a small number of amendments that would improve the legislation.

They saw their role as not to block legislation, but rather to enhance it. They would take a piece of legislation find the holes and close them.

A good illustration was the GST legislation. The Democrats may not have agreed with it, but they acknowledged that the Coalition had a mandate to legislate. The Democrats therefore took the legislation and negotiated with the government to improve on the final product in the interests of the Australian people – for example, in pushing for the removal of GST from fresh food. And they did it despite knowing it would be unpopular among their voting base. This is a true example of leadership.

Their decline was rapid, but from what I have read about their recent activity, it seems that the political wilderness has helped them return to their original purpose.

Liberal Democrats: A

The Liberal Democrats in Australia are not equivalent to their British namesake. They are indeed closer to the Libertarian Party in the USA.

This party believes in getting the government out of our lives. They believe in the primacy of individual choice and freedom. And of course there is the libertarian mainstay of lower taxes and lower spending.

But with governments today writing more laws and expanding government reach and complexity, it is a good thing to have a party that wants to simplify the system and cut out much of the red tape.

The one danger with libertarian philosophy is their desire to remove too much government involvement. We do need some government control, and there are many instances in which the public good requires intervention from the state. It is a delicate balance and without a track record we have no way of knowing if the Australian Liberal Democrats would successfully negotiate these competing demands.

Building Australia – C

In spite of a long search online, initially I could not find anything about this party, and it seemed that their only policy was to have a strong sounding name.

After more searching, however, the reason for the difficulty in finding them online is dueto the search term “Building Australia” having been purchased by a number of construction companies, pushing the party far down the list.

Once found (at www.buildingaustralia.org.au) they seemed to be a group of practically minded people from the building industry. They believe in building infrastructure around Australia and streamlining the building industry.

With the discussion on the first weeks of the election centring on sustainable living, I would suggest that the infusion of some practically minded builders into the mix might be useful.

Stephen Mayne – B

Stephen Mayne is running as an independent in this election, with his wife on the ticket with him.

Mayne’s platform is based on an anti-pokies, pro-immigration stand. He is probably viewed as a serial pest by the major parties, having run in a number of elections as an independent.

A journalist by profession, Mayne founded Crikey.com.au. He went on to greater notoriety as a shareholder advocate. He has bought a few shares in numerous large, public companies in order to gain access to their AGMs. He has also run for the boards of these companies.

Mayne uses the media effectively, appearing on TV or radio programmes to call for more principled behaviour from big business, whether that involves serving shareholders better or manufacturing goods in a more ethical way.

Now Mayne is targeting the pokies, and the big parties’ conflicts of interest in this area. For example, the family of Liberal candidate, Julian McGauran, owns a pokies venue while the Labor party owns four such venues.

He is a single individual who is fighting a worthy battle against a much bigger machine.

This list details the good elements in the election. Coming next: the bad and the ugly.

Series Navigation«Election 2010Elections 2010 – The Bad»
  • Share/Bookmark

No related posts.

22 Responses to “Election 2010: The Good…”

  1. Aaron says:

    Gee, no sign of the Greens. Whatever could that be about? Wait, there’s an upcoming post on “the bad and the ugly”. What’s the bet the Greens will appear there, for their refusal to unconditionally support Israel.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Alex Fein says:

      You are clearly not a regular reader of this blog. Israel has most certainly come in for critcism here, as have our own communal leaders’ methods of Israel support.

      Why would you assume we dislike the Greens on the basis of Zionism – unless of course you immediately associate the word, “Jew” with simplistic analysis that does not take Australia’s national interests into account?

      Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:


      I have not mentioned Israel once, nor will I in this series. This is about what is best for Australia.

      My dislike for the Greens runs far deeper then a view of foreign affairs that they will not influence.

      When you see what I have to say about the Greens (coming up next) you can then respond with your own views. This is part of the democratic system that we live in.

  2. janice says:

    What about Josh Frydenberg taking over the seat of kooyong?

    Where is he coming from and as a product of the Jewish day school system could you shed some light on this high profile guy?

    What’s his stance on Israel etc.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:


      While I have met Josh briefly a few times I have not had the pleasure of discussing politics with him.
      It would also be quite difficult to find information about him online, since in relation to the wider Liberal campaign there would be very little spoken about him.
      If anyone does know specifics about this or any other candidate please feel free to post it as a comment

  3. Janice says:

    Thanks for your reply,


    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  4. Janice says:


    check this out for Josh, a lot of politics on vexnews, how credible is this site by Landeryou?

    some of the comments are somewhat “ridiculous” there….


    Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:


      The truth is that the events leading up to preselection would probably not be that different then quite a few seats around the country, except…
      This is Kooyong.

      And it is strange that one of the oldest Liberal seats in the country was electing a career backbencher.
      Just to be clear, Georgiou was a very good politician, but since 1922 there have been only 4 sitting members in Kooyong – a minister and then Chief Justice of the High Court (John Latham), the long term PM (Robert Menzies), a high profile opposition leader (Andrew Peacock) and Petro Georgiou. He is clearly the odd one out.

      This seat is the kingmaker for the Liberal Party. Any sitting member should be able to demand almost by birthright a senior ministry at the very least. The personality that would be a candidate for this type of seat would be intelligent, ambitious and driven to reach the top and we want that in our leaders.

      This would not only be the case with Frydenberg, but with every member, Labor or Liberal trying to reach the top, especially those in safe seats.

  5. Janice says:


    please have a look at this re: comments above,

    dear oh dear…

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:


      Well… I am not entirely sure about the comparison you were drawing. Let me use this opportunity to look into Danby’s position in the seat of Melbourne Ports.

      As a few people are becoming aware, the ‘Jewish’ areas of Melbourne Ports are being cut up and divided between three electorates.
      East St Kilda will stay the same, Elsternwick will become part of Goldstein and Caulfield will again become part of Higgins.

      Having looked at the results for the last election, while Danby won with 57% of the vote in 2 party preferred, he lost the Caulfield area with only about 45% of two party vote.
      He also lost the postal vote (generally higher in a Jewish electorates due to Shabbat) with about 48-49%.

      This ‘Danby effect,’ however, seems to lessen in Caulfield where the Liberal Party win with about 60% of the vote in state elections and about 75% of the postal vote.

      However, on a quick analysis of the seat it would seem that Melbourne Ports will now be about 1-2% safer for Labor in the future elections.

      Now for Danby himself – He seems to be a career backbencher as Georgiou was in Kooyong in a seat that has given the country a number of significant Labor politicians in the past.

      This fact, with the strengthening of the seat for the Labor party, could potentially bring about some people to lean on him to give up his seat to a future minister, especially since what he brought to the table (ie the Jewish vote) is no longer within his electorate.

      I would guess that he would begin to encounter some stronger preselection challenges from the ALP in the coming elections.

  6. Janice says:

    Georgiou was well respected from all sides of the political paradigm, that’s very true indeed.

    Thanks for the remarks, much appreciated!!


    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  7. Will the Secular Party of Australia make an appearance in this series? They’re running candidates in Melbourne Ports, Wentworth and the Senate.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:

      Have patience Michael,
      I will not ignore them, I just do not think they are part of the forces for good.
      Wait to see what I write and then no doubt you will attack my view, which I will look forward to

    • Alex Fein says:

      Absolutely! The analysis is coming.

      Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • I can barely contain myself. :)

      On the basis that you state:

      I have not mentioned Israel once, nor will I in this series. This is about what is best for Australia.

      I’m intrigued to know what you could possibly find so “Ugly” with the Secular Party, seeing it didn’t make the “Good” or the “Bad” lists, and seeing it has a lot in common with parties like the Democrats, the Sex Party and even the Greens (some of which rate quite highly here).

      This game should be fun.


      Support this comment Thumb up 0

    • Yaron Gottlieb says:

      Just a few more days to go till you find out…

      I am also hope you shake your natural shyness to comment online so that we can find out what you really think :)

  8. janice says:

    Tim Wilson(i.p.a) was a better media performer and more well known to the electorate than some of these unknown, it seems that there’s a clique as seen in todays age with Kelly o Dwyer et al.
    More pragmatic and less factional according to the age.READ ARTICLE.

    Are there any independent Jewish candidates that you know of?
    Thanks again

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  9. janice says:


    Here’s an article on the above comments…love the quote about Costello and Kelly Dwyer.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  10. jenny says:

    how can Frydenberg et al support asylum seeker policies when he is of Jewish heritage astounds me…

    is he of the self hating jew variety or just a massive extreme snob…?

    Don’t get some of these gen y types,assimilated yet fascist to the extreme and yet scream anti-antisemitism when it suits them.



    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  11. fiona patten says:

    Hi Yaron
    Very interesting report card. The other Sex Party candidates read it with interest.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

  12. Swinging Voter says:

    The only problem with the Sex Party is that their policies could be pro-inflationary.

    Support this comment Thumb up 0

Leave a Reply

Anti-Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree