Election Candidate Surveys

Candidates for Queensland / CTH Senate Election 2007


Show

All Q1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9Q10

Scoring Key

Yes, Definitely10Probably7Unsure5Unlikely3Definitely Not2No Comment1

Candidate scores

BG = Ballot Group / BP = Ballot Position / = previously sitting member / = personal response / = party response
BG BP Candidate Party Q1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9Q10 Total
A1BOUSFIELD, AnneWhat Women Want----------0
A2BEUTEL, SonyaWhat Women Want----------0
B1HUMPHREYS, JohnLiberty and Democracy Party221022225101047
B2CLARK, JosephLiberty and Democracy Party321022277101055
C1JOHNSON, PhilClimate Change Coalition----------0
C2POSSELT, SteveClimate Change Coalition----------0
D1MADDISON, FelicityCarers Alliance----------0
D2GOW, RobertCarers Alliance----------0
E1PEAKE, BenSenator Online----------0
E2BATESON, SharonSenator Online----------0
F1WATSON, SamSocialist Alliance----------0
F2TAYLOR, AmeliaSocialist Alliance----------0
G1SMITH, BobThe Fishing Party----------0
G2STOCKER, ElizabethThe Fishing Party----------0
H1BUCHANAN, JeffFamily First101010101010101051095
H2SPENCER, Beryl JFamily First101010101010101051095
H3MANNERS, MerlinFamily First101010101010101051095
H4EATON, CathyFamily First101010101010101051095
H5HART, ShaunFamily First101010101010101051095
H6BENSON-STOTT, ElizabethFamily First101010101010101051095
I1BARTLETT, AndrewAustralian Democrats3222223210230
I2NEILL, SharonAustralian Democrats3222223210230
J1MACDONALD, Ian DouglasLiberal Party10537573521057
J2BOYCE, SueLiberal Party10537573521057
J3BOSWELL, RonThe Nationals10101010101010101010100
J4POWELL, MarkLiberal Party10537573521057
J5GOODWIN, DavidThe Nationals10101010101010101010100
J6BUCHHOLZ, ScottThe Nationals10537573521057
K1HACKETT-JONES, RichardIndependent----------0
K2RIVETT, JohnIndependent----------0
L1FEENEY, Paul JosephShooters Party----------0
L2HRSTICH, Allen DShooters Party----------0
M1WATERS, LarissaThe Greens111111111110
M2LIGHT, AnjaThe Greens111111111110
M3ROSIN, DarrylThe Greens111111111110
N1COUPER, David AlanIndependent7373337731053
N2BROWN, MichaelIndependent----------0
O1HOGG, John JosephAustralian Labor Party10233723510550
O2MOORE, ClaireAustralian Labor Party10233723510550
O3FURNER, MarkAustralian Labor Party10233723510550
O4O'BRIEN, DianaAustralian Labor Party10233723510550
P1COLLINS, KevinAustralian Fishing and Lifestyle Party----------0
P2DONALD, DaveAustralian Fishing and Lifestyle Party----------0
Q1NELSON, Ian JOne Nation10101010101010101010100
Q2ARROITA, LewOne Nation----------0
R1HANSON, PaulinePauline's United Australia Pa----------0
R2SAVILLE, DavidPauline's United Australia Pa----------0
S1PUKALLUS, JanCitizens Electoral Council----------0
S2HETHERINGTON, MauriceCitizens Electoral Council----------0
T1BRICE, LindaChristian Democratic Party10101010101010101010100
T2BRICE, MalcolmChristian Democratic Party10101010101010101010100
U1HEALEY, BillNon-Custodial Parents Party----------0
U2THOMPSON, DougNon-Custodial Parents Party----------0
UG1DUGGAN, JohnIndependent111111111110
UG2LOW, PillyIndependent----------0
UG3REID, James KennethIndependent10103101010510101088
UG4TRAVERSARI, Marsileo MarkIndependent----------0
UG5DEMARCHI, LeoIndependent----------0
UG6PETERSEN, RobinIndependent----------0
V1JACKSON, NoelDemocratic Labour Party10101010101010101010100
V2DOWLING, BrianDemocratic Labour Party10101010101010101010100
W1ALBERTS, KatrinaIndependent227101025107257
W2RADY, MartinIndependent----------0
X1BAKER, JamesIndependent10101010101010101010100
X2FITZGERALD-BAKER, LouiseIndependent----------0

Questionnaire

1. Prayers in parliament

Prayers in parliament are an important daily reminder that we must all ultimately answer to the higher authority of Almighty God. The prayers, which consist of the Lord's Prayer and a request for God's guidance, are an expression of the Christian foundation and character of our nation. According to the latest census, 64% of Australians identify as Christians.

Do you support the current practice of opening each day of parliament with Christian prayers?

2. Relationship registers

In 2004 the Parliament amended the Marriage Act 1961 to reaffirm that marriage is between a man and a woman and to prevent courts recognising same sex marriages. The homosexual lobby is now seeking to gain legal recognition for same sex relationships through state or territory legislation setting up civil unions or registered relationships. The Commonwealth's constitutional marriage power enables it to further amend the Marriage Act 1961 to invalidate these state laws in order to protect and defend the unique status of marriage.

Would you vote to amend the Marriage Act 1961 to prevent states from giving legal recognition to couple relationships other than marriage, including homosexual, lesbian and de facto relationships?

3. Abortion funding

A national opinion poll conducted in 2005 by Market Facts (Qld) found that 67% of Australians are opposed to Medicare funding of abortions performed in the second trimester (14-26 weeks). Children born as early as 21 weeks are now surviving thanks to the wonderful advances in modern medicine. Second trimester abortions can result in a live born child who is then left to die. 49 such abortions were recorded in Victoria alone in 2005. Some second trimester abortions are performed by the partial birth abortion method which has now been banned by the US Congress, a ban upheld by the US Supreme Court. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for these abortions.

Would you support a change to the Medicare schedule so that taxpayers are no longer forced to pay for second trimester and late term abortions?

4. Illicit drugs

Harm minimisation has been one of the key principles of Australia's drug strategy since 1985. Harm minimisation measures include needle and syringe exchanges, injecting rooms, heroin prescription, methadone substitution, liberal cannabis laws and drug testing kits. In 2003 the House of Representatives "Roads to Recovery" report called for the replacement of the current focus of the National Drug Strategy on harm minimisation with a new focus on harm prevention and treatment. This recommendation has not yet been implemented. Sweden has shown that "drug free" policies can dramatically reduce the use of illicit drugs.

Would you support the replacement of the current focus of the National Drug Strategy on harm minimisation and harm reduction strategies with a new focus on achieving a drug free society?

5. Internet filtering

The internet provides many benefits but also carries many dangers. Unfiltered, the internet can bring explicit pornography and material that promotes terrorism, crime or suicide into the family home. Voluntary PC based filtering systems will not protect children in vulnerable situations such as the 9-10 year olds reported by the Canberra Hospital for sexually abusing even younger children after exposure to internet pornography. Mandatory filtering at the ISP level is essential for the protection of Australian children and for a healthy society.

Would you support mandatory filtering of the internet at ISP level to exclude all explicit pornography as well as material which promotes crime, suicide or terrorism?

6. Benefits supporting marriage

Over many centuries, governments have granted marriage a privileged status not given to other types of relationships, for two key reasons. Only marriage provides the best environment for raising children with stability plus complementary male and female role models (Mum and Dad). Men and women complement each other in marriage, benefiting each other and society. Homosexual and lesbian relationships do not have these characteristics and should not be given the benefits given to married couples.

Would you oppose any measure which seeks to extend to homosexual and lesbian couples the benefits currently given to married couples?

7. Cloning

In 2002 federal parliament unanimously banned all forms of human cloning. In 2006 a private member's bill lifted the ban on the creation of human embryos by cloning for use in destructive research. It is wrong to create a human life with the intention of using him or her for research and then destruction. Cloning for research is scientifically unnecessary as the hoped for benefits from cloning are being more effectively and more safely obtained using stem cells derived in an ethically uncontroversial way from adults or from umbilical cord blood.

Would you vote to repeal those laws which permit the creation of human embryos by cloning for use in destructive research?

8. Child care benefits

Surveys indicate that a large majority of parents would prefer one parent (usually the mother) to care for their children full-time at home if they could afford it. Current child care benefits are much more generous to mothers who place their children in child care centres than to those who care for their own children at home. All parents should be treated equally, receiving the same childcare benefit. They should be free to spend it as they choose - on childcare or on helping one parent stay at home.

Would you support legislation requiring equal child care benefits to be paid directly to all parents of young children, whether the children are cared for at home or in a child care centre?

9. Access Card

A mandatory smart card for access to all government social services including Medicare is an unjustifiable intrusion into individual privacy and a possible step towards a national identity card. While there may be a need to rationalise the processes used to access social services, there is no need to include Medicare in this scheme. For millions of Australians, Medicare is the only Commonwealth benefit they access. Once billions of dollars are invested in a smart card which will be mandatory for any Australian unwilling to opt out of the Medicare system and forego any entitlements to social services, there will be a natural 'function creep' until the access card becomes a de facto national identity card.

Would you oppose the introduction of a mandatory smart card for access to all government social services including Medicare?

10. Vilification legislation

Laws which prohibit vilification on the grounds of religious belief or sexuality are an unwarranted interference with free speech and religious liberty. Those who point out the health risks of homosexual behaviour, or who question claims and practices of a particular religion such as Islam, should not be penalised.

Would you vote to oppose laws which would prohibit vilification on the grounds of religious belief or sexuality?
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio
Authorised by: Charles Newington, FamilyVoice Australia, 4th Floor, 68 Grenfell St, Adelaide SA 5000