Ludwig
Is that true the SPP won't be running candidates. It does not say as such on their home page and the news realease in late June refers to their registration application to the AEC.

If so what a shame for the Australian people who don't currently feel represented on a Big Australia. While Julia Gillard and Tony Burke have coined the phrase sustainable population I have yet to see any evidence of a plan or target.

Wunderbar! Yet another centrist, stand for nothing political party. In case you hadn't checked, we've already got two: Labor and Liberal. Your mob don't provide a real alternative any more than the Greens do; you're just a half-arsed attempt to resurrect the Democrats. Folk who won't learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

I hate to rain on your parade, but nobody cares that much about the Republic. Anyone with an ounce of sense realises that the difference betwixt a Governor General and a President is a change of frock and leterhead, and instead focus their attention on stuff that actually matters.

Like the separation of church and state - which will be dropped from the Republican Democrat platform if/when they gain any sort of popular support. After all, by their reckoning, Labor are left, and therefore are theoretically even keener on the separation of church and state than centre and right parties. Funnily enough, I've yet to see the Rudd/Gillard government taking significant steps to render unto Christ what is Christ's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's. So it's a bit of a stretch to imagine the more right-wing RD's doing so.

I'm sure y'all will forgive me if I remain cynical about the mutant bastard spawn of an elephant and a jackass achieving meaningful reform in the Australian political system. It just doesn't strike me as a likely outcome.

Hey Ludwig, while I pretty much agree with the principles of your SPP (with the exception of maintaining current refugee levels) I find your attitude on preferential voting rather strange.
It appears the majority of voters on this post don't find any party to be perfect. Even arch conservatives aren't entirely happy with the Libs. This supports my contention that Ozzies don't vote for parties, so much as against them.
In the absence of preferential voting in any election that has more than 2 runners, the majority of the population would end up with a candidate they very specifically didn't want, if the winner failed to get more than 50% of the vote.
Another way to get true representation for the majority would be to have a series of elections, like a tennis tournament, where least popular candidates are eliminated in the first round, etc.,
This I think, highlights my earlier point. Why must we accept a 'least worst' candidate at all?
With modern communication methods, we have the ability to tell our representatives exactly which way we want them to vote, on any issue. The Rep., becomes like a barrister; committed to argue his clients' case, regardless of his/her own policy beliefs.
While voting for representatives would remain compulsory, polling on issues would be voluntary. 'Pollers' would be registered voters, who are interested enough to explore the issues and express their opinions.
Just like here.

More political parties are certainly urgently needed to break the two party tyranny in this country. But they won't stand a chance if the electoral system continues to grossly favour the two look-alike major parties. I had a look at the extensive range of policies of the Republican Democrats but could not find a reference to the need for proportional representation. Minor parties have come and gone in Australia because the electoral system does not provide opportunity for them to get a foothold.

It also puzzles me why the party claims to be a "centre party". The major parties are already centre parties and the room between them is very limited indeed. Actually, this was one reason why the Australians Democrats failed in the end. We need a Republican party that insists on electoral reform, constitutional reform and the Republic. I think the new party fails thus far on the first two policy areas. Have a look at http//:www.republicnow.org for further ideas Messrs. Pyke and Higgins.

Klaas Woldring
Republic Now!

Oh dear, the blasted 'republic' debate again.

But what form should it take for its titular head?

A sportstar/celebrity millionaire elected by the cringing fawning people?

A 'respected person' (of the elites) appointed by the PM?

Which is it to be?

How about having no president at all?

Someone mentioned the electoral system of representation, indeed, why not a single house, with multi-member electorates, based on a Tasmanian system to ensure a much wider spread of ideas in parliament, with no forced passing on of preferences, as in Qld?

The danger is that this reduces to a defacto first-past-the-post as the majors insist on a 'vote 1 only' policy.

Does NSW run better than Qld with its unicameral ssytem?

They are both knackered as far as I can see.

Is Tasmanian politics better than Qld politics, or are both incestuous pits of corruption, as bad as each other?

We kid ourselves with the models we defend/argue against.

In the end, we have politicians running the show, with business corrupting it through lobbying.

This new party offers nothing new at all.

Hi all,

A direct election Republic Now!

There are several contributors to this thread who claim that there is little interest in the Republic. These people are seriously misguided. PM Julia Gillard is also quite wrong about there not being a community consensus on the Republic. It is a cop out and this need to be exposed now in the election campaign. Research by Sydney based UMR company (Principal Bruce Dier) CONSISTENTLY (over two years) shows that over 80% of respondents want a Republic with a directly elected President. The real reason why the ALP Government is not interested in testing the waters with a comprehensive plebiscite is that they want to avoid having to deal with a Head of State who is directly elected by the people. This disappointing, cowardly attitude came first to light at the Australia 2020 Summit when a very large number of delegates wanted to talk about the Republic but it wasn't even put on the Agenda by the Rudd Government. If Gillard wants to be a consultative PM she should produce a plebiscite at election time that probes what kind of Republic the people want.

The reason why we don't hear much about the Republic is lack of government resolve to put it on the public agenda.

For that reason alone it is encouraging that a new party has been formed with that objective.

Klaas Woldring,
Convenor Republic Now