Excellent article Marshall.
I believe that the ill fated legislation you introduced in your term as Chief Minister of the NT was, and remains, one of the most outstanding political achievements in Australia`s short history.
Sadly overturned by a few narrow minded right wing backward thinking ultra conservative Liberals, one of whom I think is still keeping his safe seat warm.

Irrespective of the matter at hand, politicians should not be allowed conscience votes – ever.

The electorate is not the slightest bit interested in the consciences of politicians. The electorate, rightly, expects politicians to vote in parliament the way they (the voters) want them to. Politicians voting on euthanasia, homosexual ‘marriage’ or anything else other than national defence and the economy on personal preferences, are merely DICTATORS.

Australian politicians are too stupid or too arrogantly authoritarian to realise that they are supposed to representing the electorate, not themselves, their party or their own fantasies.

Neither should we take any interest in a communiqué from one politician to another. Australia politicians simply cannot be trusted; we deserve much better, and we should be demanding better.

NTP:

...A good reason to keep left wing nutters out of politics…The conscience vote!

...Here is an interesting link on who did and did not support the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012 (House of Representatives only) 19th September 2012.

http://www.australiavotes.org/conscience/

...The ALP allowed the conscience vote of its MP’s, but thankfully, the Liberals did not! (Another very good reason to permanently exclude any further advancement in the Liberal party of the left-leaning Malcolm Turnbull).

Back to your point:

...Our elected official at the time, was sent back to the electorate (by the ALP), to gauge the response of the electorate. This either didn’t happen at all in my electorate, or was so unenergetically performed as to be effectively "not performed".

...Of course our elected MP was not only a vocal supporter from her personal perspective, of gay marriage, but conveniently inept at gauging her community support, if in favor or otherwise.

...Well, the election of a National party representative to replace the long standing ALP MP at the last election, was the local response to her arrogance.

...Conscience votes are a joke…a sick one at that. The MP has the obligation to represent the political conscience of the electorate, not the moral conscience!

Excellent reply that exposed the bigotry of Hodgman. The debate about why euthanasia is the compassionate resolution to a problem has moved on. It's time to expose the "values" of those who are denying the response.

Replies like this are important.Because the Abbott government has promoted the falsifiers to his front bench who replace truth and compassion with lies.

Politics needs more Marshall Perrons.

Field Marshall Peron
Don't Cry for Me
Argentina 8001

Thanks for the good idea mate.

I've got a great aunty whose loaded, a little depressed and wants to be disappeared. Problem being she's good for another 10 years.

However I reckon I can post her in a box to Holland where I've lined up some fixers, all legal like.

Yes we'll have to split her dough 6 ways but its worth a shot.

Ta Mate

Planta

What a careing nephew, no wonder arnty wants to depart this world.

There's no need to reduce the inheritance by sending her overseas, just leave some rope or a firearm lying around, that's how many elderly Aussies in her situation solve their problem.

Marshall Perron

Thanks Marshall Perron

For your response. Speeding the demise of a relative for pecuniary or other interests is indeed an issue in the euthanasia debate.

Even if there is no evil intent, other family, other friends or future descendants may question whether Aunty's assisted demise involved the self interest of some who continued to live after her.

Regards

Pete

To the Marshall Perron Imposter,

If you were Marshall Perron, your spelling would be better.

@NeverTrustPoliticians

Oh Ye of little faith. Spelling ability is no qualifier for political office.

And some current or retired politicians can be trusted. Take http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gai_Brodtmann for instance - went to Uni with her - nice person.

I belief Marshall to be the real Marshall Perron - who has been a determined advocate for euthanasia for almost 20 years.

Cheers

Pete

"Dear Will"?

No person expecting to be taken seriously would write a letter addressed to a parlimentarian and be so informal.
(It's "Dear Mr Hodgman", mkay?)

Solution: decriminalise opiates.

Those in pain can relieve it themselves.
Those who want out altogether can deliberately overdose and leave with a smile on their face, instead of their face all over the wall.

Fraudulent/coerced "assistance" can still be criminally prosecuted. (It's called "murder").

isn't it the loony left who cried over not allowing the 15 year old rape victim to have an abortion. Now it is open slather for thousands of murders each year.And now they want us to trust their 'pure ' motives for killing the elderly.

Marshall, there is no point preaching to the insanely religious right, you will never change their minds.

The Libs have to follow their mad Abbott on this one, and he follows faceless men/gods in the sky.

I have always said that euthanasia will never become involuntary, so why on earth is it anyone else's business if someone else chooses to die this way or not?

All anti-euthanasia advocates can die in as much agony, and with as little dignity, as they wish...

Marshall Perron (and wish you had not left NT,) should stand for the Senate on this issue.

Given the terror politicians have for using Constitution s.128 polling, this closest Australians will get the chance to vote on it.

Suseonline: I have always said that euthanasia will never become involuntary ...

This suggests that if someone approached you to administer medication so as to expedite a relative's death, you would resist such evil intent. Does this mean that you have adopted ethics, as you were not renown for defending sanctity of life?