Dear Mr Bartlett,

Don Chip certainly did the nation a favour by enabling the Senate to actually function as a House of review.

It is a shame the Democrat Party has not been willing to aid the creation of a third choice in the Lower House; reviewing bad decisions is important, but making good decisions is even more important for the nation to be able to follow its own course instead of following the same course of corruption which multi-national corporations wish the government to spend the nation's resources on.

What a sad day for Australia with the passing of Don Chipp. His vision of a wonderfully democratic, balanced, third party was always a good one. His vision and his actions were a watershed development in Australian History. He created the most democratic party in Oz.

But what has happened to his legacy? Do Democratic Senators past and present question how much they may have let this man down?

You can't run the slogan "Keep the Bastards Honest" and then capitulate on every issue claiming that you got the best deal possible. It's simple - If the best deal possible was not good enough you just should have said "NO".

There are major problems with a predominently two party system. I want a strong third party - one that on the big issues, when the deal is not good enough, actually says "NO". One where the Senators listen to the public openly and actually follow their members decisions.

The Dems are now seemingly irrelevant even though they still argue policy well and have many good ideas. They lost the people's and especially their voter's trust as can be seen from the Liberals control of the Senate.

I wonder if among the sadness at Don Chipp's funeral, the former & current Senators will reflect on themselves, as individuals and a group, and perhaps question whether they blew the greatest opportunity to become what was the realisation of Don's dream?

The once pround political party the Australian Democrats saw a burlesque made of its high ideals. Under Bartlett the Australian Democrats had as its No 1 priority a stray cat on Manus Island. No questions on the economy, jobs, the environment, welfare or defence. Mr Bartlett wanted an aircraft used to fly a stray cat from Manus Island to Australia so that it could be reunited with an asylum shopper.

Do we pay our politicians enough?

The slogan was great, what a pity it didn't work.
The wafflers who took over the party and ran it into the ground will weep and wail at Chip's funeral but they will never face themselves in a mirror.
They ,like the Greens, are time wasters and money wasters. Maybe soon the ALP will join them.

Edited for being offensive.

[Deleted for being offensive]

Fair enough. Thing is, l dont care what physical 'sort' a person of power/position happens to be. Sort of character, yes, definately. The fact that someone in her political position would resort to such obviously tawdry tactics totally undermines credibility. Gee, l wounder if anyone else noticed. This sort of thing from a woman aspiring to power and control, blatant as its hypocracy is, speaks for itself and deserves the ridicule it invites.

She basically sets the cause of women and the esteem (credibility) in which they are held, back 200 yrs. Makes me think that she, like all the other pollies, dont gives a rats and dont really want to change anything, least of all what they claim to want to change.

Heck, if they actually did fix things, to whom will they preach their perpetual message of discontent and division. How they gonna get the votes. They would undermine their own relevance. Heaven forbid they should make a paradigm shift away from the negative to the positive.

l am harsh, yes. The likes of (g)Nat and the democraps are a most obvious and stricking example of this sort of thing. Laughter is the best medicine, so l self administer a bit of pointless ridicule at the pointlessly ridiculous types, ala (g)Nat.

Strike 1 - Reith's Allowable Matters (that set the stage for the Workchoices Legislation)

Strike 2 - the GST (despite the meagre concessions)

Strike 3 - The sale and subsequent decline of Telstra and its services.

Perhaps some regrouping and reassessment would be in order?

Winning concessions and making deals sometimes isn't enough.

Don Chipp was a great guy but are any of the bastards honest as a result? People (in general) are simply too well-meaning and not honest enough to keep in mind the harsh facts of human life and so they prefer to overlook such bastardly dishonest things such as Cheryl Kerno having sex with Gareth Evans. Don Chipp nor the Democrats kept anyone honest. They weren't honest in the first place and shan't be in the final place. Humans are greedy and dishonest by nature and encouraged by advertising. Good on you Don for spending so long on the gravy train but folks, don't take the slogan too seriously.

“Don Chipp and the Democrats carved out clear political ground separate from the two major parties.”

Yes they did Andrew.

So what happened?

As I have said a number of times on this forum, your personal views seem to be scantly different to those of Labor or Liberal. And yet there is half of the political spectrum unoccupied by anyone (or perhaps with the Greens just left of centre)…. the half that actually considers sustainability ie the protection of our quality of life and environment in an ongoing manner, as the underlying principle, instead of the manic rush-for-the-cliff approach of the Libs, Labs…and Dems.

You have said that you fought strongly against former leader John Coulter’s push to address population stabilisation and other real environmental and sustainability issues.

So I’ll say it again – you must wear a good deal of the blame for the demise of the Democrats, and for turning them into just a really little Liblab party!

--
Opinionated2;

“What a sad day for Australia with the passing of Don Chipp. His vision of a wonderfully democratic, balanced, third party was always a good one. His vision and his actions were a watershed development in Australian History. He created the most democratic party in Oz.”

Absolutely

Ludwig,
your comment that Bartlett opposed former leader Coulter over serious environmental issues has me seriously intrigued.
Are you willing to enlarge?
I (too) am a beleiver in the primacy of a genuine, reasoned economics (not the filthy, greed-based neo-lib travesty of genuinely thought out economics!) based on environmental sustainability, including minimal population growth (at least until something rational is done concerning environmental problems involving things like water and public transport policy)?
Am surprised Bartlett would oppose rational environmentalism, given the lack of such previously will be the creating mechanism behind the big burdens to be faced by coming generations of Australians.

Senator Stott Despoyer{?] sure could bat her eyelashes but she never got as shrill as chainsaw redhead got.
I would like to see more women in government but I loathe to see harpies in positions they should never have been elected to.
Ms Nettles with her 'ovaries',and another yesterday referring to someone who fell on 'their arse' have no place in our parliament. If they want vaudeville, let them find vaudeville.Or one night comic stands.
Parliament needs cleaning up and the crude and the vulgar weeded out.

I agree with Ludwig.No matter what we think of Don's ideals or politics,he was a person of integrety and sincerity.To successfully start a new political party takes sweat,will and planning that is beyond the grasp of most mortal beings.

The greatest enemy of the idealistic,altruistic polly,is the ignorance and avarice of the electorate at large;since the opposition will always resonate with the weakness of short term gratification that dwells in us all.

It is no use blaming the pollies,since they just reflect the attitudes of society at large.

Until we all start paying attention and insist on better standards,our Govts will continue to decline.

Because of Don Chipp I voted Democrat in the upper house for many years. Because of what came later (particularly Senator Stott 'Destroyer') I would never vote Democrat again. How a few selfish 'political animals' destroyed a great chance for Australian politics to raise it's head from the 'pig trough'. Democrats became Femocrats became Stupidcrats. A great chance for all Australians frittered away by untinking ideology. Those charged with 'keeping the bastards honest' became 'the bastards' themselves.

It seems that people criticising Senator Stott-Despoja may have spent too long looking at the parts their minds and wandering eyes lead them too, instead of listening to the woman and what she espoused. It's called respect! You might just be enlightened if you try it.

Seems some here were threatened by her looks rather than her policies. She was a high profile leader and worked hard for that profile, was articulate, communicated with both young and older voters and was well mannered and courteous to all. We can't have that. The fact that she was a young attractive woman has nothing to do with anything.

People are throwing rocks at her because what? - she is attractive.

The manner in which she dressed is totally up to her and people critising her should grow up and raise your eyes to see the person, to hear the person, to listen to policy and to try NOT to judge her on what you appear to be transfixed on.

You have the problem ... she gets the blame... I suspect that is called sexist. Grow UP!

Opinionated2

You will be pleased to note that the OLO moderators agree that Arjay and Trade went too far and had their offensive posts deleted.

They are just typical of adolescents who cannot look at women and see human beings - ironically on threads about women's rights they are among those who claim that feminism is unnecessary, that women already are treated as equals.

Senator Stott-Despoja is probably one of the best pollies around - very few have the integrity she has, and one of her number has just passed away.

Rest in Peace, Donald Chipp.

Funguy

As far as I can see, Andrew Bartlett’s Hansard record of contributions (http://www.iparliament.com.au/hansard.asp?member=2) shows no input on environmental matters (in the broadest interpretation of ‘environmental’), except for one tiny contribution in support of legislation dealing with ozone protection and synthetic greenhouse gases.

He clearly doesn’t hold environmental matters close to heart. And yet in his personal introduction on OLO, it is stated; “Andrew has a strong interest in housing, environmental, social justice, and animal welfare issues.”

Andrew supports high immigration with no end in sight. On OLO on 28 Jan 2006 he wrote;

“John Coulter was – and remains – a zero net migration person. I am sure the ACF Council is currently having as much fun dealing with his anti-migration views as the Democrats did 15 years ago. Fortunately the Democrats fully disassociated themselves from that stance quite some years ago.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4099#28928)

John Coulter was then and still is not anti-migration. He is for low immigration, in fact net zero, which really isn’t all that low – about 30 000 or more pa. But more importantly he is for sustainability, of which population stabilisation is an essential factor, and low immigration and an essential part. Of course, ACF should have accepted that stance without any problem… but alas, they have gone the way of the Democrats, and faded into insignificance, from their high-profile days of the early 90s with front man Philip Toyne.

In opposing low or net zero immigration that was premised on sustainability (net zero immigration was really a good balance between having a reasonable immigration program and dealing with sustainability issues), Andrew opposed an essential part of the solution to most of our big environmental problems.

With his high immigration stance and his clear lack of real interest in environmental matters, I have to ask; what on earth is he doing in the Democrats? It seems to me that he would fit right in with the Liberals or Labor.

I wonder what Don Chipp thought of Andrew.

Seems like a case of; 'If you can’t keep the bastards honest, just give in and join them'?!

Agreed - all the Democrats ever did was agree with anyone they thought was likely to win votes.

The Democrats lost their way, became bogged down in minute detail of legislation; Their decisions on legislation like Telstra produced apparent contradictions so joyfully swallowed and regurgitated by others who live politics.

The Democrats forgot their core, their most succesful policy - keep the bastards honest !

Most Australians try hard to ignore politics.

On most issues each Democrat MP could vote differently without real problems from within their geo-political electorates.

There were really only a few issues Democrats really held balance of power, most were promotional rhetoric they came to believe.

Sadly, on few occaisions when Democrats did hold power and influence as decidors they failed to use it effectively.

They failed to use it effectively in terms of policy, in terms of good democratic principle, and, in terms of party self-purpose.

A good future for the Democrats exists, as do issues worth the effort, not clear is whether todays Democrat politicians see these issues and see the roles they have in resolving them.

Australians face hard labor, without democrat principles

p.