@Peter the Believer: If the Sukhoi flanker & Rubin submarines are no good why does Labor want to spend $100 billion defending against them? Maybe Russia's best engineers were NOT assigned to tractors! The Russian arms industry survives only because China, India, Malaysia, etc buy there stuff. Are all these countries wrong? Take a look at the http://www.ausairpower.net site for some detailed analysis of the Sukhoi Flankers relative capabilities.

BTW we support consideration of the F-15E OR the Su-35 instead of the JSF. Either would save ~$10 billion and defend Australia better than the JSF. (We might be better off giving more prominence to the F-15E option, I accept many people are against buying Russian gear. Singapore recently ordered 24 * F-15E)

@Foxy: (1) No Pauline Hanson is not in NewAustralia. (2) The whole of http://www.NewAustralia.net is full of policies - how many do you want !?!? The usual criticism is we have too many! (3) My name is carefully hidden in *BOLD* on the About page. That's one click from the home page. (5) Preferences are explicitly stated on the about page. Here it is again: http://www.newaustralia.net/about.html.

Conspiracy theories are fun but this one doesn't really stack up unless I was to change the preferences to put the Coalition ahead of the Greens & Dems.

Cheers,
AlanIde (Founder)

There is only one policy needed to reform Australia. That policy is to make the Constitution a compulsory subject at school, and teach the kids parsing and punctuation. If the High Court we have today cannot read and write properly, and either will not or can not, understand written English, sufficiently to understand that S 79 means that any proceeding decided by a Judge, is unconstitutional, then a policy should be to sack the lot of them.

Civil and criminal matters are all the same and should be decided in a court. This B**l**t of having two classes of justice, first class for crims, and second class for everyone else is not good enough, for a 21st century nation. The only republic that has stood the test of time, the United States of America, has guaranteed jury trials, inherited from England.

All others have failed. The English republic is failing because since WWII they have given in to lawyers, and established a Roman Catholic system. This model has failed everywhere it has been installed, because government from the top down, is bad, but government for the people by the people works. The only way a republic will work is if it has guaranteed jury trials.

The monopoly on lawyers representing other people in court, was not in force, when the United States was formed. It was not in force in England in 1828. We have to abolish the lawyer’s yoke around our necks, or Parliament is just a waste of time. What they do in Parliament has no relationship to what actually happens in Australian Courts.

I still say that we need some honesty and integrity. The integrity of a court is only achieved by a Justice and judges, not by a Judge, and an exclusive bunch of clowns who like to dress up, with wigs, and cloaks

New Australia Party
Oops I got the letters wrong dyslectic or what?
The NPA was meant for you.

Ludwig: Sorry I forgot to answer your previous query. Your optional preference idea seems fine to me, I suggest you join the NewAustralia supporters forum and submit the idea there for comment. Re sustainable economy I think our Green Tax Shift would steer the economy in that direction at high speed. Certainly it's what we want. If you have better / new wording that you think we could use then again draft something up and submit it.

Cheers,
Alan.

If your preferences are going to the God and human hating Greens don't expect my vote. They are a false religion that sacrifices the unborn at their altars. They worship the creation rather than the Creator with the outcome being perverted policies. Both Liberal and Labour have their fair share of these regressive's although strangely enough they are called progressives in the media. They are in love with the corrupt UN because they share the same godless values and worship the same dead gods. Count me out.

“ The monopoly on lawyers representing other people in court, was not in force, when the United States was formed. It was not in force in England in 1828. We have to abolish the lawyer’s yoke around our necks, or Parliament is just a waste of time. What they do in Parliament has no relationship to what actually happens in Australian Courts.”

Peter, what do you mean the lawyers representing others – is there not a choice to represent one self here?

Hubby was trying to explain to me today about the judges in a tribunal that can change laws. Judicial reviews rewriting laws, he had read it somewhere yesterday in a Sydney paper. I think he would agree with you or at least understand more.

He was explaining it is wrong or shouldn't happen. I was cooking dinner!