Yes Poirot, it is a frequent source of frustration to me that we can't edit comments after they have been posted, as you can on Agmates for example.

----
<< Anyone who needs to work with their local member will say the same thing, pick the best person for the job with only a weather eye for the platform of their party. >>

Corny, I would indeed think it is very important for people to be able to work and communicate with their local member.

You’ve prompted me to start a new general thread about this.

Sorry to disagree here "pick the best person for the job with only a weather eye for the platform of their party"... the problem here is that 'the platform' is all they bother with.

If you are, say, a Labor voter in a Coalition seat, you will be speaking in a foreign language to your local member, and so too if the situation were the other way round.

Imagine being a Green voter in a seat owned by either of the major parties.... no chance in being understood at all.

We need multi-member electorates, and no 'safe' seats please.

I suppose, Cornflower, that what you are trying to hint at is somebody voting for anybody BUT the party you work for is in no way their 'best candidate' but merely a 'protest'.
(would be half-true if one just voted for a single-issue party, though it would mean that "issue" would possibly hold a balance of power in governance).

Nice try though.

There are political parties that are growing in representative power in Parliaments that seek to undermine the values of family. Family (mother father and children) is the basis of society and must be maintained for a healthy society. See below for a fresh look!

http://www.familyfirst.org.au/Policies.htm

http://www.nsw-familyfirst.org.au/GordonsCrossBench/GorgonsCrossBench.htm

Sorry Philo, but despite their sound policy on government standards, Family First policies on abortion, euthanasia, Aboriginal Australians (paternalistic) and censorship have absolutely killed any chance I will ever support them.
Their brief public/private-ownership paragraph that did not once designate what public and private ownership would be, nor clear a stance on privatisation/nationalisation, was unsatisfactory- One Nation and the Greens however have a crystal clear stance (both demand an expansion of public-owned infrastructure and staunchly oppose privatization).

Local candidates often fall victim to voters dissatisfaction. Mal Brough was a prime example. A finer person would be hard to find, yet, he got the chop due to peoples dislike of John Howard.