Wow, Is Mise, you take no prisoners, do you.

>> I'd expect those who advocate higher rates on anything to make voluntary donations equal to the higher rates to show that they are willing to lead by example, otherwise I'd consider them to be hypocritical.<<

That would of course be a first in political history. A world first, no less. Where the public requires their politicians - whether in power or not - to live by the letter of their manifesto commitments.

I'm still not convinced it is practical, though.

How would it work, do you think, if my election manifesto advocated a zero rate income tax, to be replaced by a flat transaction tax? The ATO would have me behind bars in a New York minute. "Ah, but Mr D’Ascenzo, it would be hypocritical of me not to follow my own prescription for Australia's economic well-being"

Or if I proposed the legalization of marijuana. How do you think my defence would stand up in court - "I was simply standing by my principles, yer Honour, it would be hypocritical of me not to supply my friends and neighbours when they asked me."

Nope. Doesn't wash. The rules are the rules, right up until the moment they are changed, I'm afraid.

Right on there Pericles, the Green's want to decrimalise drug use. I've worked with young men who regularly smoke dope. They when employed at 18 were intelligent by 24 were incoherent slobs. Today dependent on Welfare. I have been involved in building and developing drug rehabilitation farm for referrals. They learn to go cold turkey and turn their lives around.

Allowing them merely to remain on drugs just destroys their lives.

Statistics show that alcohol causes much more social and actual damage to the social structure than substance abuse.

But that off subject for this post. Great work of thought, I think Pericles and Pelican.

I havent contributed but I'm having a great read.

On the subject of the Greens accepting donations, what else can they do?,
that is, the way it is.

the mass entertainment is an absolute farce .. and should not be paid from the public purse

I have no problem with limited public funds being applied to disseminating POLICY ... but not the promotion of political cult heroes (aka 'leaders') endlessly brandishing insults and half truths against each other ... in some futile attempt at POPULISM

As far as politicians living up to their word, Ted Mack springs to mind. He, you will all undoubtedly remember, resigned from Parliament two days before he qualified for a pension because he objected to the level of such pensions.

No one, least of all I, would consider that a political principle allowed one to break the law, but it could be considered to be hypocracy if one advocated breaking the law and then didn't do it.

The examples cited don't wash because their proponents didn't advocate breaking the law, whereas the Greens stated that they were against political donations. Not accepting them would have been lawful and an admireable demonstration of their committment to reform and possibly, in the long term, worth the cost.

Personally I'm glad that Brown did accept because it is ammunition for at least the next three elections.