Democracy guarantees us all the right to participate to the best of our ability. If our ability is making money, then it would be anti-democratic to stop us from contributing that.
Question Time needs an overhaul if it is to genuinely meet the non-negotiable standards of accountability, integrity, and transparency sorely missing from Australia's current system of government.
The getting and begetting of wisdom - so revered in the past as a practical and spiritual necessity for both individuals and societies - seems to be sadly out of fashion in our present age.
The only possible conclusion I can come to on compulsory voting at Local Council level is that is wholly inappropriate; all it achieves is to entrench the powers of the major parties.
There is no current alternative party of the centre, a role once filled by the Australia Party (remember Gordon Barton?) and the Democrats. If one existed I would expect it to do quite well.
Why are we here? Is it just to devour each other?
The claim that one compassionate good is achieved (stopping drownings) should not come at the cost other unjustified practices.
Neoliberalism in effect undermined the class positions of both major political parties, and both have spent the subsequent years trying to find a new role.
In my term in parliament, I want to convince Australians to reconsider whether handing their money over to the government is better than keeping it themselves.
Given that they have had virtually a monopoly of the mass media, the government and the scientific academies, doesn't that point to a fundamental problem with the 'climate change' message?
Like the last, this parliament looks as though it will be obsessed by who lied, and didn't, and just what constitutes a lie.
If a line cannot be drawn through this type of campaign tactic it is likely that many people with excellent credentials and cause to run for public office will simply shy away.