Please take a moment to introduce yourself.
Rowan Harrip is a young 24 year old who has a passion for politics and public affairs, which started in his early secondary school years. He joined the DLP after resigning from the ALP, ending an eight year membership in 2010. Rowan has a strong belief in supporting the working class and a working Australia – something the Australian Labor Party no longer does.
Rowan is the eldest of four children and his family has held connections to the region over the past sixty years. Rowan is a strong believer in representatives being real servants to their electorates and in keeping businesses and industries from being sold offshore.
Rowan is a young leader, ready to apply his skills and abilities to making a difference in the electorate of Coomera.
What are your thoughts on coal seam gas?
The party is currently undertaking an engineer’s study on this subject but our stand has been and remains that coal seam gas should cease on prime agricultural land and especially on the Downs where it may very well affect the water system that feeds the Murray Darling System. Whereas NSW Farmers have the right to refuse entry on their farms, this is not the case in Queensland. We are aware of the many benefits brought to the Roma District via gas, but would support a moratorium on any further mining until a proper study can be carried out. The method of fracking should also be examined and ceased on any area that has flows into the Great Artesian Basin and into the Murray Darling System.
What are your thoughts on water?
Put simply “more dams and more infrastructure”. Water in the Murray Darling System currently is proportioned in the following manner:
Environment – 88%
Water that flows out to sea and for wetlands – 11.25%
Water used for agriculture and human consumption – .75 of 1 percent.
To further ration or remove water from our farmers, or for human consumption would not only affect their ability to compete it may very well affect our food security in this country. The DLP will always work to keep our farmers competitive and support the many small businesses and workers that rely on Queensland farmers for their livelihoods.
The DLP campaigned against recycled sewage into our drinking water.
The DLP is the only party to have successfully had a bill passed through any parliament on halting the forced medication (fluoridisation) of community drinking water.
What are your thoughts on climate change?
Climate change has been occurring since before man industrialised and although natural climate change may be occurring, we do not believe that a case has been brought that would excuse the Federal Governments rush to profit on a Carbon Tax. The DLP were the first party to publicly oppose any Carbon Tax or Trade and it stands by and is proud of the fact that many other political parties have come onboard.
What are your thoughts on renewable energy?
The DLP recently moved a motion in the Senate to have a moratorium on any further Wind Farms until the recommendations of the Senate enquiry were adhered to. The DLP is not a supporter of the current heavily subsidised and expensive offerings of renewable, which has left Europe wasting some $287 Billion. The DLP has recommended that coal gasification could be a viable and cheaper transitional form of low carbon electricity generation. This would reduce the amount of coal used by 40% and meet current carbon targets. This technology was developed in Australia and is now being rolled out in Germany, China and other nations around the world. Privatisation has held back this great technology and the DLP have moved in both council and in the Senate that privatisation of the SECV in Victoria was a disaster and for the recommissioning of the SECV to build new coal gasification plant there. The DLP would also vote against the failed ideology of privatising any power generation stations in Queensland and would point to other states and the failures that this madness caused.
What are your thoughts on nuclear energy?
The DLP has never ruled out nuclear energy and is proud that Australia has and continues to work towards a nuclear fusion solution that may very well be the only way to clean up the world’s nuclear waste. The DLP also recognises that Queensland has some of the world finest and cleanest black coal with more than 150 years of supply still available. Nuclear fusion therefore may very well be bonanza for future generations.
What are your thoughts on public transport?
Public transport is too expensive and lacks integration with rail. Ticketing integration and bus services feeding rail stations does work in other states and saves money. Brisbane buses should be under State control and better integrated to help reduce costs. Students and pensioners should have low or no cost fees 7 days a week.
What are your thoughts on public education?
Public Education remains the responsibility of the States and is often used in blame games with the Federal government. The DLP believes in equity in Education and believes that before closing schools in regional centres that the option of Charter or community Co-operative arrangements should be explored before economic irrationalism of the major parties kicks in.
What are your thoughts on the National Broadband Network?
The DLP believes that the theft and sale of the Telstra backbone was a crime. Whilst in principle we would support a nationally owned backbone of communications to create real competition, we are against the current arrangements and the methods of how the NBN is to be rolled out. The forced removal of low cost copper from many regional centres with replacement costs of NBN services starting at $80-$120 per month is just another added impost on the public for poor planning. Instead of decommissioning the copper that in many cases was sufficient, perhaps the Government could have offered these services free to give taxpayers some of the benefit that the Telstra sale made the Federal government. The DLP is aiming to hold the balance of power in 2012 and will halt any sell-off of the NBN planned by the current government and not mentioned by the current opposition.
What are your thoughts on High-Speed Rail?
The DLP would support a High-Speed Rail system but not at the cost of badly needed backbones of our current internal rail system. Brisbane – Toowoomba, Brisbane to Coolangatta link and a host of other options including a suburban rail network in Townsville. The upgrades of these routes hold priorities over any interstate High Speed Rail system. This may be difficult to achieve with the former governments irresponsible sale of QR but should be a priority to preserve our Queensland decentralised way of life.
What are your thoughts on abortion?
The DLP supports life from conception to death and oppose any legislation that ignores the sanctity of life.
Do you support or oppose gay marriage?
The DLP policy on gay marriage is as follows: Support legislation that preserves and protects marriage as the voluntary union of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others, for life. It continues with: Oppose legislative or administrative measures that undermine or degrade marriage by conferring on homosexual, lesbian or transsexual pairings any form of legal recognition of their relationships, per se, whether through “civil unions”, “relationship registers” or other legal device.
Do you support or oppose the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia?
The Democratic Labor Party opposes euthanasia as the deliberate intent to kill another person, whether through lethal injection, ingestion of a drug or poison, or failure to provide minimum necessities of life such as nutrition or hydration.
Do you support or oppose the legalisation of marijuana?
NO – but we are currently looking at the possibility of hemp manufacturing in Australia.
What are your thoughts on campaign finance disclosure?
The current finance disclosure regulations tend to support the incumbent and make it more difficult for minor parties to compete. Therefore we would revisit these laws if elected.
Do you support or oppose the reading of prayers to start each Parliamentary day, and why?
The DLP does and has always supported the reading of prayers at the start of each parliament. Australia was built on a Judeo Christian Heritage and we base our policies and beliefs on that foundation.
On your particular electoral ticket, where are your preferences going, and why?
The LNP made public it was not interested in any preference deals. The ALP showed no interest in winning Coomera and the greens social policies are too extreme to consider them an option. Therefore we will be preferencing Katter’s Australia Party (Peter Cobb) in the seat of Coomera with no other candidate numbered.
Are there any local issues you are trying to highlight with your campaign?
1. Common Sense policies for business & life = Red tape is literally strangling small business. It needs to be cut back so employers and employees can focus their efforts on profits rather than wasted time. In turn promote tourism outlets and attractions which make our electorate great.
2. Real protection of our rights and real penalties and punishment for criminal activity. More resources for “on-the-ground” police. A police station at Ormeau to take strain off Beenleigh and Coomera Stations.
3. Fight to ensure future decrease in cost of living = this ranges from electricity through to transport costs
4. No More Asset Sales – both LNP and ALP support the continued sell off of our State
5. Coal Seam Gas “Handbrake” – It shouldn’t proceed until PROVEN to be safe and land owners secure better land rights. We need to ensure our sustainable and renewable industries are not being destroyed by non renewable industries of mining.
6. Rego Rewards for good drivers. Good drivers keep our roads safer. Incentivizing our good drivers to retain a good driving record will increase the level of care on our roads further. Any Queensland driver who retains a perfect driving record and does not incur any demerit points within their 12 mth registration period will receive a 10% discount on their vehicle registration in the following year. Any Queensland driver who retains a perfect driving record and does not incur any demerit points for five consecutive years will receive 25% discount on their registration and have their licence renewed for free. The 25% discount will apply until a demerit point is received.
7. Public Transport Upgrade = Good public transport services empower people. If the system is not resolved now, the area will be crippled as the population explodes further. This issue was identified as a key target issue during the incumbent’s maiden speech and yet nothing has been done. Decreased fares for students during tertiary hours and pensioners.
8. Support the removal of the carbon tax that will hit Australians pockets
9. Supporting the Chaplaincy programs in our State’s schools
10. Support the local tourism and business sectors
What do you think about the media’s coverage of the election so far?
At this stage most of the media seems to be centred on the two major party leaders but the campaign is still young and with journalists still able to improve.
If “life begins at conception”, does this mean that the DLP wants to outright ban oral conraception?
No we dont have a policy on contraception but it amazes me that with all the information provided that you would ask such and obscure
question. One thing I can say is that in the past when changes to these legislations occur the move to the extreme happens quickly and thats why the DLP has made this stand. A brief history of our fight against such injustices can be viewed at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3WHP7Q5dp8
Question isn’t obscure.
The pill works in several ways, and one of these stops fertilised eggs from taking root in the lining of the uterus. Ergo, using the pill violates the DLP’s policy on abortion.
Did you not know this about the pill?
What I meant by obscure was that after such a comprehensive policy statement that someone chose one point to make a very poor argument.
I know the LNP don’t have much to offer and the ALP have blown their chances but to their members continue to hide from the real issues, never ceases to amaze me.
To answer your question… No the DLP does not or never had a policy on contraception. Whether DLP or ALP or LNP members hold these views is another question. But for those that that push that argument, I repeat we do not or ever had a policy on the Pill.
So David how about you compete in the policy area for once.
He did. The issue he campaigned on was picked up by the federal government, and the change he campaigned for is well on its way to becoming law.
/nods.
I can understand your frustration that after completing such a lengthy questionnaire, the one thing people get hung up on is social policy.
I actually agree with many of your stated policy aims. For example : No more asset sales of publicly owned infrastructure, the Coal Seam Gas “Handbrake” (though the frame of reference for proof had better be very strict), the registration rewards idea (which I think is the fist refreshing policy idea I’ve seen in a long time, even though I do not know how its implementation would affect revenue on a macro scale), cheaper public transport and the idea of hemp manufacturing.
But some of the things that really matter to me, personally, are social policy issues. Particularly gay marriage rights (though I’m not gay), abortion rights (though I’m not a female), voluntary euthanasia rights (though I have no brutal personal story to tell myself), and the legalisation of marijuana; a drug less harmful than a plethora of currently legal and much more socially accepted drugs like alcohol and cigarettes.
And that doesn’t touch on your energy policy at all, which I find internally inconsistent. If you want to remove subsidies for renewable tech, does this mean you also want to remove subsidies for existing fossil-fuel based tech? Or does this mean that you would not give subsidies to the nuclear energy industry, considering that no nuclear power plant anywhere would exist without government subsidies?
This is an opportunity to have an open discussion about competing ideas, and perhaps also an opportunity to flesh out greater detail on supportive ideas.
Will wait with interest for your reply.
Still interested in your response to the idea that your policy would ban oral contraception, and the notion that you were unaware how the pill functioned, but perhaps leave that one ’til last. =)
Thanks Dave
I will try and give a short answer to all of those questions.
1. Homsexual Marraige
The DLP’s economic model of distributism is based on the family being the base unit of any economic model. The vast majority of other parties IE Socialists based parties (base their beliefs on all for the good of the State) and the Capitalist (the individual). Marriage of course was around long before any State but eventually states understood the economic value and the need to re-produce so afforded families, as did most cultures, special dispensation. The idea that the state should consider that the marriage act should be altered to appease a tiny minority of a tiny minority who by their very biological makeup cannot achieve either the economic or re-productive basis of support is not only an act of re-verse discrimination of the worse kind, but also overrides the very need and basis of its support in the first place. The rights issue sometimes heralded by the left is absolute nonsense and although there are many reasons to maintain the act as it is, I cannot think of one that would have anyone racing out to alter the act. Lawyers I’m sure would love it. Children of course have been the great sufferers in these legislative changes and we also hold a policy not to deliberately deprive a child of a mother and a Father. Alteration of the marriage act would do just that.
2. Euthanasia. It is everybody’s right to refuse or stop treatment that is prolonging life. Euthanasia it legislating the taking of one’s life. If the state can legislate to kill for whatever reason then where is the state heading. Governments have been the biggest killer of human beings over the past 100 years and I don’t intend to ever start giving them a free kick. Besides do we really want to go down the road Holland did. Yes I’m sure there are plenty of kids out there wanting to get their hands on their parents heritage early but when do we call a stop….. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/07/world/europe/netherlands-euthanasia-clinic/index.html
3. I am aware and so are many of the party on how the pill works and yes when this policy was founded many in all parties wanted to outlaw the pill. But as I said we have no policy on contraception and never did.
4. Abotion: One only has to view the video previously presented to gain a picture of what would happen in Queensland if the ALP were to alter the current legislation. I have no doubt that MPs like Karen Struthers who are pushing for such extremes will meet their Waterloo on March 24th.
You say you have no policy on copntraception, but one of your stated positions – that life begins at conception – would mean that a common contraceptive method would be classified as ‘abortion’ and, by your own policies, would be prohibited. Is the DLP’s position that an exception would be made in your abortion policy to allow the use of such contraception? Alternatively, is your lack of policy on contraception deliberately tailored to avoid having to answer to the millions of Australian women who use contraception, while still technically opposing it?
Hi Chris
It seems that Abortion is your major issue and whether or not a pill defines an abortion or not. I have answered this and yes nowadays most are aware of how the pill operates. The difference is though that an abortion is a deliberate attack on a Fetus (young baby) whereas taking the pill is for most women a form of contraceptive. (They are not delberately ending ones life)
If your party wishes to present this argument then go right ahead, perhaps you may gain support from some of our members or other traditional based parties, but as i have said we have no policy on contraceptives and never have.
I think the main thing we can aim for is that our legislation is not relaxed to the point of the Victorian laws of which no one who understands them wants.
On the matter of homosexual marriage, you address the contribution of the family unit to society, particularly in a reproductive sense. Does this mean that the DLP opposes marriage for heterosexual couple where one or both partners are infertile? Does the DLP oppose heterosexual marriage involving women who have been through menopause, and are thus unable to bear children? Is the DLP opposed to heterosexual marriage where the couple have no desire to bear children and raise a family? If marriage is about supporting the ‘base unit of any economic model’, and thus a primarily economic matter, does the DLP oppose heterosexual marriage where the partners have serious congenital defects that would be passed on to any children, who would then cost the health system more than they contributed in wages. If indeed the DLP does not oppose these types of heterosexual marriage, what is the “base unit of any economic model” difference between these heterosexual marriages and homosexual marriages? As there is no difference that I can see, how can you claim that the DLP’s opposition to homosexual marriage is simply a matter of economics?
On a related note, this argument of economic imperatives is based on the premise that homosexual couples do not produce offspring, and thus do not have families. Yet, in the same paragraph, you speak of children being “deprived” of having parents of both gender, which seems to acknowledge that homosexual couples to indeed have children and raise families. This severely undermines your already rickety argument about economic imperative.
In speaking of children being deprived a mother and father, you suggest that this is somehow an inherently bad thing, for which children would suffer. However, a recent longterm study into the well-being of the children of lesbian parents in the United States indicated that in all areas of psychological, social and educational well-being and performance, these children performed as well or better than their peers raise by a heterosexual couple. How does this objective assessment of the parenting abilities of homosexual couples match up with your claims of harm?
On the matter of voluntary euthanasia, which you seem to be conflating with euthanasia: the “voluntary” aspect is key here. While you speak of governments killing people – which is indeed a very scary idea – voluntary euthanasia is not a matter of governments deciding when people die. It is a matter of each person being given the choice about when they, themselves, die. These are two very different things, and the conflation of the two suggests either a woeful ignorance of the issue on your behalf, or a deliberate attempt to compare a matter of personal choice to the most heinous of government-sanctioned killings in the 20th century – something which comes dangerously close to a Godwin.
So, to clarify: your position is that, although effectively an abortifacient – something to which the DLP is opposed – the DLP does not object to the use of contraceptives?
How, exactly, does asking one clarifying question make the topic of that question my “major issue”? I’m genuinely interested. Also, what do you mean by “your party”?
David
I find it refreshing to have so many Pro-Life debators on here. Now getting back to the questions you asked:
Renewable Energy.
Currently we have sound knowledge and abundance or coal powered Hydro and Gas, baseline power grids. With coal gasification that would could extend the life of coal for many hundreds of years by using this technology which would not only save us money it would reduce substantially our carbon output. I have had the opportunity to visit the Latrobe Valley in Victoria and talk to many experts in coal, wind and Solar power generation. Most agree that any worthwhile or commercial viable renewable energy technology is some 30-40 years away. The lifespan of these silly Wind Farms that chew up billions of dollars and collapse is usually about 15 years.
Why is it then they that current governments both State and Federal and a number of our superannuation funds are pouring billions into these schemes that are destined to fail. The DLP believes that we have technology and the resources to both continue to supply cheap power while reducing our carbon output. In 30 or 40 years who knows we may have master the renewable but currently it certainly isn’t working and is driving our energy costs through the roof. As for Nuclear we have uranium in abundance and if fusion is to be the answer then we should be aware of it and as we are doing maintain a good knowledge of it. It will be able to burn the old rods and it is not of weapons grade so yes there may be a bonanza for the next generation around the corner
Here is some worthwhile links on renewables:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/europes-287bn-carbon-waste-ubs-report/story-fn59niix-1226203068972
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-philip/8901985/Wind-farms-are-useless-says-Prince-Philip.html
http://toryaardvark.com/2011/11/17/14000-abandoned-wind-turbines-in-the-usa/
The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one.
And you didn’t answer any of the questions relating to subsidies that I asked.
Honestly starting to think this Poe’s Law is applicable.
Hi Chris:
I think the statement you are asking is an oxymoron. It would not be possible to do a fertility check on every young couple wishing to marry. (Although in the States for many years they forced blood checks on young couples). If a young couple married and were not able to or chose not to have children then all or most of the dispensation provided by the state would not be provided so that question is not relevant. Same as an older couples who for cultural and or a religious beliefs enter into marriage. Fertile couples of course drive the economy from education to health, housing to almost ever sphere of life and are a nation’s life blood and means of survival. A homosexual marriage or union by its very nature cannot be compared. Besides the overwhelming support for two parent families across the western world, we are aware that in today’s society that the model family may not be always possible and we would still support them in whatever capacity we could.
As for the so called, “Voluntary Euthanasia” legislation. Show me an example where it hasn’t lead to the deliberate killing of their elderly.
David,
I don’t know of any subsidies for Coal or Hydro or Gas. Which power generating substance are you referring to when stating subsidies?
If you are referring to the diesel fuel subsidy then I don’t think it should be included in this context.
David,
Sorry you might be right I forgot about the diesel engines installed on windfarms that constantly have to kick in.
Chris as for you statement So, to clarify: your position is that, although effectively an abortifacient – something to which the DLP is opposed – the DLP does not object to the use of contraceptives?How, exactly, does asking one clarifying question make the topic of that question my “major issue”? I’m genuinely interested. Also, what do you mean by “your party”?
An Abortion is a when a woman/doctor takes it upon themselves to end the Childs life.
Taking the pill (which may in some cases in practice may become an abortive process) is not the deliberate decision to end a child’s life.
IE
An Abortion – I intend to kill my Child
The Pill – I intend not to get pregnant
A big difference Chris. If you cant see the difference then I think it is you that has the problem
Well I for one am glad that you’ve gone to such lengths to illustrate that you don’t have any idea how the pill functions, even after being told how it does, so thanks for that.
For David and Chris
The Pill.
•The combined pill prevents pregnancy by several mechanisms:1. preventing the egg from leaving the ovary, 2. changing the cervical mucus to restrict sperm movement and 3. changing the lining of the uterus to make it less suitable for implantation.
If three is required then yes David and Chris are right it is an abortifacient.
So yes we all understand how the Pill works.
Surely your political knowledge is so restricted that you cannot move of this subject.
David.
Here is an article that supports our and our Senators position on Wind farms.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/billions-blown-away-on-wind-power-says-british-study/story-fn59niix-1226294168155?from=hot-topics-home
I am shocked, SHOCKED, that a socially authoritarian party would use an article from The Australian to strengthen its tenuous argument that wind farms are bad.
In other news, now that you’ve accepted that the pill causes fertilised eggs to not implant in the womb, does the DLP support the outright banning of contraceptives, in line with your policy of “life begins at conception”? And if you don’t support the banning of the pill, doesn’t this indicate inconsistency in your own policy?
This is what’s called getting people to answer a question.
I still think this is a Poe, but I’m having fun anyway.
David,
I think everyone is shocked by your statements. Authorian ? We are not the ones demanding or approving of killing of either minors or the Elderly.
You asked me our stand and I have clearly given you straight answers.
If we are Authorian. Then who are you that is demanding us to have a policy on the pill that may or may not act as abortifacient.
I have clearly indicated our stand on all our policies and you have ignored and continued down this “authorian as you call it”road.
Now once again so that even a child understands our position.
Abortion – is a deliberate killing of a child.
The Pill – may or may not act as an abortifacient.
How can anyone legislate to Kill. Or legislate or have a policy on anything without an intent.
Poe confirmed, thank you. =)