by Sojourner » Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:23 pm
by Barto » Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:55 pm
by Sojourner » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:08 am
by mick » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:29 am
Sojourner wrote:The Street Machine Association of South Australia have been trying to get a Special Vehicles Registration Scheme going in SA as is in the other states for a very long time and the ALP Government here will have none of it. Looks like another way has been found to approach the issue.
If you restore a GT Falcon to original specs, you can get a 90 day a year rego for the same cost as three months of rego, this is because these vehicles are used for club runs or the Bay to Birdwood or similar. If you fit an FM radio or upgrade the Drum Brakes to Disc Brakes, it instantly becomes ineligible. What SMASA want is a fair scheme like the other states have, hardly an unreasonable request.
This party just won in Vic, I suspect they stand to do well on the back of that here, Will be interesting to see what happens, I will definitely be signing up this Friday!
by wycbloods » Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:08 am
Sojourner wrote:The Street Machine Association of South Australia have been trying to get a Special Vehicles Registration Scheme going in SA as is in the other states for a very long time and the ALP Government here will have none of it. Looks like another way has been found to approach the issue.
If you restore a GT Falcon to original specs, you can get a 90 day a year rego for the same cost as three months of rego, this is because these vehicles are used for club runs or the Bay to Birdwood or similar. If you fit an FM radio or upgrade the Drum Brakes to Disc Brakes, it instantly becomes ineligible. What SMASA want is a fair scheme like the other states have, hardly an unreasonable request.
This party just won in Vic, I suspect they stand to do well on the back of that here, Will be interesting to see what happens, I will definitely be signing up this Friday!
by Grahaml » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:30 pm
by Psyber » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:46 pm
by Trader » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:02 pm
Psyber wrote:I'm supporting Nick Xenophon's push for Optional Preferential Voting, which has always made sense to me.
This would eliminate the above the line vote which generates these weird cross party deals.
You would only have to fill in the first 6 of the currently below the line list to make a valid vote.
by Psyber » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:41 pm
Your vote only passes to those you have nominated until your sequence runs out at whatever number you stopped at.Trader wrote:To the non political types, what's the key differences and how does it improve the situation?Psyber wrote:I'm supporting Nick Xenophon's push for Optional Preferential Voting, which has always made sense to me.
This would eliminate the above the line vote which generates these weird cross party deals.
You would only have to fill in the first 6 of the currently below the line list to make a valid vote.
Also, if you put 6 below the line, and you happen to pick 6 that are say ranked 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72, when those candidates drop out, what happens to your vote?
by Trader » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:51 pm
Psyber wrote:Your vote only passes to those you have nominated until your sequence runs out at whatever number you stopped at.Trader wrote:To the non political types, what's the key differences and how does it improve the situation?Psyber wrote:I'm supporting Nick Xenophon's push for Optional Preferential Voting, which has always made sense to me.
This would eliminate the above the line vote which generates these weird cross party deals.
You would only have to fill in the first 6 of the currently below the line list to make a valid vote.
Also, if you put 6 below the line, and you happen to pick 6 that are say ranked 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72, when those candidates drop out, what happens to your vote?
It is not passed on to some candidate you have never heard of or would never vote for down at the end of a line of inter-party deals.
You can thus exercise your choice - not some party's choice - without the tedium of having to fill out every box in a huge upper house paper.
by Psyber » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:59 pm
I'm not sure but I suspect quota size would be adjusted automatically based on the total number of votes counted.Trader wrote:Psyber wrote:Your vote only passes to those you have nominated until your sequence runs out at whatever number you stopped at.Trader wrote:To the non political types, what's the key differences and how does it improve the situation?Psyber wrote:I'm supporting Nick Xenophon's push for Optional Preferential Voting, which has always made sense to me.
This would eliminate the above the line vote which generates these weird cross party deals.
You would only have to fill in the first 6 of the currently below the line list to make a valid vote.
Also, if you put 6 below the line, and you happen to pick 6 that are say ranked 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72, when those candidates drop out, what happens to your vote?
It is not passed on to some candidate you have never heard of or would never vote for down at the end of a line of inter-party deals.
You can thus exercise your choice - not some party's choice - without the tedium of having to fill out every box in a huge upper house paper.
Thanks.
What happens if say 15% of people vote that way so their vote drops out, all of a sudden you don't have enough votes left to get the 6th person to a full quota?
by once_were_warriors » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:02 pm
Trader wrote:Psyber wrote:Your vote only passes to those you have nominated until your sequence runs out at whatever number you stopped at.Trader wrote:To the non political types, what's the key differences and how does it improve the situation?Psyber wrote:I'm supporting Nick Xenophon's push for Optional Preferential Voting, which has always made sense to me.
This would eliminate the above the line vote which generates these weird cross party deals.
You would only have to fill in the first 6 of the currently below the line list to make a valid vote.
Also, if you put 6 below the line, and you happen to pick 6 that are say ranked 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72, when those candidates drop out, what happens to your vote?
It is not passed on to some candidate you have never heard of or would never vote for down at the end of a line of inter-party deals.
You can thus exercise your choice - not some party's choice - without the tedium of having to fill out every box in a huge upper house paper.
Thanks.
What happens if say 15% of people vote that way so their vote drops out, all of a sudden you don't have enough votes left to get the 6th person to a full quota?
by tipper » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:44 pm
I'm not sure but I suspect quota size would be adjusted automatically based on the total number of votes counted.Psyber wrote:Trader wrote:Your vote only passes to those you have nominated until your sequence runs out at whatever number you stopped at.Psyber wrote:To the non political types, what's the key differences and how does it improve the situation?Trader wrote:
Also, if you put 6 below the line, and you happen to pick 6 that are say ranked 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72, when those candidates drop out, what happens to your vote?
It is not passed on to some candidate you have never heard of or would never vote for down at the end of a line of inter-party deals.
You can thus exercise your choice - not some party's choice - without the tedium of having to fill out every box in a huge upper house paper.
Thanks.
What happens if say 15% of people vote that way so their vote drops out, all of a sudden you don't have enough votes left to get the 6th person to a full quota?
by Jimmy_041 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:53 pm
once_were_warriors wrote: Put them in a cage and they fight to the death. Then we will really see who wants the 6 years of living on the Gravy Train.
by Trader » Thu Sep 12, 2013 3:19 pm
by Psyber » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:40 pm
This is not about micro parties, but about winning seats without getting anywhere near a quota on the primary vote, over candidates who got much higher primary vote levels.tipper wrote: anyone else find it ironic that the X man is proposing this, when he himself is the head of a "micro" party!! another example of his hipocracy......
the only reason this is even on the radar is because the "micro" parties involved hold some views that arent really politically correct. personally i dont have any issue with them representing the country (or their states) in the parliament. they have used the system to their advantage, the majors have been doing it for years.....
maybe some different perspectives could be good for a change. obviously it is yet to be seen, and we could be stuck with a similar situation to the last few years, but just because these people hold some non politically correct views, doesnt mean they are necessarily bad. i actually agree with some of the things they have campaigned for. then again, i expect that i will be described as a redneck for my enjoyment of cars and guns.....
by Gozu » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:21 pm
Psyber wrote:(As you may know from my past posts, I, too, love my cars and was reluctant to part with my rather nice Winchester lever action .22 Magnum.)
by Sky Pilot » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:29 pm
Gozu wrote:Psyber wrote:(As you may know from my past posts, I, too, love my cars and was reluctant to part with my rather nice Winchester lever action .22 Magnum.)
You might even be able to get a new gun Psyber if that Liberal Democratic Party nutter gets in!
by Gozu » Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:24 pm
Sky Pilot wrote:Gozu wrote:Psyber wrote:(As you may know from my past posts, I, too, love my cars and was reluctant to part with my rather nice Winchester lever action .22 Magnum.)
You might even be able to get a new gun Psyber if that Liberal Democratic Party nutter gets in!
Firearms laws are solely state affairs.
by Leaping Lindner » Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:48 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |