A bit of a shambles?

During the recent federal election campaign, I often received responses of total disbelief from electors - some could simply not believe that someone was running on a platform focused upon calling out clearly identified abuse and neglect in the South Australian community. During the last decade, I've had my own moments of disbelief in response to the antics of successive federal governments, the harrowing accounts of many survivors in numerous Royal Commissions and somewhat less publicly, repeated examples of harmful systemic behaviour in my former workplace. It’s been challenging to have witnessed more irregular conduct and experienced more disbelief in recent months.

I did anticipate encountering political gamesmanship during the campaign and whilst I encountered a few incidents involving various political parties, I am more concerned by the  significant number of incidents involving Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) staff. It began with my initial contacts with the AEC during the nomination process where I witnessed odd behaviour most commonly seen at a rowdy night out at the pub, specifically comments of questionable taste and a variation of the abrasive and dismissive conduct of a bouncer who will not provide explanations for their behaviour. In the weeks that followed, the AEC proceeded to rack up a sizeable list of incidents including multiple breaches of privacy, unnecessary and vexatious email interactions and on a regular basis during pre-polling, repeated ill-informed challenges questioning the legitimacy of my campaign.

At this point in time, my impression is that the unnecessary challenges to my campaign were not so much the fault of any of the individual AEC staff members involved but more a consequence of the AEC's decision to misrepresent the process of casting a vote on the Senate ballot in their advertising blitz during the election. The AEC simply ignored the vote saving provisions in the Electoral Act and in the main emphasised that voters must number boxes one to six above the line or one to twelve below the line at a minimum on the Senate ballot. In contrast, my how to vote material and election signs correctly informed voters that they must number a minimum of boxes one through to six below the line (as clearly detailed on page 41 of the AEC’s Scrutineer’s Handbook).  As a consequence, not only AEC staff but some voters and party volunteers also questioned if my campaign was lawful and some expressed sentiments that they did not vote for me as a consequence of ‘my mistake’.

Whilst most Australians consider deceptive and misleading conduct in modern politics as unsurprising; this view, informed by the conduct of politicians, now appears to also apply to the independent organisation that manages our democratic processes. The AEC's muted response to complaints regarding the Liberal Party's election signs which recently targeted the Australian-Chinese community builds on such concerns. Whilst the perception of political bias within various government departments is worrying; in my circumstances, I am more inclined to suspect that it's a case of repeatedly shambolic behaviour. As these matters are largely of no concern to the AEC, I feel obliged to provide this information for the Australian community and intend to provide more specific details in the future. It may have seemed very quiet here following the federal election but only recently have I felt that I could speak freely about these experiences. The AEC took a long time to respond to my concerns raised in late May, and their response was quite light on detail.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank almost everyone I met during the campaign and particularly those who shared their personal stories and experience of abuse and neglect with me. Many of these stories have both strengthened my resolve, and my sense of disbelief regarding the extent which our lawmakers prioritise the reputations of the powerful over the wellbeing of everyday Australians. I’d also like to thank the many AEC staff members who treated me with common decency. Whilst the behaviour of some AEC staff members has been a distraction, the greater goal remains supporting individuals and medical practitioners in stopping repeated incidents of clearly identified serious injury and harm.

Far from repealing Medevac, we should be providing medically supported interventions and protection to everyone in our community.

Light at the end of the tunnel

This will most likely be my last blog post before the election. If elected, I aim to identify and respond to individual cases of abuse and neglect that are currently creating serious harm in the South Australian community. Systemic abuse is rife and the extent of unnecessary suffering demands a response that supports early intervention with urgency. I believe there is broad community support for enforceable laws to prevent further injury when inflicted repeatedly following clear identification by first responders, witnesses and health professionals. Whilst recognising that some instances of serious harm and injury will be of a complexity ill-suited to such a direct approach, there remains a frightening amount of instances where victims and perpetrators have been clearly identifiable and often brought into sharper focus through the occurrence of further serious injury, stonewalling, cover ups and failures of due process and procedure. Over the course of six years, I hope to bring about a focus upon this systemic failure, change the conversation by the major parties and create legislation that will strengthen in law everyone's right to be safe from clearly identified harm.

Tragically, it has been a bad week for stories about abuse and neglect – particularly the disturbing content aired in the ABC’s stories into neglect in the aged care sector and the abuse of children in Queensland detention centres, and the more disappointing examples of the juvenile argy bargy of the political circus that occurs at many polling booths. I’ve lost track of the amount of instances I’ve been called names or been told that I am initiating disputes simply by standing up for decency, fairness and factual, informed debate. I’ve witnessed many representatives and volunteers from political parties and the AEC wilfully engaging in aggressive and vexatious conduct, the reasons for my nomination continually become more compelling every day. No wonder so many voters are disenfranchised with Australian politics and over half of electors who arrive at Pre-polling booths appear to have their blinkers on and are power walking into the booth and out again. The experiences of the last three weeks have proved to be both character building and somewhat daunting, and I question whether our next parliament will be able to regain the trust of Australians.

I have received quite a number of emails this week from electors concerned about the rights of the unborn, freedom of religion and speech, and a number of issues from individuals concerned about a range of issues focused around religiously conservative viewpoints. Given my determination to always remain open and honest, I have recommended that these electors consider voting 1 for one of the more conservative aligned parties who more accurately represent their viewpoints. In the interests of honesty, I remain quite concerned by the ongoing disparagement of the LGBTQI+ community which is significantly out of step with mainstream Australia, as clearly evidenced in the results of the 2017 referendum on same sex marriage. This issue has re-entered the public discourse as a result of Israel Folau’s views and recent religious and political leader’s commentary on this matter. I remain staggered that public figures feel compelled to make repeatedly hurtful statements about such a broad cross-section of individuals, and then claim a position of victimhood as a result of people calling them out on their behaviour. Everyone is entitled to their views but when they are representing an employer, organisation and any broader group – they must clearly understand that their actions will bring some focus on these groups and have a range of consequences and impacts far greater than just their lives. As I’ve stated before, this need not be a politically correct position and everyone is entitled to their private views but we all should be held to account for any hurt we are causing in our community. This issue has been made unnecessarily complex and seems stuck in this endless loop of reverse victim blaming, despite very few public LGBTQI+ figures making sweeping statements disparaging all churches or all people of faith. However, I do wish Bill Shorten didn’t use the opportunity to trot around on his high horse earlier in the week – I’d rather he simply say that the Australian community has moved on from this debate, next question. Today is the International day against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, and I wish to stand by everyone in the community and demand that no person suffer unnecessary, needless harassment and suffering. Thank you to all the inspirational figures of the LGBTQI+ movement who have inspired my campaign, and I wish to particularly highlight Karl Heinrich Ulrichs. It’s fair to say I can fully identify with being ignored.

Finally, I have been surprised by how difficult it has been to have my views heard by the public during this campaign and this does not seem to purely be the fault of Rupert Murdoch or any perceived right wing media agenda against someone who holds quite progressive views. Whilst I hope to do well in tomorrow’s election and have received a largely positive reaction from most individuals and the very few media and public broadcasters I’ve spoken with, the reaction from progressive advocacy groups and media organisations identified routinely labelled as having a leftist agenda has been surprising. I certainly understand what it is like to coordinate a resource stretched operation so will choose to detail a few instances from larger organisations that hint at my frustrations. Our (maybe at times not so) beloved Aunty’s ‘print your own how to vote guide’ simply doesn’t list all candidates running this election so if you wish to consider a vote for any independent Senate candidate tomorrow, you will need to do your own research. I previously have detailed my responses to VeganAustralia on this site and whilst I do not fully support all their propositions, I am a lot more supportive than some of the parties and individuals whose views they have promoted on their website. My contact with GetUp has been the most surprising having been a long-time supporter and promoter of many of their petitions and campaigns for over twelve years. I have written to GetUp both prior to the election and during the election, and I only recently got a response from them as I sent a rather tersely worded email expressing my dismay at their neglect to mention my campaign on their site, or even reply to my emails. Instead they choose to highlight Katter’s Australia Party, the Liberal Democrats, the LiberalParty, the National Party, the United Australia Party and the Shooters, Fishers & Farmers non-response to their enquiries. There are a number of conclusions that readers may choose to make about GetUp’s stance but I wish to highlight that the most effective way we can initiate strong action addressing the climate emergency in our next parliament is to elect as many Greens and progressive / centre aligned independents as possible, not more diluted Labor or Liberal versions of environmental policy and protections. I’m unsure if GetUp's stance this election is truly reflecting their Statement of Independence nor their commitment to the environment. In conclusion, for the consideration of electors – I provide my responses to the questions that GetUp chose not to send to me but I recently sent to GetUp. I also want to thank the individual GetUp volunteers who I've met during the campaign for their support.

I hope everyone has an enjoyable democracy sausage tomorrow, and that the vegan not sausages are freely available.

Thanks for reading my blog this election,

Brett

RESPONSES TO GET UP! QUESTIONS – BRETT O’DONNELL, INDEPENDENT SENATE CANDIDATE FOR SA

1.       Will you stop the Adani coal mine and the exploitation of the Galilee coal basin, as a first step in a moratorium on new coal mines and expansions?

YES

2.       Will you review Adani’s environmental approvals and take action if new evidence is available?

YES

3.       Will you rule out any direct or indirect public subsidies to Adani?

YES

4.       Will you implement policies in line with the Paris Agreement to limit dangerous global warming to 1.5 to 2 degrees, including a process to regularly strengthen these policies when needed in line with independent scientific advice?

YES

5.       Will you rule out counting Kyoto carryover credits towards your emissions reduction target?

YES

6.       Do you accept that carbon pollution can and must be reduced faster in the electricity sector than in other sectors of the economy?

YES

7.       Will you implement a national plan for a just and orderly transition away from coal power to clean energy, phasing out all coal-burning power stations by 2030, and establishing a statutory authority to make sure that affected workers and communities are supported in the transition?

YES

8.       Will you establish a new national Environmental Protection Agency and pass a new generation of environment laws that includes binding National Standards on Air Pollution (including from vehicles and coal-burning power plants) to protect the health of all Australians, with sufficient penalties to ensure that requirements are met?

YES

9.       Will you work with the states and territories to ensure Australia’s renewable boom continues in your first term of government (i.e. that the roll-out of renewable across the country continues at the rate of at least 6GW’s a year)?

YES

10.   Will you unleash investment and jobs in renewable energy by protecting and extending ARENA’s mandate beyond 2022, supporting new transmission for renewable energy zones, supporting the development of a clean energy exports industry, and helping businesses seize the benefits of low-cost renewables and energy savings by underwriting clean energy contracts for at least 250 energy-intensive businesses?

YES

11.   Will you ensure that all households, especially low-income households, renters and indigenous communities, can access the benefits of clean energy and energy efficiency, including the establishment of community clean energy hubs and solar rebates for renters?

YES

12.   Will you support a Commonwealth Integrity Commission with sufficient funding, public hearings, strong investigative powers, a broad scope, and the ability to make public findings of corruption?

YES

13.   Do you support protections from prosecution for whistleblowers who expose government wrongdoing?

YES

14.   Do you support caps on electoral campaign expenditure?

YES

15.   Will you cap an individual or corporation’s donations to political parties, candidates and associated entities to $2000 per year (aggregate) and require donations to be disclosed in real time?

YES

16.   Will you support and commit to implement the ‘Medi-vac Bill’ which instituted a process to allow detainees offshore to be transferred to the Australian mainland for medical treatment and assessment at the behest of a panel of Australian doctors?

YES

17.   Will you support the full evacuation of all those refugees and people seeking asylum held in Nauru and Manus Island for over 5 years to safety in Australia or an equivalent third country?

YES

18.   Are you committed to multiculturalism and a diverse community?

YES

19.   Will you oppose attempts to introduce English-language tests and extend the waiting times for Australian citizenship, and ensure that the Home Affairs Department processes all current and future citizenship applications in a timely and transparent manner?

YES (all citizenship applicants to have commenced an English language course prior to application)

20.   Will you reverse changes made by the Social Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 that adversely affect migrant communities and oppose any further exclusion of migrants from the social safety net?

YES

21.   Will you ensure that protections against racial discrimination, including 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, remain intact and that you will consider extending existing protections and policies?

YES

22.   Will you rule out any preference or political deals with One Nation and similarly racist far right parties or candidates, and will you place them at the bottom of your how to vote cards?

YES

23.   Do you support putting First Nations Affairs in First Nations hands?

YES

24.   Will you take action on deaths in custody, starting with a comprehensive audit of the implementation of the Royal Commission’s recommendations?

YES

25.   Will you end the racist and punitive Community Development Program?

YES

26.   Will you restore critical funding partnerships between state and federal governments for remote Aboriginal community housing?

YES

27.   Will you reverse all of the budget cuts to health, education and aged care from the 2014 budget onwards?

YES

28.   Will you reverse all ABC and SBS budget cuts from the 2014 budget onwards?

YES

29.   Will you protect the independence of the ABC and SBS, reform the board appointment process and commit to not interfering in board or senior executive decision making?

YES

30.   Do you agree that Newstart is too low and that it must be raised by at least $75 per week?

YES

*Raise the rate of Newstart and Youth Allowance – I support an increase in the rates of Newstart and Youth Allowance, above that of the regular minor indexation increases. The real rates of Newstart have not risen in 25 years and Anglicare today confirmed in their rental affordability snapshot, that there are only 2 quite isolated properties to rent in Australia that are affordable for a single person on Newstart. I support an urgent and immediate increase in the rate of Newstart and Youth Allowance, and whilst supportive of the work undertaken by ACOSS, I do question whether the recommended increase will be politically possible in the next parliament. A modest increase combined with changes in funding and accessibility around social housing, community, health and employment services, and a scaling back of the more punitive aspects of the welfare system, might be a more realistic outcome (and better than nothing at this point). The frequent poor bashing of the unemployed by some parliamentarians is yet another example of the growing normalisation of abuse of the vulnerable in our community. (from https://independentagainstabuse.blogspot.com/2019/04/replies.html)

31.   Will you take steps to reduce the cost of out-of-pocket medical expenses?

YES

32.   Will you reverse cuts to weekend and public holiday penalty rates announced in 2017?

YES

33.   Will you make housing more affordable, including by reforming negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount?

YES

34.   Will you adopt a full employment target of 2-3% unemployed?

YES

35.   Will you trial a Job Guarantee program?

YES

36.   Will you abolish Stage 2 and 3 of the income tax cuts in the 2018 Federal Budget?

YES

37.   Will you stop unfair tax giveaways to high income earners through avenues like superannuation tax concessions and dividend imputation?

YES (However, I support grandfathering provisions so that older Australians who have already made retirement decisions are not adversely affected)