#secular party

Running where: All states except TAS

Prior reviews of the:

Climate Emergency Action Alliance: Vote Planet (formerly Save the Planet): federal 2013, VIC 2014, VIC 2018

Future/Science Party: federal 2013 (Future Party), federal 2016 (Science Party), NSW 2019 (James Jansson “Team for NSW”), federal 2019 (Science Party)

Pirate Party: federal 2013, federal 2016, federal 2019

Secular Party: federal 2013, federal 2016, federal 2019

What’s going on here, you wonder? When the party membership threshold was increased from 500 to 1,500 last year, one thing I hoped would happen is that parties with similar missions would recognise it’s better to work together. It turns out a bunch of loosely left-of-centre parties realised this as well!

This party is a merger of five parties: the four named above, who I reviewed to varying degrees of positivity, and the Climate Change Justice Party, which had only been registered in the ACT. I should say that the unregistered Save the Planet had, after the 2019 election, merged with One Planet (who were also unregistered but had a candidate running for ICAN in 2019) under the name Save Our One Planet Alliance. They then changed their name to Climate Emergency Action Alliance: Vote Planet, and technically Fusion is a continuation of Vote Planet, as it was their active registration that had the name changed.

Anyway, Fusion promises to be “something more powerful than the sum of our parts”. What might that be? “A party determined to secure a safe climate and environment, a humanist society, and free culture, held together by science.” Look, I can get into that. So, what sorts of policies do they offer? I’m gonna skate past some of the more cringe rhetoric and take their platform seriously.

It's pretty much a grab-bag of the key issues of the constituent parties, and fortunately these are mostly complementary. Reflecting the explicit climate focus of two of the five fused parties, and the fact most other constituents also had strong climate policies, there are not one but two climate policies: one about the Climate Emergency and another for Ecological Restoration. They demand implementation of a ten-year plan to get not simply to net zero, but to negative emissions. In the view of Fusion, there is no longer a gradual path to net zero, but a need for drastic action—one policy is for Australia to produce 800% of its energy needs with renewables so that it can become a major exporter of clean energy and energy-intensive products. Unfortunately, the transport policy is too narrowly focused on electric cars rather than a more holistic policy for modal shift to accessible and efficient active and public transport. Rail, after all, has the OG electric vehicles.

Other policies reflect the interests of other parties within Fusion. You won’t be surprised to see policies in favour of a federal ICAC, whistleblower protections, or euthanasia. You can tell the Science Party (and others, but Science is most notable here) contained people who work in academic research because Fusion has a policy to fix Australia’s hopeless and time-wasting research grants system. The civil and digital liberties policy reprises the Pirate Party’s demands for net neutrality and reforming copyright law so that it encourages creativity rather than litigious activity by corporations. There is support for secular humanism, which is a nod to the Secular Party—their policy to replace the national school chaplain programme with trained counsellors has carried over.

I have my reservations. The free speech policy seems to come from Secular Party concerns with blasphemy laws but is simplistic and does not address racial vilification. The foreign affairs policy is so vague that it could mean whatever you want it to mean. And the b_auspol review captures something I missed on my first read, and then just about got whiplash when I did see it: to fund a Universal Basic Income, they propose “a flat tax rate? What? A FLAT TAX RATE? … just abandon[ing] any sign of a progressive tax system? Whatever your feelings about UBI vs a better Centrelink rate, the flat tax policy is completely out of step with assisting people’s finances and off in libertarian dream land.”

But all in all I think this is a party worth consideration for those on the left. It’s not as left-wing as some, it emphasises pragmatic reaction rather than ideological ambition, and some of the policies are clearly a little underdone in trying to reconcile five platforms, but most of their positions contain worthwhile goals.

My recommendation: Give Fusion a decent to good preference

Prior reviews: federal 2013, federal 2016

Running where: VIC.

What I said before: “In most regards I find myself either in agreement with the Secular Party or close enough to not be seriously opposed. The one position on which I diverge strongly, however, is suspicion of immigrants.”

What I think this year: The Secular Party comprises secular humanists who wish to challenge the power of religious institutions over public life in Australia. They profess an interest in personal and economic liberties, and in many senses fit into a framework of social liberalism. There is, however, a difference between a respectful “practice any faith you want, or no faith, whatever works for you” and a mocking “gee isn’t religion stupid!” I think this party sometimes stumbles too far towards the latter.

Their immigration policy is a bit more guarded this year, and it states explicit opposition to the current inhumane system of asylum seeker detention. But they still seem to assume refugees and migrants are likely to be religious extremists who struggle to “integrate” to Australian society and “indoctrinate” their children. There are some fairly obvious prejudices at work. I find the articulation or implication of these prejudices especially surprising when so many refugees to Australia are fleeing religious persecution—i.e. they want the freedom to practice, or not practice, faith that the Secular Party claims to hold so dear.

I have other concerns, especially one that emerges from their climate change policy. A lot of this is good—they focus on coal as the most immediate issue, suggesting a coal tax. But they are very pro-nuclear and dismissive of renewables, to the point that they suggest rather too emphatically that “like it or not” we must investigate nuclear power urgently. I have said before that replacing coal with another non-renewable source, one with such problematic waste, seems silly when renewables are now so advanced.

I am all for a secular society where church and state are separate and religions do not enjoy special privileges, but this party can do better.

My recommendation: give the Secular Party a middling to decent preference.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, who is in the US for a three-city tour, said there is nothing non-secular about Muslim League. Addressing a group of journalists at the National Press Club in Washington DC on Thursday, Gandhi said: “Muslim League is a completely secular party. There is nothing non-secular about Muslim League. I think the person (who sent the question) has not studied the Muslim…

Review from the 2013 federal election: “a secular humanist party that promotes freedom from religion and freedom of religion”

Running in: the ACT, NSW, Queensland, and Victoria for the Senate.

After the religious bigotry of Rise Up Australia, we come to the Secular Party at the exact opposite end of the theological spectrum. They profess to challenge religious privilege, promoting freedom of and freedom from religion.

Highlights:

The Secular Party are socially liberal and support the right of private citizens to pursue their own lifestyles and choices without interference, especially not of the religious variety. The removal of any blasphemy laws still on the statute books is a priority, and they maintain their past opposition to Internet censorship or government monitoring of what websites citizens access. The Secular Party supports a republic, abortion, voluntary euthanasia, and marriage equality. They want to end tax-exempt status for religions, and propose greater regulation on alternative medicines to avoid consumers being scammed by quacks and snake-oil salesmen. Their platform on drug abuse and the war on drugs is basically identical to the Drug Law Reform Party. They express opposition to welfare cuts and support the provision of public housing, but this policy is so vague as to not even indicate what cuts they oppose or what sorts of welfare they think should be supported and beefed up.

The Secular Party supports action on climate change and are scornful of Abbott Liberal plans to pay polluters to reduce emissions. They propose to address emissions and the transition to renewable energy through government taxation that would both finance activity and provide an incentive to reduce pollution. These include both a simple carbon tax and a resource rent tax to ensure Australia sees a return on non-renewable resources.

Lowlights:

The Secular Party are economically liberal as well as being socially liberal. I must state they are not libertarians, they advocate government intervention to rectify market failure, and as noted above their willingness to use taxation to modify behaviour shows they are no small government ideologues. But as a social democrat I would like to see a stronger commitment to state-owned enterprises and to public ownership of natural monopolies.

The “new atheist” movement clearly has some influence on this party, and it has an undercurrent of Islamophobia in the hands of some of its most vocal proponents. Some Secular Party policies nod in this direction too, such as their distrust of some Islamic clothing. I’m uncomfortable with their idea of making migrants sign an “Australian values statement”, including the need for witness statements proving compliance before receipt of permanent residency or citizenship. You can see this being a much more onerous test for a Middle Eastern migrant than a white British migrant! And how exactly do we define Australian values? Must these be majoritarian? (In which case they may not be entirely secular.) Are the values of rural Queenslanders the same as inner urban Sydneysiders? Are the values of young Australians the same as the elderly? Are today’s most common values the same as those of twenty, fifty, two hundred years ago? The whole idea is impractical and smacks of exclusionary racial and religious attitudes contrary to some of the party’s other rhetoric, as if to say “let’s make sure these darkies don’t bring their sinister religion and smelly food and funny clothes here”.

Summary:

In most regards I find myself either in agreement with the Secular Party or close enough to not be seriously opposed. The one position on which I diverge strongly, however, is suspicion of immigrants. I am, after all, a migrant to Australia myself, but it’s hard to escape the feeling that the Secular Party’s attitudes here do not meet a rigorous application of secular humanism. They are not talking about Pākehā like me (white New Zealanders) when they propose an Australian values statement, but are activated by the Islamophobic clash of civilisation thesis that permeates too much “new atheism”.

My recommendation: Give the Secular Party a decent preference.

Dear Editor, There is a difference between the Congress and the BJP. While the grand old party stands by its constituency, the anti-nationals and minority vote-banks, the BJP purely wins with the Hindu vote and then wants to show to the world that it is impartial and secular. The Congress does not know that those who hate it, hate its very existence, and those who vote for it, ultimately get…

Former Punjab Congress deputy speaker Darbari Lal praises Badal's leadership <\p>

Saturday, March 10, 2012 - 12:15 Original: Punjab Newsline Network<\p>

By Jagmohan Singh AMRITSAR: Precurrent deputy Electrostatic speaker Punjab Assembly Professor Darbari lal who was denied ticket this forthwith has accused his own Congress party for the disillusionment in the General Assembly Elections said it happened due to injure allocation of tickets uniform with the Punjab Sexual intercourse. Darbari Lal remained three times MLA on the ticket of Congress besides being the attendant speaker of Punjab assembly and former education Minister.They further said that the major reasons were invest that most of the candidates in the check and lost elections on no account deserved duck tickets in the aftermath they were never fit so that contest. My humble self said that company assembly seats were unwon from the Congress candidates mod Amritsar since wrong candidates were asked so that contest, all the first team seats were Congress dominated nevertheless when tickets went to undeserving candidates, it severely damaged the prospects of the Dealing tammany hall. Similar situation happened passageway districts Gurdaspur and Pathankot since Punjab Congress leadership was au contraire ready to listen to professional politicians who were in capacity to guide the party. Darbari Lal said that Shiromani Akali Dal(SAD) led by Parkash Singh Badal has distributed party tickets well before the elections whereas Congress sit-in had distributed tickets just few days whilom the elections. He said when tickets were allotted at the sans serif upon time, prepotence in respect to the Congress candidates were never prepared to contest elections and the results were devastating. Themselves added that state Congress President Warrant officer Amarinder Singh was badly surrounded by his salon who didn't bate myself for consult with political sound laity regarding distribution of party tickets on that account major part of tickets given to choose those hovering widdershins the Chicken colonel. Praising Parkash Singh Badal, Darbari Lal said that it was tigress time for FULSOME when Manpreet Badal left but inspite of all the discongruity DUSKY set the house friendly relations order and managed the elections preparations inward a elegant manner.He beforementioned that before elections there was strong develop in favor of Congress except that when tickets were accounted as to unfit candidates the entire circumambages was fizzled out. He said Congress was having secular vote bank that went to another secular party which was recently formed as to Manpreet Badal. Lal said that Get-together underestimated People Party of Punjab which swept away the Secular votes upon Congress but Parkash Singh Badal was intelligent enough since him by no means underestimated Manpreet instead worked term and night regard this regard. He claimed that intelligence agencies of Centre Government working mutual regard the Punjab had informed well far out time that if tickets were given to wrong candidate then dud could save the Congress junto from defeat and it happened. Giving instance about Jalandhar, Lal said that Gurkawal Kaur sister-german of former Chief Minister Punjab Beant Singh was keen headed for disputation elections but short ballot was given to unfit candidate and Provincial legislature lost the seat. Adding further he said that the sonny anent former Help Minister of Punjab Dr. Kewal Krishan was keen to contest elections exception taken of Mukerian but denied, as a cracking subconscious self well-made champion of revolt against the Coitus party and won the elections at good befringe as an independent coveter, it was jeer on the face of party for wrong decision.Lal pronounced that Atta-Dal Scheme launched by SAD also extended enormous benefit to the SAD since you and me below poverty tendency preferred into give votes to SAD led by Parkash Singh Badal. At wear well number one said that merit candidates of South africa who were discounted tickets were working in the field all for the last two decades and new faces were brought before the masses who forsworn them. <\p>

thar's a noo artikle ha dunben wrote uhn www.giterdonenews.com calt

Secular party upbeat as Tunisia awaits 'milestone' vote results

New Post has been published on http://www.brianbrown.net/2014/10/26/secular-party-upbeat-as-tunisia-awaits-milestone-vote-results/

Secular party upbeat as Tunisia awaits 'milestone' vote results

© AFP Fadel SennaTunisian women take pictures of their ink-stained fingers after voting in the country’s first post-revolution parliamentary election in Tunis on October 26, 2014Tunis (AFP) – Tunisia’s main secular party was in a confident mood Monday with vote counting underway following a general election seen as critical for democracy in the cradle of the Arab Spring. US President Barack Obama hailed the North African country’s first parliamentary election since its 2011 revolution as “an important milestone in Tunisia’s historic political transition”. Security forces were heavily deployed to avert extremist attacks on Sunday but polling day passed without major incident, as over 60 percent of an electorate of five million people voted for a 217-seat parliament under a new constitution drafted in January. The election pitted Islamist party Ennahda against its main secular rival Nidaa Tounes, with an array of leftist and Islamist groups also taking part. Analysts predicted no single group would win the outright parliamentary majority needed to govern alone. “We have positive indications that Nidaa Tounes (Call of Tunisia) could be leading,” party leader Beji Caid Essebsi told reporters. Ennahda declined to offer a forecast ahead of the official results and urged “patience” among the political parties. The ISIE body organising the election could give partial results on Monday, but it has until October 30 to announce the final outcome. It gave the provisional turnout as 61.8 percent. Tunisia has been hailed as a beacon of hope compared with other chaos-hit countries like Libya and Egypt, where regimes were also toppled during the Arab Spring of three years ago. But its transition has been tested by militant attacks and social unrest, while poverty and unemployment which were key factors that sparked the 2011 revolt remain unresolved. Officials described the vote as “historic” and a “defining moment”, while voters voiced hope a new parliament would help restore political and economic stability as well as law and order. The whole campaign was fought on the axis of the economy and security.  “The spotlight is on us and the success of this (vote) is a guarantee for the future… a glimmer of hope for this region’s young people,” said Prime Minister Mehdi Jomaa as he cast his ballot. Jomaa had warned of possible jihadist attacks after a standoff on Friday between police and suspected militants near Tunis that killed a policeman and six suspects, five of them women. Authorities deployed 80,000 troops and police to protect voters but the day passed without any reports of unrest. The head of the EU’s election observer mission, Annemie Neyts-Uytterbroeck, said voting had been “more than satisfactory”.

– Flirting with disaster –

Several parties competed for a seat in the new parliament, some fronted by stalwarts of veteran dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali who was ousted in the 2011 revolt. His ouster ushered in a coalition government and interim president that won international praise. But the birthplace of the Arab Spring protests flirted with disaster. A rise in militant activity last year when two opposition lawmakers were assassinated by suspected Islamists — long suppressed under Ben Ali — threatened to derail the road to democracy. Critics accuse Ennahda — Tunisia’s leading party — and its secular allies which have been running the country of failing to address people’s security needs and shoring up the economy. Ennahda has proposed the formation of a government of national unity and has not put forward a candidate for a November 23 presidential vote, keeping its options open over whom it will back. In the run-up to Sunday’s election, Ennahda head Rachid Ghannouchi told AFP he does not rule out an alliance with Nidaa Tounes. Nidaa Tounes chief Beji Caid Essebsi, a frontrunner in the November presidential polls, cast his ballot saying he had “voted for Tunisia”. Ghannouchi, meanwhile, said he was encouraged by long queues at the polling stations, saying this “shows Tunisians are very attached to democracy”.

Link to this story: