AMID the funding promises which have dominated the political scene in the lead-up to elections, down and dirty policy can play second fiddle.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
One of the more contentious issues facing Australia, let alone Victoria — legal abortion — has come to prominence in one of the state’s most marginal seats, Buninyong, after Nationals candidate Sonia Smith promised not to preference fellow Coalition candidate, the Liberal Party’s Ben Taylor, over his views on the issue.
The Courier interviewed all major party candidates in Wendouree and Buninyong on the issue earlier this year and the responses can still be viewed on our website.
Setting aside the issue of abortion itself, this week’s developments again expose the nature of policy debate in a generally contrived and controlled party-first environment.
In general terms, it is recognised that voters most regularly vote based upon the leader of a party, or the party itself.
However, in marginal seats, it can be the recognition or standing of candidates who do the doorknocking and the public debates and are prepared to stand up on localised issues which can swing a result their way. There’s little doubt that Ms Smith has been outspoken during the campaign based genuinely on what she as an individual believes are the important issues.
While her party’s official preference forms will put Mr Taylor second, her public announcement that she cannot support such a position will hurt the Liberal Party’s chances of winning Buninyong.
It is also damaging for The Nationals which will be questioning if Ms Smith’s views align with those of the party.
From the public perspective, we spend so much time criticising politicians for failing to be open and honest and not delivering on what they promised once elected that we surely cannot then criticise those who are prepared to stand up for what they believe — be it popular or otherwise. In this context, it goes for both supporters and those against reforms to abortion laws.
The public does have a right to know candidates’ views on local issues but also state ones which they can influence if elected. This way voters can make the most informed choice on election day beyond just which party is making the most alluring funding promises.