Home > Beliefs Survey > Federal Election - Senate 2007
List of Candidates for VIC (VIC)
= previously sitting member
TicketBallot PositionCandidatePartyQ1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9Q10Total
A1HOWARD, AinslieClimate Change Coalition 00000000000
A2ROZAIRO, SashikalaClimate Change Coalition 00000000000
B1STEEL, NickOne Nation 00000000000
B2SHORE, DanielOne Nation 00000000000
C1ALLISON, LynAustralian Democrats 3222223210230
C2CHIPP, GregAustralian Democrats 3222223210230
C3MCCUBBIN, JoAustralian Democrats 3222223210230
D1LOVE, MadeleineWhat Women Want 00000000000
D2THOMPSON, RobynWhat Women Want 00000000000
E1ROSE, RobertSenator On-Line 00000000000
E2BARRETT, JennySenator On-Line 00000000000
F1COLLINS, JacintaAustralian Labor Party 10233723510550
F2MARSHALL, GavinAustralian Labor Party 10233723510550
F3FEENEY, DavidAustralian Labor Party 10233723510550
F4LEWIS, MargAustralian Labor Party 10233723510550
G1PARKER, BrettShooters Party 00000000000
G2GRAHAM, MattShooters Party 00000000000
H1FIFIELD, MitchLiberal Party 10537573521057
H2KROGER, HelenLiberal Party 10537573521057
H3RYAN, ScottLiberal Party 10537573521057
H4SWAYN, SimonNational Party 10537573521057
I1TOSCANO, JosephIndependent 00000000000
I2PIERCE, JudeIndependent 00000000000
J1BYRNE, PeterSocialist Equality Party 00000000000
J2BAPTIST, TaniaSocialist Equality Party 00000000000
K1PLUMRIDGE, GaryFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
K2RAWSON, MiriamFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
K3PODBURY, MoniqueFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
K4WILLIS, ChrisFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
K5HEATH, ClareFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
K6BOWN SEELEY, AnnFamily First Party 101010101010101051095
L1CLANCY, SteveLiberty and Democracy Party 5210222310101056
L2SAW, GeoffLiberty and Democracy Party 00000000000
M1RASKOVY, SteveConservatives for Climate and 00000000000
M2LEWAND, VieshaConservatives for Climate and 00000000000
N1MULHOLLAND, JohnDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
N2FLOOD, GerryDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
N3LA MANNA, PatDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
N4EVELYN-LIARDET, TeresaDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
N5WELLS, KenDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
N6CREA, PaulDemocratic Labor Party 10101010101010101010100
O1MCDONALD, Ewan AngusChristian Democratic Party 101010101010101071097
O2CLARNETTE, DallasChristian Democratic Party 10101010101010101010100
P1PERKINS, JohnIndependent 00000000000
P2CONWAY, AndrewIndependent 00000000000
Q1AFFLECK, RachelCitizens Electoral Council 00000000000
Q2ISHERWOOD, KatherineCitizens Electoral Council 00000000000
R1HALL, BrendanNon-Custodial Parents Party 00000000000
R2ZABANEH, JohnNon-Custodial Parents Party 00000000000
S1WINDISCH, MargaritaSocialist Alliance 00000000000
S2SMITH, JeremySocialist Alliance 00000000000
T1KALINIY, JosephIndependent 00000000000
T2MESARITIS, KoullaIndependent 00000000000
U1DI NATALE, RichardGreens 111111111110
U2O'CONNOR, JennyGreens 111111111110
U3BHATHAL, AlexandraGreens 111111111110
U4REIHER, JimGreens 111111111110
U5PHAM, HoaGreens 111111111110
U6HENLEY, EmmaGreens 111111111110
V1KLEIN, TonyIndependent 00000000000
V2KLEIN, AmandaIndependent 00000000000
W1RHODES, JunelleCarers Alliance 00000000000
W2GIBILISCO, PeterCarers Alliance 00000000000
W3KARADIMOS, PatriciaCarers Alliance 00000000000
UG1WALKER, NormanIndependent 10710710107107785
UG2O'BRYAN, DarrylIndependent 1013105177101064
UG3GROVES, Llewellyn JohnOne Nation 00000000000
UG4SENER, Tejay MIndependent 111111111110

FOL's scoring rewards openness and honesty. Failure to respond scores zero. An evasive non-answer to any question scores one. An honest "no" - completely opposing our position - scores two. Qualified agreement scores between three and seven. Full agreement scores ten.

Questionnaire

Candidates were asked to indicate how they would vote or did vote on these issues by answering the questions. If they are bound by party policy on a particular question, they were asked to provide an answer in accordance with that policy.

1. Prayers in parliament
Prayers in parliament are an important daily reminder that we must all ultimately answer to the higher authority of Almighty God. The prayers, which consist of the Lord's Prayer and a request for God's guidance, are an expression of the Christian foundation and character of our nation. According to the latest census, 64% of Australians identify as Christians.
Do you support the current practice of opening each day of parliament with Christian prayers?

2. Relationship registers
In 2004 the Parliament amended the Marriage Act 1961 to reaffirm that marriage is between a man and a woman and to prevent courts recognising same sex marriages. The homosexual lobby is now seeking to gain legal recognition for same sex relationships through state or territory legislation setting up civil unions or registered relationships. The Commonwealth's constitutional marriage power enables it to further amend the Marriage Act 1961 to invalidate these state laws in order to protect and defend the unique status of marriage.
Would you vote to amend the Marriage Act 1961 to prevent states from giving legal recognition to couple relationships other than marriage, including homosexual, lesbian and de facto relationships?

3. Abortion funding
A national opinion poll conducted in 2005 by Market Facts (Qld) found that 67% of Australians are opposed to Medicare funding of abortions performed in the second trimester (14-26 weeks). Children born as early as 21 weeks are now surviving thanks to the wonderful advances in modern medicine. Second trimester abortions can result in a live born child who is then left to die. 49 such abortions were recorded in Victoria alone in 2005. Some second trimester abortions are performed by the partial birth abortion method which has now been banned by the US Congress, a ban upheld by the US Supreme Court. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for these abortions.
Would you support a change to the Medicare schedule so that taxpayers are no longer forced to pay for second trimester and late term abortions?

4. Illicit drugs
Harm minimisation has been one of the key principles of Australia's drug strategy since 1985. Harm minimisation measures include needle and syringe exchanges, injecting rooms, heroin prescription, methadone substitution, liberal cannabis laws and drug testing kits. In 2003 the House of Representatives "Roads to Recovery" report called for the replacement of the current focus of the National Drug Strategy on harm minimisation with a new focus on harm prevention and treatment. This recommendation has not yet been implemented. Sweden has shown that "drug free" policies can dramatically reduce the use of illicit drugs.
Would you support the replacement of the current focus of the National Drug Strategy on harm minimisation and harm reduction strategies with a new focus on achieving a drug free society?

5. Internet filtering
The internet provides many benefits but also carries many dangers. Unfiltered, the internet can bring explicit pornography and material that promotes terrorism, crime or suicide into the family home. Voluntary PC based filtering systems will not protect children in vulnerable situations such as the 9-10 year olds reported by the Canberra Hospital for sexually abusing even younger children after exposure to internet pornography. Mandatory filtering at the ISP level is essential for the protection of Australian children and for a healthy society.
Would you support mandatory filtering of the internet at ISP level to exclude all explicit pornography as well as material which promotes crime, suicide or terrorism?

6. Benefits supporting marriage
Over many centuries, governments have granted marriage a privileged status not given to other types of relationships, for two key reasons. Only marriage provides the best environment for raising children with stability plus complementary male and female role models (Mum and Dad). Men and women complement each other in marriage, benefiting each other and society. Homosexual and lesbian relationships do not have these characteristics and should not be given the benefits given to married couples.
Would you oppose any measure which seeks to extend to homosexual and lesbian couples the benefits currently given to married couples?

7. Cloning
In 2002 federal parliament unanimously banned all forms of human cloning. In 2006 a private member's bill lifted the ban on the creation of human embryos by cloning for use in destructive research. It is wrong to create a human life with the intention of using him or her for research and then destruction. Cloning for research is scientifically unnecessary as the hoped for benefits from cloning are being more effectively and more safely obtained using stem cells derived in an ethically uncontroversial way from adults or from umbilical cord blood.
Would you vote to repeal those laws which permit the creation of human embryos by cloning for use in destructive research?

8. Child care benefits
Surveys indicate that a large majority of parents would prefer one parent (usually the mother) to care for their children full-time at home if they could afford it. Current child care benefits are much more generous to mothers who place their children in child care centres than to those who care for their own children at home. All parents should be treated equally, receiving the same childcare benefit. They should be free to spend it as they choose - on childcare or on helping one parent stay at home.
Would you support legislation requiring equal child care benefits to be paid directly to all parents of young children, whether the children are cared for at home or in a child care centre?

9. Access Card
A mandatory smart card for access to all government social services including Medicare is an unjustifiable intrusion into individual privacy and a possible step towards a national identity card. While there may be a need to rationalise the processes used to access social services, there is no need to include Medicare in this scheme. For millions of Australians, Medicare is the only Commonwealth benefit they access. Once billions of dollars are invested in a smart card which will be mandatory for any Australian unwilling to opt out of the Medicare system and forego any entitlements to social services, there will be a natural 'function creep' until the access card becomes a de facto national identity card.
Would you oppose the introduction of a mandatory smart card for access to all government social services including Medicare?

10. Vilification legislation
Laws which prohibit vilification on the grounds of religious belief or sexuality are an unwarranted interference with free speech and religious liberty. Those who point out the health risks of homosexual behaviour, or who question claims and practices of a particular religion such as Islam, should not be penalised.
Would you vote to oppose laws which would prohibit vilification on the grounds of religious belief or sexuality?