I'm running as an Independent Candidate for Redlands - why? Because I'm sick of government inaction regarding child safety and protection. I am tired of government forcing ridiculous restrictions on recreational fishermen while commercial fishermen and cargo ships cause more damage. I am offended that the government can discriminate against children born after 30 June by prohibiting them from attending Prep.
Most Independents run in the election because, like myself, we're tired of party politics and government inaction and run because we hope we can make a change and give the voice back to the people. As we all know the parties are not interested in what we want or need, all they want is to line their pockets.
What do I stand for:
- Tougher penalties for repeat offenders.
- Non release from jail for repeat sex offenders.
- Mandatory counselling and other service for first time sex offenders.
- Changes to the Green Zones (for those who don't know the report Labor relied upon to implement the new zones was done by an employee from the EPA - and no-one is allowed access to her full thesis).
- Changes to the Prep system by removing the cut off date so all children turning 5 can attend Prep that year.
- Reduction in govt advertising - the govt wastes millions of dollars per govt dept/commission in television advertising alone - wouldn't that be better spent on health, education and other services.
Comments
Heather (not verified)
Sun, 2009-03-15 20:41
Permalink
Independent argues monitoring of sex offenders insufficient
James Sinnamon
Sun, 2009-03-15 23:48
Permalink
Sexual abuse not the only form of child cruelty
Heather Steinbe... (not verified)
Mon, 2009-03-16 22:50
Permalink
Children
Anonymous (not verified)
Sun, 2010-02-21 23:13
Permalink
RE: Indecent Treatment of a child
James Sinnamon
Sun, 2009-03-15 23:50
Permalink
Protection of endangered marine environment must be paramount
Heather Steinbe... (not verified)
Mon, 2009-03-16 23:07
Permalink
Moreton Bay fishing Green Zones problematic
James Sinnamon
Tue, 2009-03-17 00:23
Permalink
Need further explanation of failure of buy-back scheme
Heather Steinbe... (not verified)
Tue, 2009-03-17 20:48
Permalink
How Moreton Bay buy-back fails to reduce commercial harvest
James,
My understanding and from what I have been told from those in the know is that the larger commercial fishermen sell their licence to the govt - the govt pay a stack of money for them because these fishermen catch most of the fish and the government believe by buying the licences from the larger commercial fishermen the volume of fish being caught will be reduced. However, these large commercial fishermen are then able to buy licences from the government that have been handed in by the smaller fishermen. So effectively the larger commercial fishermen are buying out the smaller fishermen via the government without any great reduction in volume of fish caught. Most of the smaller fishermen are generally those who only go out occasionally / part-time and have very small catches anyway, so the volume of fish caught is remaining constant.
The purpose of the buy back scheme was to encourage the commercial fishermen to hand in their licences and not go back fishing so that the volume caught is reduced - but with the loop hole the volume is remaining the same - the only ones benefitting are the larger commercial fishermen who were already making good money.
And yet the government keep blaming recreational fishermen for the problems - there is yet to be any announcement on reducing or controlling jet skiiers more effectively who roar around the waterways creating wakes which wash up against the banks causing damage.
Add comment