Our+Policies

O U R POL I CI E S  Climate Change
 * Policy will cost $3.5 billion
 * Plant 25 million trees (providing more jobs so good for economy)
 * Up to $1500 rebate for houses with solar panels (more jobs)
 * Not supporting ETS
 * Farmers and industries who reduce emissions will be rewarded and those who continue to pollute will be penalised financially
 * $1.2 billion invested in helping to public, industry and farmers to cut emissions
 * Soil carbon storage
 * This will hopefully reduce emissions by 10% year 2020
 * Policy commences from the moment if voted

Asylum Seekers What we do not support:**﻿****﻿** **﻿**
 * Increase the number of places available to people who apply for refugee and humanitarian resettlement offshore
 * Introduce a temporary protection visa for asylum seekers who do not have a valid visa when they lodge heir asylum claim
 * Applications for protection and humanitarian visas should be made offshore through UNHCR or by persons who are lawfully in Australia as much as possible.
 * Offer refugees access to support programs, medicare and work rights to TVP holders in return for satisfying mutual obligation requirement to undertake work
 * Restoration of the 45 day rule abolished by the labour government, which requires applicants to lodge an application for a protection visa within 45 days of arrival if they wished to access work rights and Medicare benefits in Australia.
 * Assessment of refugee status
 * Ensure safe and secure return to self-proclaimed refugees who do not have a legitimate reason to remain in Australia
 * Introduce community support system to sponsor legal humanitarian entrants (visas)
 * Detention centres
 * Turn away refugees truly in need of safety

Internet Filter Stance: Negative Reasons for stance on Internet filter: Alternative: Optional child filter in which there is a set setting where all sites that would have been banned are banned and parents can add more to the list. The Coalition isn’t convinced net filtering will protect kids.
 * Human rights, liberty being invaded-individual choices.
 * Taking away the parents choice of what their child can view.
 * Waste of money-$44.2 millions instead can be used in more useful such as climate change and education.
 * Bad international relations, set a barrier to international trade (eg banning radical Islam will lead to extremely dangerous circumstances)
 * No limit on what can be banned
 * Knowledge is power, limited sites
 * Curiosity of the unknown could lead to more dangerous stunts occurring
 * Main pornography spread around peers, which wouldn’t be blocked by the technology filter.
 * Parents will completely trust the system leading them to turn a blind eye even though there will be flaws in the system.
 * The best accuracy of filter is only up to 88%, most of the “dark side” won’t be detected, why waste the money?
 * People will find other ways of getting child porn/rape porn
 * Australia’s level of internet filtering will put it in the same league as countries including China, Cuba, Iran and North Korea-is an excuse to manipulate people’s action
 * It might be the cause of the leaking privacy; e.g. email, conversation and private files.
 * Slow down internet speed

National Service
 * participate for a period of a year during their youth (18 - 29 years old)
 * benefits: 6 weeks annual leave, including travel + housing grants + insurance + we will pay for your HESC fees
 * it will include; free meals, accommodation, uniforms, work clothes, medical, dental & hospital treament
 * completing the 1 year will be helping the country, and it will also help you gain skills, knowledge & mateship providing one with friends for life leading one to a brighter future
 * this will help the individual, Australia and the world which is what we, the Liberal party, stand for.

Voting at 16 The Liberal and National Parties believe that voting for teenagers ages 16 and 17 should be made optional. This policy should be adopted across all states and territories of Australia. We believe this is best for our country because;
 * Many 16 and 17 year olds are just as politically educated as those who are already eligible to vote (as is evident from programs such as PIP).
 * It gives people who are interested in politics the chance to have a say, and the views of the younger generation should be just as valued as those of elder generations
 * Many people who are currently allowed to vote take no interest in politics, and vote because it is compulsory. Therefore it is unfair to prevent people who are just as educated, if not more, from voting just because they are a few years younger.
 * 16 year olds are legally allowed to drive, work, pay tax and have sex and have to make life-changing decisions such as subject choices and university choices. Therefore, as people who have to carry out a lot of things that are considered to be adult responsibilities, they should be empowered to have their say through voting.
 * We should be able to have a say in how our tax is payed.
 * Young people have a lot more to deal with than previous generations, particularly in terms of employment, the environment, education and technology, thus widening our viewpoints from a young age. This knowledge is something that should be able to expressed in the terms of having a say in our government.
 * Teenagers are unjustly generalised as self absorbed, shopaholic, technology obsessed youths. Yes, there are some people in the 16/17 year old demographic that have no interest in voting, but similarly there are people 18 and over who aren’t interested either. If voting were optional it would give those who are interested a chance to have a say without any pressure.