Gay cop’s tilt for Senate

Gay cop’s tilt for Senate

Gay policeman and ACON board member Wes Bas is campaigning to join the Senate ticket for the Senator Online Party (SOL) at the next federal election.

SOL aims to bring direct democracy to Australian politics, with registered voters telling the party’s senators how to vote on every bill.

“The definition of a politician is somebody who represents their constituents and that’s just not been happening, so this gives that back to the people by giving the Australian public the right to go online and vote on the topics that matter to them,” Bas told Sydney Star Observer.

“SOL senators will have input in that they can give their informed opinion to the people through the website — so you’re not just a puppet.

“But your right for a conscience vote is signed away and you have to represent the people in the way that they vote.”

Bas said he is prepared to stand by that principle, even if it means voting for bills he disagrees with.

“It would be hard if something like gay marriage came up, which is something I would want to vote for. But I think the majority of Australians agree with the concept of civil unions or gay marriage or whatever way it’s presented, so I think they’re going to vote the right way — I have that faith,” he said.

“But if the majority says ‘No’, I’m not there to represent my own views and making that ‘no’ vote, while it would be very difficult, is probably the right one because it’s what the majority want.”

For that reason Bas said he understood LGBTs might be apprehensive about supporting SOL.

“SOL will represent the majority voice of Australia and that’s a hard sell to the LGBT community because they’ll say,

‘You’re representing the majority, we’re a minority voice’, ” he said.

“My way of thinking is that we’ve lobbied the major parties for so long to get them to listen to us and they’re not, so this might turn things around in that we’ll be able to lobby the Australian public directly and if the public can be swayed they’re going to vote the right way when telling us how to vote.”

The 27-year-old said he’s been bowled over by the support he’s received from friends and colleagues.

info: Visit www.senatoronline.org.au or www.facebook.com.au/WesleyBas

You May Also Like

11 responses to “Gay cop’s tilt for Senate”

  1. i’ve known Wes for a couple of years now, he’s one of the nicest people you’ll meet and i think it will be great to have him in parliament voicing the word of the people.

  2. I am an intelligent, 35 year old who is passionate about social, political and moral issues. I am a sponge for news and debate at the local and global level.
    I do not have the time though to research, rationalise and then make an informed decision on every issue that affects my future in our society.
    For me to change my mind on the topic being discussed, I need to be persuaded that my future is not going to be put in the hands of unelected, irrationally opinionated, tech-savy individuals with great marketing skills who can mount an on-line campaign at the drop-of-a-hat.
    I want my future being decided upon by people who listen and can make a balanced decision based on the facts of the debate.

  3. Bayne, who said anything about direct democracy with out any rights? I would much prefer direct democracy where everyone can vote, than to have a member of parliament like Ms Plibersek in there “abstaining” from a vote to show her support. Let us ALL have a vote – not just the one person who was elected in the seat. There are many deficits to our current system. proportional representation in the lower house is a start. direct democracy is even better. you think that the silent majority who don’t contact their MPs in co-ordinated letter campaigns are homophobic? they aren’t. most people are on our side, it’s the loud ones that politicians listen to who aren’t on our side.

    and as for Ethics training – the NSW government could use a few lessons. minister after minister resigning because they did the wrong thing. Ms Keneally even claimed the whistleblower in the penrith mp corruption claim was being “vexacious”! give me direct democracy any day!

  4. I’d like to respond to this, both as a supporter of this campaign and as a consultant on politics, international relations, law, and human rights (which have been flagged in these discussions).

    Obviously, I don’t think this is a gimmick, or else I wouldn’t be supporting the campaign. Right now, the platform of direct democracy is in its infancy, so there is definitely a huge scope to grow. However, the people becoming adults today have effectively lived all their life with the internet. Facebook and social networking is becoming a more common method of communication than mobile phones.

    So while it might seem like I gimmick to some, I would instead I think we’re seeing an opportunity to engage with the political system that has not existed before. One of the biggest issues facing contemporary politics is apathy and the lack of engagement. Having a more direct means of interacting with representatives or politicians allows such connection. It empowers citizens to have a political voice in ways they have not had before.

    I have heard arguments concerning the tyranny of the masses before, and I think they would only apply if the direct democracy was the only process we were looking at. We also have a judicial system designed to keep such extremes in check. It basically seems to suggest that public opinion (which would strongly influence the results of more direct democracy) is always going to be discriminatory.

    One of the consequences of this kind of networking is that it brings these different voices more directly together. So rather than opinions forming in political isolation of party lines. Direct democracy means that we are far more responsible for what happens in politics, and so we can’t simply shift blame to politicians for inadequately representing us. I feel that the hesitation to become involved with such a platform is symptomatic of people hesitant to become politicians themselves.

    Will such a system be without contention? Of course not. However, this very tension and deliberation is needed to ensure that all issues are debated over properly.

  5. James is correct, this is a gimmick and devalues our parliamentary system. Politicians have a bad enough reputation without stooping so low that they enter parliament without an opinion/platform. Maybe we can just do away with government all together and run the country on referendums facilitated by “liking” facebook pages. What a joke.

  6. John… at times the majority have been against equal rights… thats why having protected rights that the majority is not meant to tamper with is so important… but we don’t have that in Australia.

    So any group of people not sufficiently popular can then be thoroughly trampled on! Direct Democracy without Rights protections are a very bad thing, the worst of the tyranny of the majority which the rest of modern democracies wisely put human rights protections in place to limit.

    Now if we had powerful strong human rights protections a reliable media and a well educated populace taught both Ethics and critical thinking then it would be a good thing.

  7. I agree that there needs to be a change in the way politicians vote.
    Politicians are not representatives though, they are delegates.
    We delegate our responsibility to them, and pay some of them for it, in order for them to make the informed decisions that we simply don’t have the time to research. We empower our elected delegates to make up their own minds once they have been presented with all the facts of the case and done their own background reading.
    We constituents have an opinion, but it’s rarely as informed and (hopefully) balanced as the people we elect in to make those decisions for us.
    Personally, I’m in favour of a non-party political system, or, at the very least, removing party whips and compulsory voting along party lines. But that’s a debate for another day.

  8. Giving a voice to armchair activists across Australia. I wonder how Wes will feel when the Christian machine overloads the website with ‘No’ votes on Gay Marriage. Would he then vote that way?

    If you want to be independent, run as one. Don’t run with a gimmick.

  9. It’s a recipe for the tyranny of talkback radio – but good on the bloke for having a tilt.