|Social Media:||Facebook — Twitter — YouTube — Instagram|
|Slogans:||It’s Just Common Sense!|
|Themes:||Harsher sentencing for criminals, end animal cruelty and legalise euthanasia|
|Electorates:||Upper House: Victoria
Lower House: Casey, Corangmite, Deakin, Goldstein, Indi, & Kooyong
|Preferences:||Not yet available|
|Previous Reviews:||2019 — 2018 (VIC) — 2016>|
Policies & Commentary
A little weirdness, before I get into the party review proper. Despite being listed in the number two spot on the ballot paper, there’s no mention of Ruth Stanfield anywhere on the website. I can find no news stories about her, and indeed, little record at all of her. So, no idea what happened there.
Hinch, and one assumes, his party, have not significantly changed their policies since the party was founded. They still want a public register of sex offenders, they still want harsher sentencing and more stringent requirement for both bail and parole, they still want legalised euthanasia (for the whole country, not just Victoria, although they do support the Victorian law) and they still want an end to animal cruelty. Cate went over this stuff in some detail in her previous looks at the party, and not much has changed – most of the wording is still the same, even. They have added support for Veterans, although in a fairly vague way – there’s no actual statement of what they plan to do here.
There are other additions: Hinch was also opposed the amalgamation of the Family Court into the Federal Court system, and the party is very much in support of reversing this decision, and generally reforming the Family Court to be less traumatic for everyone, but especially the children. Hinch was also a big supporter of the Royal Commission into Aged Care and wants to see nurse/patient ratios introduced into this sector. They also want to see regional rail funding increased to match metropolitan rail funding – which isn’t an entirely unreasonable point of view, but is much more a state issue than a federal one.
Honestly, there’s not much here to dislike. Hinch’s voting record in the Senate suggests that, unless it’s one of these issues, he tends to vote with the government of the day. It’s not clear that any of his lower house candidates would necessarily do the same, but it’s unlikely that we’ll ever find out. Hinch’s party will rank behind my top picks, but well ahead of the rest of the pack.
I’m going to break with our usual pattern here, and include a song myself. It’s not Eurovision, but I can’t pass up a chance to introduce more people to that one time that Derryn Hinch recorded with TISM:
Please note: I wasn’t able to find just the Hinch bit, so it will play the rest of the album, with some NSFW lyrics. You have been warned.
Probably worth pointing out – Derryn Hinch has been flirting with outright transphobia on Twitter for some time now, and it’s worth having a scroll through his feed with an eye to reading between the lines before deciding where to place him on a ballot.
Personally, I do not overly resonate with their raison d’etre of being harsher on criminals, though I think we do need a stronger response to e.g. domestic violence, sexual assault and so on. They do have a policy on domestic violence sentencing and giving more support to womens refuges. I have warmed to them ever so slightly after doing research on the election, maybe just because they seem relatively reasonable. So about middle of the pack for me too.
For me, his criminal justice stances are totally irresponsible and greatly outweigh any of the more progressive positions he advocates for (which are for him clearly side issues to his tough-on-crime crusade, at any rate). I just hope people don’t get sucked in this time around.