According to a story on brisbanetimes.com.au (Click to read) our house are set to fall.
I don't necessarily agree that the proposed changes will bring down house prices, but if they do then great, I support it. But, one thing I feel will help people own their own home is the removal of 'building covenants'.
Not only is the land expensive enough in the first place (and that's another story), you are then told you have to build a house to certain requirements. Often they include items like "minimum square metre area of the house" and "the house needs to have 2 garages". The list can and does go on and on....
What is going to raise the price of a new home more then to force the owner to build their own "McMansion"?
Often the owner may only want or afford a nice modest home.
Please help me remove the building covenants that require families to build a house they don't want!
Regards, Tim.
Candidate for the Family First Party in the 2012 state election for the seat of Ipswich, Queensland.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Abortion
Abortion seems to be a topic continually returning for debate at the moment. Please help the pro-life view be heard. Contact your state MP and let them know that changes to the abortion laws aren't acceptable, unless they are to reduce the number of abortions.
Click below to read Family First's media release on the topic, and I hold to this view too.
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
Gay Marriage
While the Labor party decide what their stand will be on gay marriage (Click here to read story). Mine is firm and will remain unchanged.
I believe the marriage act should stay the way it is.
That is that a marriage is between a man and a women.
Regards, Tim.
I believe the marriage act should stay the way it is.
That is that a marriage is between a man and a women.
Regards, Tim.
Friday, November 05, 2010
Pay raise for State MP's
It looks like the state MP's got themselves other pay raise (Click here for the story).
$133,803.00 per year now for a backbencher. I think this is a little rich.
I believe a frontbencher will be getting now $200,000.00 per year, which is also a little too rich.
This is specially the case when the state government is ran like a circus and they can do what they want (due to the fact Queensland doesn't have a higher house, see previous blogs). I can see justification for the raise (for backbenchers) if the state is in the black and running the way it should be, but at the moment it's not!
In either case, I feel $200,000 is too much for a frontbencher, and the Premier gets even more!!
If I was to be elected into government, I would donate $14,000.00 each year of my salary to local and state charities for the first two years I'm in office.
Regards, Tim.
$133,803.00 per year now for a backbencher. I think this is a little rich.
I believe a frontbencher will be getting now $200,000.00 per year, which is also a little too rich.
This is specially the case when the state government is ran like a circus and they can do what they want (due to the fact Queensland doesn't have a higher house, see previous blogs). I can see justification for the raise (for backbenchers) if the state is in the black and running the way it should be, but at the moment it's not!
In either case, I feel $200,000 is too much for a frontbencher, and the Premier gets even more!!
If I was to be elected into government, I would donate $14,000.00 each year of my salary to local and state charities for the first two years I'm in office.
Regards, Tim.
Monday, November 01, 2010
Hidden Speed Cameras
Queensland now has another three "covert speed camera vehicles" (Click here to read story).
In this story Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson said "Speed contributes to around a quarter of fatalities on our roads each year,"
What I would like to know is what is the government doing about the other contributions that cause us to have fatalities on our roads? It seems to me that the governments main 'focus' is speeding (or should a say the revenue from speeding fines). How often to we hear about other contributions for fatalities?
I admit there is a sustained focus also on drunk/drugged drivers, and rightly there should be. But, I would love to see the government put a stop to the addiction to the revenue from speeding fines, and reallocate the mass amount of resources and funds into this area and cover more evenly the other factors that cause fatalities on our roads. Some of these areas may include:
Regards, Tim.
In this story Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson said "Speed contributes to around a quarter of fatalities on our roads each year,"
What I would like to know is what is the government doing about the other contributions that cause us to have fatalities on our roads? It seems to me that the governments main 'focus' is speeding (or should a say the revenue from speeding fines). How often to we hear about other contributions for fatalities?
I admit there is a sustained focus also on drunk/drugged drivers, and rightly there should be. But, I would love to see the government put a stop to the addiction to the revenue from speeding fines, and reallocate the mass amount of resources and funds into this area and cover more evenly the other factors that cause fatalities on our roads. Some of these areas may include:
- Fixing unsatisfactory road conditions
- Upgrading of roads and signage
- A cars condition (ie. inspecting for bald tires etc..)
- Education of drivers to new, changed or commonly misunderstood road rules
- A drivers medical condition
Regards, Tim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)