I consider the prospect of Pauline Hanson's One Nation party in the Senate as a highly concerning situation, on many levels, but let's just focus on her policies surrounding Family Law and Child Support.
It appears that she is in favour of abolishing the Family Law Court and putting it in the hands of the public and other professionals.
I am not completely against this, however, how much training will those of this new forum she proposes have? Will they have the knowledge and legal skills required to determine matters in accordance with our laws? And she wants a zero tolerance for perjury, which is something just anyone does not have the authority to commence proceedings over.
Due to this I call nonsense on her ill conceived notion of a family court forum. We need reform of the current Courts, with greater accountability and transparency being the main focal points for change, and greater access to the Courts for those experiencing financial hardship. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see social workers and psychologist with greater powers and respect in our Courts, but lawyers are quite able to do the job, if it is run according to legal and community standards of equality before the law, and not being run as a money making machine off other people's pain and suffering.
Next point - Child Support. She wants to reduce payments to even less with some income not considered for child support purposes. This is bad policy because it takes no hard evidence into account, and the already minuscule expectations from fathers. Not only do men not want to share in care and the lives of their children, but they are avoiding financial responsibility also. This has no positive affect in society. Maybe this blows my mind because I come from a family where my father would happily give the shirt of his back for his daughters and only worked to support us and his family, and I would go without anything to ensure my children don't, yet this argument of forcing children into poverty so dad can live large and carefree takes hold in the imaginary of some Australian citizens. This is entrenched patriarchal ideology at play, which brings me to my last point.
Domestic Violence policy. Good for her for offering more rhetoric on Domestic Violence. She fails at all to consider the link between economic abuse and violence. In fact, the only inference she makes is when the link is made between the family courts and suicide, murder and violence. The blame is indirectly put on the Courts and women for Domestic Violence. What it says to me is "women should give men what they want or else!"
So, to recapitulate, she seems to be arguing for less support of children (notice that spousal support is not the party's issue), Family Court to become a forum or we risk more murders, violence and suicides.
For a women so passionate about the wrongs of Sharia Law, it's ironic how close her views and policies can at times resemble.
Interesting times in Australia. What are your thoughts?
Peace, love and prosperity Xxoo