Some people seem to think we are only about industrial hemp or medical marijuana. They are very wrong. We are also about legalising recreational cannabis.
We do what we can, when we can, with very limited funds.
We would like to see an end to the demonisation of cannabis in every way.
The writs have been returned. The HEMP Party is registered!!
Parliament cannot sit until the AEC returns the writs - the signal that counting has been completed and all 150 seats are officially declared. This could happen any time between now and October 27, which is the AEC's final deadline.
In 2007, it took the AEC 27 days to return the writs. So far, 17 days have passed since the August 21 election.
Once the writs are returned and Parliament sits, our registration should follow in four days.
Julia Gillard called the election four days before our registration could be finalised, and she did not delay the issuing of writs, so we cannot stand in the current election. Unusually, there are a couple of parties that do have policies of interest concerning cannabis. Labor well and truly backed away from any sort of drug law reform years ago. The Greens no longer have a policy on the subject. Whether you agree with the other policies of the two parties below or not, they are the only parties we know of that do have policies on drug law reform.
Ultimately you must cast your vote where you feel it best serves your interests. My personal view at my age is that the choice is between bad and worse, and that my preferences will end up with the bad and worse, rather than a minor party, even though I wish it were otherwise.
It is a difficult choice for voters this election.
The Liberal Democratic Party wants re-legalisation.
The Liberal Democratic Party is growing rapidly and in essence, we stand for less government interference in every aspect of your life. And less tax!
We believe in your free right to choose whatever is best for you.
I want to be absolutely clear:
One of our key policies is the Re-legalisation of recreational marijuana use by adults and we will champion this cause vigorously.
We urge everyone you know to support the LDP candidates at this Federal Election.
If you can help in any way we’d be really grateful!
· I hope you’ll recommend us on your website, you could say something like:
“The Liberal Democratic Party vigorously supports the Re-legalisation of recreational marijuana use by adults. We’re standing candidates for the Senate and in many lower house seats in Australia, please vote 1 LDP in the Senate and for the lower house wherever possible.”
· If you can also email your members to encourage support that would be wonderful!
· Please ask members to vote for us; and that we’d be grateful for any ‘ground support’ for instance handing out how to vote cards on election day!!
· Please ask members to phone me or email me if they can help in any way.
We are at war - Against the ridiculous war on drugs!
It is great to make your acquaintance and I look forward to a long and happy association.
Liberal Democratic Party
LDP (SA State President)
08 8125 8885
Call to decriminalise drug use by Sex Party
PERSONAL drug use should be decriminalised and drug abusers should
be rehabilitated rather than imprisoned, the Australian Sex party
The policy calls for the decriminalisation, not legalisation, of possession and consumption of drugs for personal use, up to a quantity of up to 14 days' supply for one person.
It also seeks to legalise the use of cannabis for specific medical uses and the prescription of heroin to registered users.
Drug trafficking and dealing would remain a criminal offence, as would the supply of drugs to a minor, Ms Patten said.
A similar policy was introduced in Portugal about ten years ago, she added.
"And oh my God, the world didn't end for Portugal," Ms Patten said.
"In fact, drug use has declined in that country.
"People seeking health services for drug addiction and drug abuse has tripled and it's been a phenomenal success."
Bond University criminologist Paul Wilson welcomed the Sex Party's policy, but said it didn't go far enough.
"We have to shift the paradigm from using the criminal justice system, using the war on drugs, over to an education and health system," Professor Willson said.
"These proposals are not all that radical.
"The current war on drugs has utterly failed.
"We've tried it here for 50 years, let's move towards the Portuguese model."
Illegal drug abuse cost Australia about $3.8 billion a year, Prof Wilson said.
"I don't think (the policy) goes far enough, but I do think it's a radical shift in the way we look at illegal drugs in this country."
Ms Patten said she believed the party was connecting with voters.
"The Australian Sex Party is first and foremost a civil liberties party, but it's also about getting government intervention out of people's lives, allowing adults to make those decisions for themselves," she told AAP.
"So whether it's censorship, whether it's same-sex marriages, whether it's sexuality or whether it's drugs, we believe that this is about adults making decisions for themselves."
Ms Patten said she was hopeful of winning a place in the Senate.
"From the comments and feedback we're getting I think we are hitting a nerve out there," she said.
"I think the stars and planets will need to be aligned, but we're an unknown entity and who knows in the privacy of that polling booth how many people are going to vote for sex."
It's Friday the 16th of July. If Julia goes
to the GG tomorrow, and asks for a delay of the writs untill Wednesday
21st, or even Friday 23rd,
Apparently writs would need to be delayed till next Saturday 24th for the HEMP Party to be able to contest seats. The latest date for issuing writs for an August 28th election is probably Monday 26th, as the election is usually 33 days after the writs are issued. That's as far as we know.
Impending HEMP Party registration was advertised on June the 24th, and with a month to lodge objections, we would be excluded from any election held before August 28th. We are hoping Julia won't go to the Governor General before July 25th, because once writs are issued by the GG it's 33 days and no more entries allowed.
We could probably stand anytime after 28th August, and probably on, but not earlier. Cross your finger joints!
23rd June 2010
BREAKING NEWS: A BETTER SHADE OF GREEN.
We got the numbers! We got the numbers! We got the numbers!
Voters at the upcoming Federal Election can now cast a vote for a better shade of green. Today is the day the Australian Electoral Commission said it would advertise the pending registration of THE HEMP PARTY.
Except they didn't. Not in the SMH anyway. Perhaps they got stoned and forgot? Tomorrow the whole weed world is watching!
THE HEMP PARTY will target both houses of the Federal Parliament at the next election.
Immediately following official confirmation of registration (anticipated within the next thirty days) a detailed Preselection Prospectus will be made available to all HEMP PARTY members. This document will invite application from any members who might be interested in running on THE HEMP PARTY ballot for any one of a series of lower-house nominated seats.
BALANCE & COMMON SENSE
During the coming campaign THE HEMP PARTY will reflect the commonsense view of most Australians - namely that the current prohibitions relating to marijuana are simply not working.
MARIJUANA PROHIBITION HAS FAILED
Marijuana prohibition (like alcohol prohibition before it) has failed. Marijuana remains widely available in Australia despite the current legal prohibitions. Yet any teenager in our country knows where they can buy cannabis and this hypocrisy often poisons their relationship with police (and the relationship of police with our youth). There are no quality standards protecting the honest consumer, grower, or trader in cannabis. Everyone involved faces possible criminal sanctions so the price remains grossly inflated, enriching criminals and organized crime, at everyone’s expense. In all these many ways marijuana prohibition has failed.
In the upcoming federal election THE HEMP PARTY will advocate for the re-legalisation of cannabis.
THE RE-LEGALISATION OF CANNABIS WILL:
Response to Electoral Commission
( Member names ommitted. )
Mr Graham Askey
RE: HEMP Party’s response to a registration application enquiry by the AEC
I refer to your letter, received by me on 30 April 2010, advising of a shortfall in the Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party’s membership list. That list was submitted to the AEC on 8 February 2010 as a part of an application for registration as a Federal political party.
I offer the following detailed responses.
For the 56 members, listed by the AEC as having insufficient details, I can provide additional information for the following 32 members.
Name Address Postcode Date of Birth
Similarly, I haven’t as yet been able to ascertain the DOB,s for the following 3 members. But they too appear on the 2007 Roll.
------ Division of Cowper on p229
As for ------ full details have been supplied. They both have but a single name (no Christian names) as stated. They also appear on the 2007 Roll.
------- Division of Richmond on p255
With further enquiries (postal or leg-work) I may well be able to add to this list.
These corrections, if accepted, will result in a net gain of 29 to the HEMP Party membership list thereby wiping out the “apparent shortfall”.
Therefore, if I understand your argument correctly,
the “probative evidence” that our application does not
include “at least 500 members” no longer applies, and
so the “evidential burden” has now been lifted from me
regarding the “ 97 persons” your office has not been able
to find on the current Electoral Roll.
I point out that the AEC’s own, supplied, guidelines; “Part 4 How Applications are Processed.” states that; “If the AEC is unable to match a majority of membership details with the Commonwealth Electoral Roll, it will seek further evidence from the Party or members”. Short of producing passports or birth certificates, just what “evidence” would be acceptable to the AEC ?
Whichever way you look at it, 95, (or about 16%), is a lot less than a majority of the 635 member’s details submitted in February.
Nevertheless I can provide evidence that at least 27 of the members whom you cannot presently find on the Electoral Roll must be “entitled to enrolement under the Act.”
The following members appear on the paper Commonwealth Electoral Roll of 13/04/2007.
Name Division Page number
Since these members were on the Electoral Roll in 2007 they must still (unless they have died, renounced citizenship, or are imprisoned) be “entitled to enrolment” today.
I can, also, and immediately, provide the AEC with additional membership details for 24 recently joined members. I prefer not to do this just now, unless absolutely necessary, as I expect that alternative might further delay the consideration of our application.
Finally, on information I have received since our list was submitted on 8 February 2010, please remove the following members from your record of our register.
Taken all together, the above amendments should restore the HEMP Party membership to very nearly 600.
I trust that these responses will allow our application to proceed in a timely manner.
Following the random sampling of our membership in 2007 and in 2008 the AEC advised me that 12 people contacted had denied membership of the HEMP Party. I requested their names so that I could remove them from our register but was refused that information on privacy grounds. In 2004 that same information was provided ?
Although I have carefully culled the old 2007 list and have given all of the members contained in our current list two clear opportunities to resign, (by 2 reply-paid mail-outs) some of those 12 may still be on the list submitted in February. I seek the AEC’s assurance that none of any previous ‘deniers’ have been re-contacted during this years checking process. To do so would be tantamount to imposing a double jeopardy on the HEMP Party.
I ask that the assessment of our application be expedited. To have another election called with HEMP’s registration still unresolved would be repeating history, this time as farce.
If the AEC requires any more information I request an extension of time to respond.
Commission won't pass HEMP party
Dominic Feain | 6th May 2010
MEMBERS of the unregistered Help End Marijuana Prohibition Party are threatening to storm the Australian Electoral Commission lobby in Canberra next month.
Exasperated party secretary Graham Askey.
MEMBERS of the still unregistered Help End Marijuana Prohibition Party are threatening to storm the Australian Electoral Commission lobby in Canberra next month to prove they have the required 500 registered members.
An exasperated party secretary, Graham Askey, is fed up and believes the commission is discriminating against his party.
The issue revolves around the commission’s tightening of the party registration process, including tests to ascertain the membership validity of small parties.
Because a considerable number of HEMP Party members don’t have conventional christain names and surnames, and many do not have telephones, Mr Askey believes the party is being unfairly and undemocratically treated.
“The Electoral Act says that to be registered as a political party in Australia we must have 500 eligible members, which we clearly have – in fact we have over 1500,” he said.
“In 2004, they tested this by contacting 20 members. They said if two denied membership of the party that would constitute a failure.
“They wrote to us and said they had got 12 affirmatives and eight no-replies – which they interpreted as eight negative responses.
“They supplied the names of the people and after three weeks I had located every one, so the party registration was passed and we contested the 2004 election.”
After that election the legislation was changed requiring all small parties to re-register.
“Again they told us they could not contact eight members, which again they interpreted as negative responses, but this time they did not give us the names,” Mr Askey said.
“We appealed, but it was not resolved in time for the 2007 election.
“After we accused them of shifting the goal posts it went to an internal AEC review and this time they said eight people denied ever having been members of the HEMP Party. Again, no names were given so we had to accept it.”
Mr Askey gave up on the appeals process and wrote to all party members asking them to re-apply.
After careful vetting he resubmitted an application which included 630 confirmed party members.
“This time they responded saying they could only verify 480 members due to insufficient details,” Mr Askey said.
“Some of our members have full legal names like ‘Sunshine’ and I suspect they won’t accept those.”
A spokesman for the commission said it was policy not to comment
on any application for party status.
Mr Ian Campbell
Dear Mr. Campbell,
Since your refusal to register our party is a reviewable
decision under section 141 of the Act I ask that it be reviewed quickly
given the looming federal election.
25th January 2010
The AEC have started contacting HEMP Party members to find out if they are in fact members and have the courage to say they are.
"As part of the registration process, parties are required to lodge a list of members relied upon for registration purposes with their application. The AEC then contacts a random sample of those members to be satisfied they are in fact members of the party. The AEC needs to be satisfied that HEMP has at least 500 members before it can register the party.
If the AEC is unable to obtain a high level of confirmations from members, it is likely that the application for registration of HEMP as a political party will be refused in the first instance."
So please answer promptly in the affirmative!
RESULTS OF THE PREVIOUS HEMP PARTY REGISTRATION EFFORT
As at 13 January 2009, staff of the Commission had the following results for the 42 persons who were attempted to be contacted from the Party membership list:
• 14 confirmations of membership
That's one out of three. We extend our gratitude to the fourteen who confirmed for their unwavering support.
It is a natural consequence of Prohibition that many cannabis users are alarmed by official contact, and some move about without leaving forwarding addresses at Post Offices.
That is why we ask that you only become a member if you are settled and brave enough to reply to a registered letter or phone call from the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission), saying "Yes I am."
If you can say "Yes, I am.", then "Yes We Can" make a difference.
We need new members to replace these denying Peters! (see New Testament)
Contact Graham Askey at the HEMP Party Bar over MardiGrass, or write to Graham Askey 9 Frank Street,Lismore, NSW 2480, or email email@example.com if you have questions.
Click on the form above for a A4 size print version.
or download the Microsoft Word version
If you wish to join, print out the
form, fill it out and sign it and post it to Mr G Askey
A faxed or scanned copy of a signed document is not acceptable to the AEC.
Mr G Askey
Dear Mr Askey
At a further meeting on 19 February 2009, the Commissioners of the AEC determined to affirm the delegate’s decision to refuse re-registration to HEMP. The Commissioners’ statement of reasons for that decision is enclosed and will be placed on the AEC website in the next few days.
This decision by the Commissioners of the AEC is a reviewable decision. A person (including an organization) affected by the decision may make a written application to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the AAT) in accordance with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. Applications for review should normally be made to the AAT within 28 days of your receipt of this advice. Full detail on the process of making an application to the AAT is available from the AAT website at www.aat.gov.au.
Statement of Reasons – Decision of the Australian Electoral Commission
The Determination of the Delegate to Refuse Application for Party Registration is Affirmed by the Australian Electoral Commission
File reference: Reg3145 2007/622
The Australian Electoral Commission (the Commission) is established as a statutory authority of the Commonwealth of Australia under section 6 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act). The Commission as presently constituted consists of the following persons – Chairperson, the Hon James Burchett QC, the Electoral Commissioner, Mr Ed Killesteyn and the non-judicial member, Mr Brian Pink. The functions and powers of the Commission are set out in section 7 of the Electoral Act and include “to perform functions that are permitted or required to be performed by or under this Act”.
Section 126 of the Electoral Act sets out the requirements for the making of an application for registration as a political party. Subsection 126(3) of the Electoral Act states that when an application for registration as a political party is received by the Commission, it shall be dealt with in accordance with Part XI and the Commission shall “determine whether the party can be registered”. One of the requirements contained in section 126 of the Electoral Act is that an application may only be made by an “eligible political party”. The term “eligible political party” is defined in subsection 123(1) of the Electoral Act and in the case of a political party that is not a Parliamentary party, it must have “at least 500 members”. Paragraph 126(2)(ca) of the Electoral Act requires that when making a written application for registration, the intended registered officer of the eligible political party shall “include a list of the 500 members of the party to be relied on for the purposes of registration”.
The Party application
In an application received by the AEC on 16 April 2007 the person who is the intended registered officer of the Help End Marijuana Party (HEMP) Party (the Party), Mr Graham Askey, lodged a written application with the Commission for the registration of the Party as a non-parliamentary party under Part XI of the Electoral Act. In that application, it was indicated that the Party would seek to receive election funding.
After an initial consideration of the written application lodged by the intended registered officer, a Delegate of the Commission wrote to Mr Askey on 21 August 2007 issuing a notice pursuant to section 131 of the Electoral Act. Section 131 enables the Commission to issue a notice in certain circumstances inviting the applicant to vary the application where “after initial consideration of an application for the registration of a political party, the Commission is of the opinion that it is required to refuse the application….”. In the Delegate’s letter, the Delegate advised Mr Askey that staff of the Commission had completed a random sample check of the Party’s membership list on 8 August 2007 and, based on the results of that check, the Delegate was of the opinion that he could not be satisfied that the Party had the required 500 members. Mr Askey was advised that this random sample check of 20 persons claimed to be members of the Party had resulted in 6 persons confirming membership, while one person denied membership and 13 persons failed to respond to both telephone calls and subsequent letters from the AEC. Mr Askey was invited to submit a fresh membership list and to advise whether he wished the application to proceed.
In a letter dated 3 October 2007 addressed to the then Electoral Commissioner, Mr Ian Campbell, Mr Askey responded to the Delegate of the Commission stating that the membership sampling undertaken by the Commission was “fundamentally flawed” as it was, inter alia, “a test of, party resources, fear or laxity of members, residential mobility or whether the person has a telephone listed in their name”. Various other concerns were raised about the delays in undertaking the membership checks and whether those checks complied with the requirements of the Electoral Act. Specific reference was made to the NSW Supreme Court decision in Save Our Suburbs (SOS) NSW v Electoral Commissioner of NSW  NSWSC 785. Mr Askey asserted that the membership forms “should be accepted at face value” by the Commission. Mr Askey did not provide any further membership details, requesting “that the application go ahead as is …..”.
The November 2007 general election and the by-elections in Gippsland, Mayo and Lyne brought section 127 of the Electoral Act into operation which prevented any further action being taken in relation to the application of the Party during the periods specified in that section.
The initial decision
On 14 May 2008, the Deputy Electoral Commissioner as delegate of the Commission refused the Party’s application under section 126 and provided a statement of reasons for the decision as required by subsection 133(3). Commission staff advised Mr Askey by letter dated 15 May 2008 and included a copy of the Delegate’s statement of reasons for the decision. Those reasons concluded that the Delegate was not satisfied that the Party had the necessary 500 members to be eligible for registration under sections 123, 124 and 126 of the Electoral Act. The Delegate relied on the check of the sample of 20 persons named as members that was completed in August 2007 as the reason for concluding that he was not satisfied that the requirements of Part XI had been met because “ the results of the test indicated a significant probability that there were not 500 members”.
In a letter dated 22 May 2008, Mr Askey wrote to the then Electoral Commissioner in relation to the decision of the Delegate to refuse the registration of the Party under Part XI of the Electoral Act. In the opening paragraph of this letter Mr Askey sought a review of the Delegate’s decision by the Commission, for which provision is made by section 141 of the Electoral Act. In that letter Mr Askey challenged the sampling test used by the staff of the Commission to ascertain whether the Party had 500 members, arguing that the sampling was inconsistent with the requirements of the Electoral Act. Mr Askey raised further points about the sampling methodology used by the Commission staff and the ability of members to resign from the Party. Mr Askey also adopted the earlier submissions made by his letter of 5 October 2007 [which appears to duplicate his letter of 3 October 2007].
Political parties may apply for registration for the purposes of federal elections in accordance with the requirements of Part XI of the Electoral Act. The Act requires the Commission to maintain a ‘Register of Political Parties’.
Applications to register political parties are determined under section 126 of the Electoral generally by a delegate of the Commission.
Section 141 of the Electoral Act permits persons affected by a decision made by the delegate of the Commission to make a written application to the Commission to review the delegate’s decision.
Applications are required to:
The Party’s application for review lodged by Mr Askey claimed that the random sample membership test applied by Commission staff and the results of which were relied upon by the Delegate of the Commission to parties seeking registration was an invalid exercise of the power to undertake membership checks to establish whether the Party had “at least 500 members” .
Subsection 123(1) of the Electoral Act defines an “eligible political party” as a political party that is either a Parliamentary party or has at least 500 members.
Subsection 123(3) indicates that a member of a political party means a person who is both a member of a political party and is entitled to enrolment under the Electoral Act (see Part VII for the enrolment requirements).
Subsection 126(2) requires that an application to register a political party that is not a Parliamentary party be accompanied by a list of the names of 500 members to be relied on for the purposes of registration.
In considering the application, the staff of the Commission conduct
a series of tests to assist the Commission or its delegate to determine
whether the Commission may be satisfied that an applicant party has
at least 500 members, including:
The random sample test of membership involves contacting a random sample of 20 people from the membership list by phone and by mail if necessary. Where more than one of the randomly selected people from the membership list cannot be confirmed as a member, then the membership test has been failed.
The membership tests are intended to allow the delegate of the Commission
(and on review the Commission itself) to be satisfied that an applicant
Party has the required 500 members.
Consideration of the review
The application for review of the decision of the Delegate to reject the application to register the Party was considered at the Commission meeting of 5 November 2008.
At that meeting, the Commission requested that staff of the Commission undertake further investigation involving the conduct of another random sample membership check against the list of 500 members provided by the Party using a test to be supplied by the Australian Statistician.
The test required a responding sample of 40 people selected randomly from the membership list. If five or more of the people contacted denied being members of the Party, then it is statistically probable that the number of actual members in the membership list is less than 500.
The staff of the Commission wrote to the 40 randomly selected persons on the Party membership list on 24 November 2008 to seek their cooperation to confirm whether or not they were members of the Party. Further letters were despatched by Commission staff on 4 December 2008 by registered post with two additional persons being randomly selected as replacements for two randomly selected members who had failed to include telephone contact details. The letters from the Commission staff enclosed replied paid and addressed envelopes to facilitate replies.
As at 13 January 2009, staff of the Commission had the following results for the 42 persons who were attempted to be contacted from the Party membership list:
• 14 confirmations of membership;
The random sample membership check did not disclose any
cross-party or internal duplicates and no members under 17 years of
In all of the circumstances, including the results of the further random sample membership check requested by the Commission on 5 November 2008, the applicant for registration has failed to satisfy the Commission that the applicant party can be registered. In particular, the Commission is not satisfied that the applicant Party has 500 members as required by sections 123 and 126 of the Electoral Act, given that the list submitted under paragraph 126(2)(ca) of the Electoral Act (which the Party refused to vary despite being afforded the opportunity by the section 131 notice) contained no more than 538 alleged members and the results of the test of those 42 persons claimed to be members indicate a significant statistical probability that there are not at least 500 members, as 11 out of the 42 denied that they were members.
Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to subsection 141(4) of the Electoral Act, affirms the decision under review.
J C S Burchett E Killesteyn B Pink
12th April 2009 - Hello people. MardiGrass time again, and another drive for members who are settled enough and brave enough to be able to confirm their membership with the AEC.
We have not heard back on the results of the latest membership check, so the registration process continues.
December 2008 : The AEC (Australian Electoral Commission) is currently doing another membership check in response to our appeal against the previous check, where not enough members confirmed that they were members. As a result we failed the membership test instituted under Howard for parties without sitting members.
If you are contacted by the AEC please confirm your membership promptly.
NEW MEMBERSHIP DRIVE FOR BRAVER HEMP PARTY MEMBERS
Please don't join
the HEMP Party unless you are willing to confirm your membership
to AEC officials on the phone. If you are unfindable or unwilling
to confirm membership, don't join, because it stuffs it up for the
rest of us. Sorry, but that's how it works. Give us as many ways to
contact you as possible to make it easier to confirm your membership
with the AEC.
HEMP PARTY-NOT DEAD YET
The Nimbin based HELP END MARIJUANA PROHIBITION party is in limbo, undead, neither registered nor de-registered. We did not contest the 2007 Federal elections because we had not been re-registered in time. The Howard government had arbitrarily de-registered all political parties, without a current representative in Parliament in December 2006. Our application for re-registration, complying with all the requirements of the Electoral Act, was submitted early in April 2007. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) took until August, three weeks before the election was called, to advise us that we had failed their membership test. We replied asking that our application be accepted as is, or be reviewed by the commissioners. We intended to appeal any negative review. The calling of the election froze this process and nothing has happened since.
Fourteen out of twenty menbers fail to confirm membership. Registration fails.
Mr Graham Askey
Re: Application to register a political party Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party
Dear Mr Askey
On 10 April 2007, the Australian Electoral Commission (the AEC) received an application to register Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act).
Your party's application for registration was advertised on the 20 July 2007 with a closing date of 20 August 2007 for objections, if any, to be submitted.
The AEC has undertaken a series of tests to ascertain whether your party meets the requirements for registration. As a result of these tests, the AEC was unable to determine whether your party has at least 500 members (i.e. your party has failed a branch of the 'membership test'). If this is not rectified, your application may be refused following the close of objections period.
Section 123 of the Electoral Act requires a non Parliamentary party to have at least 500 members (who are entitled to enrolment) to be eligible for registration. A party's eligibility is assessed in two ways. The secretary supplies a statutory declaration annexing the membership forms provided, declaring that the forms are signed by the people identified on them and that they have been accepted by the party as members.
The AEC conducts a membership test on a random sample
of 20. members of the Party. The purpose of this test is to check
for incorrect memberships on the basis that if a party relies on memberships
of people who do not consider themselves members, then it is unlikely
to have the required membership to be eligible for registration. The
criterion for a successful random membership check is. to achieve
19 confirmations of party membership from the 20 people chosen at
To pass a membership test, you need to provide the AEC with a list of at least 500 members who are prepared to confirm their membership of the party.
In order for your party to have the best chance of being registered in a time for the forth coming Federal election, you should rectify this failing as soon as possible after close of objections to your party's registration on 20 August 2007.
Please advise the AEC whether you:
•wish the application to go ahead having failed the membership test and be rejected; or
•submit a fresh list of members.
A copy of the relevant parts of section 4 and of sections 123, 126 and 131 of the Electoral Act are enclosed.
Should you have any queries regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Shawn O'Brien on (02) 6271 4667. Alternatively you can contact us by email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
21 August 2007
So only 30% of those registered as HEMP Party members confirmed. Our deepest thanks to the six that did.
Ok, we're going for it again! Register now for the Federal election, and be prepared to keep your details up to date, and confirm your membership immediately if you are one of the lucky twenty that are checked. Anyone fails to respond, we fail to register.
Also, for those living in NSW, we want to register as a party for council elections (held next year), same conditions as above, and if we are successful, we would like to hear from those interested in standing in their council elections as HEMP candidates.
Ironically enough, this registration situation came about when we helped expose Malcolm Jones and the bogus "Marijuana Freedom Party" in 2004, and the Federal Government's response was to make it more difficult for Parties without sitting members, by requiring them to register each election and pass a membership check that requires a 100% response. We can only wonder if parties with sitting members would pass the same test.
The Eureka Flag
You see a lot of "Eureka Flags" on stickers, Tshirts, cups etc that have a white cross and stars with a dark blue outline around the cross and stars, and for the background.
That is not the way the Eureka flag looked. On the actual flag the cross and stars were made of a cheap undyed fabric (Hemp?) with a white embroidery outline, on a dark blue background.
"The news is all bad?"
Due to a How(h)ard change in electoral laws, parties without sitting members must do a new application each election. Our efforts with regard to exposing Malcolm Jone's fake parties have resulted in small parties being frozen out of the system. Our choices have been nobbled. This makes it extremely difficult to get a HEMP candidate up in future federal elections.
The Greens have backed down on drugs policy. They have dropped their proposal to investigate regulating the supply of marijuana and ecstasy, which attracted unfavourable publicity during the 2004 federal election campaign. Instead they propose to establish a drugs policy institute to evaluate programs aimed at reducing the impact of drug use. The Greens leader, Bob Brown, said the new policy backed criminal penalties for supply or possession of illegal drugs and endorsed harm minimisation programs.
I have no idea how or why ecstasy was included in that.
NSW Labor courted us vigourously for preferences when elections were on, but were almost unreachable any other time.
Abbott and Pyne have forshadowed a new crackdown on cannabis users in particular. (Remember the Pogroms) We are just not "their sort of people".
Saliva testing drivers without any evidence that cannabis impairs driving. No limit specified like .08 of a joint, just illegal to drive with any amount at all in your system.
The recent National Cannabis Strategy specifically excluded any submissions on law reform or medical use. They made it clear that they were NOT options.
If only politicians would say this.
A RELEASE MEDIA
RELEASE MEDIA RELEASE MEDIA RELEASE ME
This page pretty much tells the story of the HEMP Party. With the new registration requirements it would be very hard for us to get up an election attempt. It was a nightmare trying to locate our members when the AEC checked our membership. Our members seem to shift home a lot. We managed though, and it was noted that the major parties had the same problem. Then they came up with the bright idea to make parties without sitting members re-register every election. The cost of administering this, and campaign costs, make it too difficult an exercise for the immediate future..
Its also a very dirty business.
RATTLE THE RATS!
VOTE FOR HEMP!
We think we stuffed up our preference deals so please go wildcard for us, and number all squares below the line so that your vote goes where you really want it to!!!
the line for NSW HEMP Senate Candidates!
In the House of Representatives the only HEMP Candidate is Judy Canales in the seat of Capricornia in Queensland. We wish we had more candidates, and if you are interested in standing in future elections, please get in touch.
IF HEMP HAS NO CANDIDATE IN YOUR ELECTORATE
The Greens have an excellent cannabis law reform policy. We would also suggest that Labor is better than the Coalition. At least Latham inhaled, and the word "regulation" is in the Labor ten point plan on cannabis! Howard, on the other hand, smugly told us at the Lismore RSL (see photo below) he'd never even heard of "farmer's hemp", and is sworn to a zero tolerance war on drugs (that means us ) attitude.
Remember cannabis is on the agenda. Mr Carr has already stated that he will be visiting the new PM for a deal on a medical cannabis trial immediately after the election.
How about this weeks announcement by the Defence Department who have a treatment program called 'Weed Control' advising safer drug use such as, eating hash cookies instead of smoking joints! Is this in the field? Attitudes are clearly changing on cannabis, and Howard is out of touch.
Voting below the line in NSW, after HEMP, the Greens have easily the best cannabis law reform policy , and then put Labor ahead of Liberal-National Coalition candidates.
We particularly recommend the Greens NSW No1 Senate Candidate, John Kaye, the only Green in NSW likely to be elected, and a good advocate of cannabis law reform for us in Canberra.
This statement was written
and authorised by
The HEMP Party stands for an ecologically sound and socially just Australia.
If elected, we would be supporting initiatives in these
Reasons to VOTE 1 HEMP.
This was a topic of extreme discussion recently
and a range of suggestions were made by an informal
Do YOU have any policy or campaign ideas to put the HEMP Party into the hearts and minds of Australia?
We had a messageboard, but viagra and other spammers forced its closure. Only the real posts are left.
Contact the HEMP Party
HEMP Party candidate, Michael Balderstone admits trying pot long ago, and says,
"I didn't exhale..."
HEMP is back in the Political Games Arena!
NSW HEMP Party Update.
MAKE SURE THESE DETAILS ARE IDENTICAL TO VOTERS ROLL
INCLUDE OCCUPATION AND PHONE
ANY INACCURACY LEADS TO REJECTION OF FORM
Send it to:
51 Cullen Street, Nimbin, NSW 2480.
Mr G Askey
Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party
9 Frank Street
It's an exciting time on the planet for Cannabis Law Reform. Radical changes are happening in Canada, Europe and England. Not so in Australia because our leader takes his orders from the United States, it seems. With your help we can be on the 2007 ballot paper and with luck replace a shooter with a toker in the NSW Upper House.
While we have had some success this year, the best Mardi Grass yet, pressure on sniffer dogs in Byron Bay forced them out of town, exposure of Malcolm Jones MLC in trying to impersonate us by forming the bogus Marijuana Freedom Party to hijack our vote and preferences may yet see him expelled from Parliament. HEMP voters preferences were pivotal in electing Green Senator Kerry Nettle into Federal Parliament.
Our submissions on the Medical Marijuana Trial Legislation helped, but there is still a long way to go. This is why we need a HEMPster in Parliament, and that's not impossible. The Shooters Party scraped in with 80,000 votes, roughly the same number of people who've been unjustly arrested for cannabis offences in NSW over the four year life of the Parliament.
First we need to get official registration with the NSW State Electoral Office. We still need another 250 new members, so get in touch!!
"At the present time declaration
of membership forms have been lodged by 471 persons who are enrolled
and who claim to be members of the party. As you are aware 750 such
forms are required to support the application.
to the intelligent & compassionate people
who voted for the HEMP Party
in the Federal Election on Nov 10, 2001.
In NSW 32,641, as at 6/12/2001.
In QLD 25,132, as at 28/11/2001.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
A Message from George Bernard Shaw
The old notion that people can "keep themselves to themselves" and not be touched by what is happening to their neighbors, or even to people who live a hundred miles off, is a most dangerous mistake. The saying that we are members one of another is not a mere pious formula...It is a literal truth; for though the rich end of the town can avoid living with the poor end, it cannot avoid dying with it when the plague comes.
People will be able to keep to themselves as much as they please when they have made an end to poverty; but until then they will not be able to shut out the sights and sounds and smells of poverty from their daily walks, nor feel sure from day to day that its most violent and fatal evils will not reach them through their strongest police guards.