Browse > Home / 2010 State Election / Family First announce candidate

Family First announce candidate

Posted on November 30, 2009, 2:02pm and updated on January 29, 2010 at 11:23 am

Frustration with city-centric governance by the major parties has prompted Mount Gambier man Henk Bruins to stand for the Family First Party at next year’s state election.

“I have always lived in Mount Gambier and love our area, but am somewhat incensed by what I see as the overlooking of our region all the time — the government is increasingly city centric,” he told The Border Watch.

The father of four adult children and a church stalwart said he supported the moral family values of the party and being part of the political group provided him with a “realistic chance” of winning the seat when incumbent MP Rory McEwen retires at the election.

“Rory has had a huge support base as an independent and Family First can emulate that to a degree because a vote for a Family First candidate is virtually a vote for an independent, supported by a small but active party,” he said.

“The candidates we get in from either of the major parties are not going to be able to really influence their parties to spend away from the city.”

Mr Bruins said he had watched an increasing drain of services from Mount Gambier, including in the health area, while roads and infrastructure were deteriorating throughout regional areas as expenditure on massive city projects continued.

He said gaining a place in parliament with Family First would allow him to draw attention to the South East, where significant projects should be undertaken.

Mr Bruins said Family First had significant influence holding the balance of power in the upper house and had been able to remove some “nasty bits” from legislation, as well as blocking others, including an active role in recently stopping Greens MLC Mark Parnell’s euthanasia bill.

Mr Bruins was a partner of Galpin Engler Bruins and Dempsey accountants from 1983 to 2004, played a key role in establishing community radio station 104.9 Rhema FM and remains chairman of South Eastern Christian Broadcasters.

Tags: ,  

Comments

17 Responses to “Family First announce candidate”

  1. H on November 30th, 2009 4:22 pm 1

    A wise choice.. Has my vote.

  2. Jeremy Aston on November 30th, 2009 9:47 pm 2

    Legend, will be voting for him, glad to see someone who won’t be attached with a major party but will have a strong presence putting their hand up for this town. All the best Henk

  3. Jason on December 1st, 2009 4:43 pm 3

    “Rory has had a huge support base as an independent and Family First can emulate that to a degree because a vote for a Family First candidate is virtually a vote for an independent, supported by a small but active party,” he said.

    That is pure rubbish, Family First is a political party with an extreme right wing ideology, which claims to recommend families, but really just uses families and God’s name for their own right wing agenda. Standing for Family First is nothing like standing as an independent.

    Family First puts bigotry first, not families, and I for one will be putting it as my last preference. I hope Steve Perryman, the Labor candidate and any independents do the same.

  4. H on December 1st, 2009 4:49 pm 4

    Care to provide distinct evidence for your rhetoric, Jason?

    One hell of a mighty attack if you’ve got nothing to back it up.

  5. Pyrrho on December 1st, 2009 6:32 pm 5

    If you are of an inclination to vote to the right, vote for the Nationals, or god forbid, the Libs. Don’t vote for FF.
    Why not? Point 1 (on pages 1 & 2)in the following link, from FF’s policy site is reason enough.
    http://www.familyfirst.org.au/documents/EDUCATION_001.pdf

    Allow me to clarify.
    It means they want free rein to teach creationism as “Science”.
    It isn’t. It’s religion, and that has no part in any education system, particularly the secular.
    Teaching children lies, fear, ignorance and superstition is never a good idea.

  6. Jeremy Aston on December 1st, 2009 6:37 pm 6

    Learn more about the party first Jason … seems your a leftist biggy, pro abortion, suicide, gays, everything that is morally corrupt. This is everything Family First is against.

    Perhaps you should also sign up for the Family First newsletter to see what the party is actually doing in the big wide world of politics.

  7. Jeremy Aston on December 1st, 2009 6:40 pm 7

    So it’s okay to teach evolution as science? I think not! No wonder suicide is on the up and up; it teaches people that we are nothing and worth nothing.

  8. H on December 1st, 2009 6:45 pm 8

    And yet evolution can be taught, despite very large flaws in the THEORY? I think it’s beyond time that there was a little honesty in the debate.

    For starters, there was nothing on that page that said anything about teaching creationism. And even if there was, it would be to only provide a balanced view, allowing students to make up their own mind.

    Lies, fear, ignorance and superstition? Not just the domain of the religious right.

  9. Wayne Stapleton on December 1st, 2009 8:01 pm 9

    I cannot see anywhere in your reference about teaching creationism over evolution. I believe they are a right wing party, but their ideas seem as reasonable as any other. I agree that Family First is not an alternative for a true independent.

  10. Adam Naiova on December 1st, 2009 9:54 pm 10

    Jeremy Aston said: ‘So it’s okay to teach evolution as science? I think not!’

    H said: ‘And yet evolution can be taught, despite very large flaws in the THEORY?’.

    This issue of creationism versus evolution was discussed elsewhere on TBW website (http://www.borderwatch.com.au/archives/4785), which lead to some very passionate exchanges of views.

    Comments there are now closed, however there is a topic on the Forum to discuss these issues in more detail(http://www.borderwatch.com.au/talk/topic/58); so this is probably not the place to get into a lengthy discussion regarding the merits of creationism versus evolution.

    However, that being said, I feel it is necessary to point out that the VAST majority of scientists support evolution and are opposed to the teaching of creationism.

    Of course there are some scientists who are creationists, but they are far outnumbered by scientists who support evolution.

    Evolution-supporting scientists are not just atheists or agnostics, but are also adherents of various religions, including Christianity.

    It is also worth noting for the purposes of discussions on creationism that most of the sensible, mainstream Christian denominations, such as the Catholic, Anglican and Uniting Churches all have official positions of supporting evolution as the explanation for how life on Earth formed.

    This position is I believe called ‘theistic evolution’; ie it has a religious underpinning to it, but the science is exactly the same; the religious angle is left to theology lessons not the science laboratory.

    Senior figures in the Church of England in the UK have also recently spoken out strongly against the teaching of creationism alongside evolution.

    Support for the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in Australia largely comes from the more extreme evangelical/Pentecostal denominations, which co-incidentally are in many ways the ‘political nursery’ for Family First.

  11. Pyrrho on December 1st, 2009 10:44 pm 11

    @Jeremy Ashton
    Thank-you for providing excellent reasons for not voting FF. You seem to be following the party line quite nicely.

    @H
    You should endevour to learn what the word “theory ” means when used to describe a scientific concept.
    Allow me to help.
    http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html
    http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/theory_vs__hypothesis_vs__law

  12. H on December 2nd, 2009 7:57 am 12

    Theory is a hypothesis with unproven fact.

    Evolution is lacking a final piece of evidence that Darwin himself in the Origin of Species said if it wasn’t found within 20 years of his work, then his work is just a theory and should be discarded.

    Yes, Creationism remains a theory that does require faith to believe in, but no more so than believing somehow pond scum formed out of nothing and started walking on land.

    But that’s not what this is about. There are many other things that form part of Family First policy that would go a long way to fix up the messes made by successive government screw ups.

    And Henk won’t let Mount Gambier continue to suffer from being overlooked!

  13. Wayne Stapleton on December 2nd, 2009 10:21 am 13

    Thanks Adam for your comment, I completely agree. As a Christian my self, I find it difficult to support those passionate about creationism. I would like to add that I believe that science revels the working of Gods hand.
    Evolution stand up to the rigor of scientific evaluation and creationism does not. We can be emotional as we like but science is simply a method of evaluating and testing.
    I would like to bring the debate back on topic to say that in reading the FF party line, there seems and under tone of strong right wing views with out directly stating so. This may be a bit sneaky?

  14. H on December 2nd, 2009 10:53 am 14

    Lets be clear about the debate — science can prove that things evolve, adapt to their environment.. But the leaps needed to prove that we evolved from single cell organisms into the complex homo sapiens we are now are mere theory with sketchy manipulation of data to support it.

    As a Christian, I believe the Bible at it’s word, but not blindly. My belief does requrie faith, and I’m not even close to pretending that it is rational and logical. But then, I do not see evolution as rational and logical either.

    Family First, even if this is their policy, like I said earlier.. Just want the opportunity to present a fair, balanced choice of options.. Instead of creating the ill-informed clones the education system has been spitting out for decades now.

  15. Pyrrho on December 2nd, 2009 12:30 pm 15

    Ill informed clones???
    Strangely, i do see evidence that the education system has indeed failed some people. i also see evidence that some folk choose their own brand of ignorance.
    let me put it simply, H.
    There is no balance debate between YEC (young earth creationism) and the theory of evolution by natural selection.
    You say “god did it”.
    science says
    ” Well perhaps, wheres your evidence? Here we have an alternative explanation for how species have arrived here and now, and we have a vast mountain of evidence in the fossil record, geologic record, and genetics.

    To describe YEC as being of equal value as an alternative is like saying that a gram weighs the same as a tonne.

    Did you get a chance to find out what a scientific theory actually is?

    “I do not see evolution as rational and logical either.“
    This is called the “argumentum ad ignorantiam “
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

  16. Craig on January 4th, 2010 10:21 am 16

    Im sorry but obviously Pyrrho has an alternate agenda and is simply looking for a Evolution/Creation debate in a political newspaper article comment page? The reference made to Henk Bruins being somewwhat of an independant would be acurate because the party would be lucky to hold more than a few seats, making him basically independant but with a modest party that can still have some influence, exactly what we need to get things happening in Mt Gambier which has too long been on the back burner. The last thing we need is a Liberal/Labour member who will fall into line with large party dirrection (big city).
    He has hit the nail on the headwith this one.

  17. Pyrrho on January 4th, 2010 12:19 pm 17

    Craig, you might liker to go back and read post number 5.
    You might be happy with someone who wants to be elected to public office who would turn the education clock back to the middle ages, but I certainly am not

We welcome your comments on this story. Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited. We require a working email address - not for publication, but for verification.