Pirate Congress 2012 Motions

= Published Motions = The Congress booklet contains the motions that will be raised at this Congress. If you wish to raise a motion that isn't in this booklet, inform Brendan.

= Draft Motions = Below are the proposed motions for the Pirate Congress 2012.

Motion 1: Platform Revision 2012
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To amend the platform by replacing it with the presented revision

Explanation
Can be found on the Draft Platform 2012 Revision talk page.

Motion 2: Disclosure of political donations
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To add to the platform, under the section "transparency," the following:

"Political donations

Representatives elected to all levels of government should disclose all gifts and donations. Candidates and political parties should also disclose all donations. The current system involves accessing PDFs that are often hand written from Government websites. These are not easily searchable, and with modern technology there is no reason why representatives should not input this information into a database immediately. Electoral Commissions should collate the information in a searchable database, accessible online and at all Electoral Commission offices by the general public."

Explanation
The current system involves accessing PDFs that are often hand written from Government websites. These are not easily searchable, and with modern technology there is no reason why representatives should not input this information into a database immediately. This makes it considerably easier for citizens to access information on gifts and donations, such as Village Roadshow's gift to Tony Abbot of a DVD package worth an undisclosed amount.

Motion 3: Offer to host 2014 PPI GA in Sydney
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To offer to host the 2014 Pirate Parties International General Assembly in Sydney if motion "Withdrawal from PPI" fails.

Explanation
The last two General Assemblies have been a shambles from the perspective of many, particularly the non-European and remote delegates. While it is comparatively affordable and convenient for European delegates to meet regularly, that luxury does not exist for most of the non-European Pirate Parties, who must remotely participate at inconvenient hours and with a general lack of consideration. Pirate Party Australia has demonstrated, even with technical disadvantages, that good management of Conferences can yield successful results and an enjoyable experience. PPI is meant to foster relations between Parties and their members – currently it does not adequately achieve this. Strict bureaucratic conventions and disregard for remote delegates has frustrated many. If Australia were to host the 2014 General Assembly it would show the parties who must participate remotely how difficult it has been for us, and establish PPAU's voice as a provider of solutions within the movement.

Motion 4: Unrestricted Format Shifting
Put by: Brendan Molloy & Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To add to the platform, after "No Digital Rights Management," the following section:

"Unrestricted Format Shifting

Accessibility of content is recognised as being of great importance. However, those with impaired abilities to access content are often left behind.

To uphold the principle of "Equitable Access to Culture, Information and Knowledge," to address the ‘book famine’ experienced by visually impaired and print-disabled people, and for the convenience of consumers no restrictions should be placed on the following:
 * Technological format-shifting, whether physical or digital;
 * Translation into another language; and/or
 * Adaptation for the blind, deaf or similarly impaired, including braille translation, transcription of speech, or creation of spoken books, in circumstances where no financial or commercial gain is derived, or for educational purposes."

This will not remove the ability for right's holders to capitalise on translations and other delivery methods, but closes the gap that exists between original content and accessible forms for those at a physical and/or linguistic disadvantage, and works in line with the no-DRM section of our platform.

Explanation
Accessibility of content is recognised as being of great importance. However, those with impaired abilities to access content are often left behind. This motion further establishes the principle of equitable access to culture, information and knowledge by removing limits that prevent access to the same content across an unlimited number of devices or mediums, languages and forms of communication. This does not remove the ability for right's holders to capitalise on translations and other delivery methods, but closes the gap that exists between original content and its accessible forms for those at a physical and/or linguistic disadvantage, and works in tandem with the no-DRM section.

Motion 5: Periodic return of copyright ownership to original creators
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Periodic return of copyright ownership to original creators.

Copyright ownership should return back to creator after 1 (one) year, within the period of the temporary protections afforded by copyright."

Explanation
The independent creators had long suffered at the hands of companies due to an oversupply of numerous ideas that outstrips demand. This had allowed limited distributors to cherry-pick and demand transfer of copyright ownership in exchange for minuscule payments as compensation touting the need for creators to have a reputation 'to get anywhere'.

After 1 (one) year, it is expected that creators will be able to command bigger cut as compensation for popular works and thus, inspire more creators to publicly deliver works due to the expectation of more appropriate and fair level of compensation from interested distributors. Otherwise, creators are discouraged from independent creation of works if it's believed that they will suffer perpetual loss of copyright ownership in exchange for a minuscule payment.

Personally, this policy has very big implications that it empowers the creators over Hollywood and similar monopolising groups. Especially as some industries are merging lately. So it's a good solid policy to the nay-sayers that say every PPAU policy is to destroy creators.

More explanation can be found here.

Motion 6: Non-Commercial Patent Infringement
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, after "Patent Reform," the following section:

"Non-Commercial Patent Infringement.

Decriminalisation of non-commercial patent infringement for non-commercial use."

Explanation
We are entering an era where creating tangible objects on demand in our very own home is slowly becoming a reality. Therefore we need to strongly ensure the 'right to participation in cultural life and to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications' is upheld while not infringing on the commercial rights of patent holders [Article 27, Universal Declaration of Human Rights].

The ability to create tangible items on demand is manifesting itself in 3D printers that can print physical objects. This may, in the near future, allow for the ability to create toys, hats, pills, food, bones and even cars vastly more cheaper. There is also the possibility of self-replication such as the RepRap project. It's important to give explicit protection to the people against vexatious litigation or disproportionate enforcement that may, sometime in the future, attempt to restrict development of their patents for private, non-commercial use in the form of restricting materials, declaring or implying such printers as devices for patent infringement, and as a reason for stricter enforcement (Internet filter, crippling unenforceable fines), et al [Article 30, Universal Declaration of Human Rights].

An exception was granted for research and experimental purposes regarding non-commercial use under the Patents Act 1990. However, I do not believe it goes far enough because individuals printing for their own personal use are still vulnerable to disproportionate enforcement and litigious responses that equate commercial infringement with non-commercial infringement.

I think this means relevant amendments are required to decriminalise non-commercial use of patents, and legislation must be enacted to prevent violations of the rights of the people.

More explanation can be found here.

Motion 7: Accelerating 3D Printer Technology Research
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, after "Research," the following section:

"Accelerating 3D Printer Technology Research

Government research into the use of 3D printers due to the great potential for people."

Explanation
Due to Australia's abundant resources, isolation and increasing amount of companies moving manufacturing offshore; people are increasingly considering other options for speedier and cheaper options as part of globalisation. 3D Printers. 3D printers create tangible physical objects with the quality and quantity dependent on printer and materials. The technology is becoming increasingly cheaper with the potential being realised everyday in medical, manufacturing, building, and even for hobbyists. We predict in the near future that there will be a demand for print-on-demand 3D printers to create art, cars, rare replacement parts, bones, etc. This can reduce dependence of some overseas imports, reduce most pollution to the 3D printer, allow new small manufacturing businesses to create custom products, and more.

A metaphor would be that 3D Printers are like computers in the last century; they are expensive and impractical in some aspects but over time have become a household and even a handheld device. It's acknowledged that there are some limitations to this metaphor but it mostly holds true that 3D Printer costs can only go down and the potential goes up.

I personally hope that due to government research, it would lead to much higher quality and cheaper 3D printers.

More explanation on 3D Printer motions can be found here.

Motion 8: Encouraging Tangible Object Creativity with 3D Printers
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, after "Education," the following section:

"Encouraging Tangible Object Creativity with 3D Printers

Every school to have a 3D printer in order to foster creativity and invest in potential future jobs in industrial and personal use of 3D printers."

Explanation
3D Printers create tangible physical objects with the quality and quantity dependent on printer and materials. The technology is becoming increasingly popular with the potential realised in industries and hobbyists. I predict in the near future that there will be a demand for print-on-demand 3D printers to create glasses, cars, musical instruments, bones, etc. Due to the demand, the young generation would have a huge benefit from being accustomed to creating tangible objects.

Some predicted job roles are; 3D Printer support, 3D Printer developer, 3D Printer designer.

I personally hope that due to youth's knowledge and ability to create tangible objects, it would lead to more benefit to the population in cheaper costs, more businesses, more jobs and more self-sustaining economy. However, this involves touching the education category to which there is a very passionate voter base. I do believe that having minor goals in education is far better than having a full policy for education, thus allowing flexibility in political negotiation.

More explanation on 3D Printer motions can be found here.

Motion 9: Exception of intellectual property infringement within extradition treaties
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Exception of intellectual property infringement within extradition treaties.

No person on Australian territory should be subject to extradition regarding intellectual property infringement for alleged acts committed on Australian territory or outside of the participatory countries."

Explanation
Recent changes to extradition law made it that crimes with a penalty of at least one year of jail, combined with stiffer intellectual property penalties had made it scary to be legally taken away to another country.

Already, other countries – notably the United States – have broad and overbearing intellectual property legislation, and it is inappropriate for extradition to occur when, compared to other crimes, intellectual property infringement is by no means a serious concern or threat to society due to lack of credible losses or distinct violation of human rights. There are also multiple (double) jeopardy issues, as foreign parties can go through not only the Australian legal system but also other foreign legal systems for similar and disproportionate crippling penalties. The current extradition process allowing extradition for intellectual property infringement harms altruistic enjoyment of culture, investor confidence and has further ramifications. To this end, we demand the Australian government to add this provision, and force all foreign parties to pursue alleged infringers within our own legal system.

Personally, there's a concern that what's not prosecuted easily in Australia, is prosecuted heavily in USA.

More explanation on extradition treaties can be found here.

Motion 10: Extradition Exception for Significant Local Actions
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform the following section:

"Extradition Exception for Significant Local Actions

No one shall be extradited from Australian territory unless there is reasonable grounds for suspicion that they have significantly committed an act under another nation's jurisdiction that would be illegal under Australian Law."

Explanation
Foreign parties are free to prosecute Australian citizens for alleged acts committed on Australian territory, but only through the Australian legal system. This includes acts committed remotely, such as intellectual property infringement via the Internet, where the accused may not necessarily have set foot on foreign territory. A prominent example is the Hew Raymond Griffiths case where the Australian had been extradited to USA despite never setting foot in USA for non serious crimes.

It's asinine that a domain name is grounds for jurisdiction.

More explanation on extradition treaties can be found here.

Motion 11: Adding section "Foreign Policy"
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To place the platform amendment motions "Exception of intellectual property infringement within extradition treaties" and "Extradition Exception for Significant Local Actions" under a new category titled "Foreign Policy" in the Draft Platform if passed.

Explanation
These seem to fit more appropriately into a "Foreign Policy" section of the platform, which could be expanded in future as we appear to be moving into that area.

Motion 12: Government-funded public domain torrent tracker
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Government-funded public domain torrent tracker.

A government-funded torrent host and tracker of public domain works, especially Australian public domain works would take advantage of the robust and ease of distribution technology."

Explanation
This scheme would;
 * Provide the public with the benefits of copyright lapses as with the original intent to give a temporary monopoly to foster creativity and innovation.
 * Prevent works of art from being lost by being an extensive decentralised repository of all Australian works.
 * Reduce dependency on intellectual property licences, potential infringement, etc, by giving researchers, educators and students a free, unconditional and authoritative source of works to copy, use and build upon.
 * Stop misconceptions about bit torrent as an evil/hacker/piracy tool.

Where I hope the funding comes from? The schools' copyright licences, reducing costs of education. I also hope it raises concerns that with the increasing length of copyright, available works are becoming far out of date.

Motion 13: Scaling penalty system
Put by: Joakal

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Scaling penalty system

A sliding income-based penalty system (Day-fines) to replace the fixed penalty units system."

Explanation
It is believed that high socio-economic statuses should be discouraged from risky criminal activity with a sliding income-based penalty system (Day-fines) to replace the fixed penalty units system that's biased towards those with a high amount of disposal income. Especially for dangerous behaviour. By equally deterring people from risky activities and opportunities over those with low socio-economic backgrounds, they would stand to equally comply with the law along with other productive members of society. Any such 'revenue' from fines would go towards ensuring everyone has full legal representation, especially those of low socio-economic backgrounds; allaying public's 'tall-poppy syndrome' and aggression towards those with high-income backgrounds in the justice system.

As well, those of lower socio-economic backgrounds would be punished with less disproportionate fixed fines that would have a more significant burden that makes them unlikely to be productive. It may in fact cause several net-negative economic issues as a result of prison terms for inability to pay fines that has domino effect of loss of employment. Thus, the day-fine would be more equitably fair yet would still act as a deterrent.

It's noted, that repeat offenders would still suffer more punishment that can lead to jail terms. Rich or poor.

Personally, it's also a good policy to break several beliefs: "PPAU wants everything for free." "PPAU is a libertarian party."

More explanation can be found here.

Motion 14: Extraordinary National Congress
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To hold an extraordinary National Congress before January 1, 2013, primarily for the purposes of pre-selection of Candidates for Election to Federal Parliament, in line with the Party Constitution.

Explanation
There is likely to be a federal election at the end of 2013. It would be appropriate to have a National Congress before January 1, 2013, to determine our candidates for these elections, as any later would be cutting things a bit fine. This provides about 9 or 10 months before the elections.

Motion 15: Artistic Quotation Rights
Put by: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer

Motion
To add to the platform, under "Free Culture and Copyright Reform," the following:

"Artistic quotation rights:

Today’s ever more restrictive copyright legislation and practice is a major obstacle to musicians, film makers, and other artists who want to create new works by reusing parts of existing works. We want to change this by introducing clear exceptions to allow remixes and parodies, as well as quotation rights for sound and audiovisual material (including musical compositions and theatrical scripts) modelled after the quotation rights that already exist for text.

(Adapted from | Greens/EFA position paper: "Creation and Copyright in the Digital Era, 2011")

Explanation
Appropriation and sampling of previous artists works has always been a force that drives culture. From folk to hip-hop, art house to Disney, the reuse of previous cultural works has been widely accepted. However, the licensing procedure for using these works is needlessly complex. This motion aims to provide all artists with quotation rights, bringing the practice into line with text.

Motion 16: Support for Fibre-to-the-Home Infrastructure Projects
Put by: Brendan Molloy

Motion is not in final form -- still being developed.

Motion
Add to the Draft Platform the following section:

"Support for Fibre-to-the-Home Infrastructure Projects

The current copper network is not sufficient to meet the requirements of a growing digital economy. A fibre-to-the-home infrastructure project that connects the majority of Australians to a fibre network is fundamental to the creation of a vibrant digital economy in Australia. We as citizens have the right to be competitive in a globalised market, and we should do everything in our power to ensure that we are competitive in the growing digital economy."

Explanation
The current copper network in Australia was installed over 50 years ago and is reaching its end of life. A Fibre-to-the-Home network is the most economically viable and technologically future proofed solution. It will replace the existing copper infrastructure and will be capable of delivering voice, data and multimedia services over a single cable. Fibre based communication systems can be upgraded with minimal cost and are immune to many of the flaws which affect traditional copper based networks.

Alternate proposals for 4G LTE cellular networks to provide internet access to households are not economically or technically feasible. It does not concurrently solve the need for significant investment to replace existing (copper) infrastructure, nor does it provide a level of service which equals or exceeds that currently available. Wireless based systems are extremely costly to upgrade and attainable speeds are largely dependent upon local atmospheric conditions and population density.

Motion 17: Voting Method
Put by: Brendan Molloy

Motion
Amend Article 8, section "Election", paragraph 5 ("The method for voting by Members at the National Congress will be optional preferential voting.") to:


 * OPTION 1: (No change)
 * OPTION 2: The method for voting by Members at the National Congress will be optional Schulze method preferential voting.
 * OPTION 3: The method for voting by Members at the National Congress will be optional preferential voting, with the method determined by motion at the National Congress.

Explanation
In previous years, we have always used Schulze method for our preferential voting even though currently the Constitution is vague on which specific method to use for counting the ballots. The motion will therefore hopefully resolve the ambiguity by specifying which method to use, or requiring a motion each Congress to determine the method.

I believe Option 2 is preferable as the National Council is tasked with ensuring the electoral systems are prepared in time for congress, and to determine the voting system at the Congress limits the potential options in some ways.

Motion 18: Mandatory Privacy Breach Disclosure and Legislative Protection
Put by: Brendan Molloy

Motion is not in final form -- still being developed.

Add to the Draft Platform the following section:

Something along the lines of if you lose my data that you were meant to keep secure, you're in trouble. There should be an audit, a report into security mechanisms and a fine handed down for unreasonable and insane breaches.

Motion 19: Constitutional Amendment: Pre-selection of Candidates for Federal Election
Put By: Simon Frew

Motion to Amend Article 5 of the Constitution, under the heading Pre-selection of candidates for Federal Election to add:

6. All members wishing to run as candidates for Pirate Party Australia must sign a declaration stating:

I hereby pledge to advance and adhere to the platform and ideals of Pirate Party Australia, both during the election campaign and upon election to parliament.

Explanation
The aim of this motion is to ensure any elected candidates of Pirate Party Australia will represent our politics and adhere to our platform whilst serving in parliament.

Motion 20: Approach to the PPI Situation
Put by: Simon Frew

Motion: Part 1.
The National Congress of Pirate Party Australia condemns the incompetent running of the 2012 PPI General Assembly for the following reasons:

1. Poor treatment of remote delegates. An International organisation should be able to facilitate remote participation. Delegates were ignored and one attendee assigned to helping facilitate the delegates was heard saying 'I don't care about these remote participation guys'. As we are based on the opposite side of the world and it is extremely difficult to send a delegate in person this is a serious failure that makes us effectively excluded from the process.

2. Most of the Assembly was tied down with procedural matters and very few motions were heard. The GA is the body that is delegated to decide on International issues of the Pirate Parties, motions put to the GA must be heard.

Motion: Part 2.
Recognising an inequality of participation between physical and remote delegates, Pirate Party Australia moves that the 2014 PPI GA be held entirely in cyberspace. Pirate Party Australia will volunteer to provide the technical facilities, logistical support and a competent Chair. Being both a Continent and a Country we have extensive experience in facilitating online discussions that could benefit the entire International.

Explanation:
For background to the last Pirate Party International General Assembly (PPI GA) see the statement by: Mozart Olbrycht Palmer

The running of the last two PPI GAs have been half-arsed and things definitely need to improve. There has been some discussion about whether we should continue to participate in the International or not. This motion is aimed to both raise our concerns and propose a solution to the problem. Withdrawing without attempting to change the course of the PPI is a cop out. We will be associated with Pirate Parties around the world regardless of whether we are part of the PPI or not through sharing our names and all representing the same fundamental movement. Therefore I believe our best course it to first attempt to reform the International before we give up on it completely.

The role of the PPI is to facilitate discussion and collaboration between the various Nations' Parties, both to share common experiences and to help combat global issues (ACTA being a good example). I see its role within the Pirate movement as only information sharing and co-ordinated support. It carries out this function adequately and doesn't inhibit any activity we undertake. It is not aiming to act as a UN of Pirate Parties or even to speak on behalf of the various Pirate Parties that take part in it.

It seems from my position, that the primary issue for the last two PPI GA's has been a dysfunctional Chair. Whoever runs the meetings needs to facilitate decision making, not endless debate about procedure. That said, I motion that we condemn the running of the last PPI GA because it needs to function better and to actually facilitate participation for parties outside of Western and Central Europe.

There was a proposal floated to host a PPI GA in Australia. I believe that rather than attempting to host it in Australia itself, we use our experience in running Congresses with good remote participation to facilitate the 2014 GA being held entirely online. Holding a physical Congress in Australia makes attendance difficult for all non-Australian parties in both distance to travel to participate and the relative time of day (Our day is the middle of the European night). This would make the 2014 GA even more exclusive than holding it in Europe.

Motion 21: Appointment of Public Officer
Put by: Rodney Serkowski

As per the requirements of the Incorporated Associations Act we are to appoint a public officer. The previous public officer, Paul Templeton, is no longer fulfilling those obligations. We need to appoint a new public officer (Form A9), and possibly submit financial reports (Form A12) for the previous 2 financial years. The situation regarding the Association need to be resolved ASAP.

Motion 22: That Pirate Party Australia apply for membership in ACCAN
Put by: Rodney Serkowski

According to the ACCAN Constitution we may be eligible for Associate/Non Voting Membership. ACCAN is participating in AGD arranged talks regarding the enforcement of copyright. Membership for our organisation would cost $27.50

Motion 23: Any Australian Government Electronic Voting Systems should be required to be open sourced
Put by: AndrewD

Motion
To add to the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Electronic Voting systems must be open source.

Any electronic voting system used in Australian government elections or referendums should have a strict requirement that the specifications and source code implementations must be open source."

Explanation
This scheme would;
 * Provide the possibility of an electronic equivalent of election scrutineers.
 * For scrutineers to be able to assess the validity of the counting of votes, they must have complete visibility of the manner in which the process works.
 * In the case of electronic voting, making the source code available is the only way to provide that visibility.
 * The business interests of electronic voting companies must remain a secondary consideration.
 * Follow best security practices.
 * Security by obscurity has long been considered an invalid practice.

Motion 24: Update to the Network Neutrality section of the Draft Platform
Put by: AndrewD

Motion
To update in the Draft Platform, the following section:

"Net Neutrality"

Remove the postal service analogy. The section on Net Neutrality uses the postal service as an analogy. The analogy is weak. The postal service does actually allow you to set the priority of your mail, even if they don't do it automatically based on content, they do do it based on how much you paid and what's stamped on the outside as a consequence. Rather than making analogies to old analog services like mail, we should just be focusing on the anti-competitive nature of a non-neutral internet.

Motion 25: Removal of Treaty Making Power from the Executive, Ensuring Parliamentary Oversight and Procedural Transparency
Put By: Rodney Serkowski

This is in draft stage, however s61 empowers the Executive with the authority to unilaterally commit Australia to treaties. Although there have been some reform to this process it remains largely undemocratic. The constitution should be amended to ensure that accession or signing any international instrument or treaty requires the oversight and consent of the Parliament. To be explained further.

Motion 26: Consumer Protection
Put by: David Crafti

Add a Consumer Protection section to the Draft Platform.

Content to put under the heading will be proposed in following motions.

Motion 27: Move the DRM section of the Draft Platform under Consumer Protection
Put by: David Crafti

Rework the existing DRM section as necessary to include DRM under Consumer Protection.

Without limiting our support for the repeal of the TPM sections of the Copyright Act, introduce terms as follows:

DRM limits the rights of consumers in order to protect hard-to-secure business models.

Culture can be lost if DRM servers are switched off.

The use of DRM should be strongly discouraged, but it is a decision for each business when formulating their business models.

Despite this, consumers should be able to circumvent DRM to support their rights to format-shift and transfer rights.

This will mean that DRM is unprotected, but it is not up to society to specifically protect a business model that stops a person tinkering with their property.

In order to balance the concerns of businesses and consumers, any DRM in use should automatically unlock after a fixed term of 5 years.

Motion 28: National IP Trust
Put by: David Crafti

Add to the Draft Platform a section under Consumer Protection called National IP Trust, as follows:

Copyright lasts for an extremely long time.

While patents, books and paintings, for example, require disclosure of the totality of the creative work, some copyrighted works, such as software are only available as an expression of the work itself, i.e. as a compiled program, without source code.

When works are abandoned or copyright elapses, it is very easy for society to lose access to creative works.

As such, Pirate Party Australia supports the creation of a National IP Trust.

The Trust would have the authority to securely store the source of creative works deemed to be of value for Australia, in order to ensure that these works can never be lost once they should pass into the public domain, and also ensures that DRM can be unlocked where necessary.

Works should be handed over if selected by the trust, according to rules to be developed, and at least on expiration of copyright or on bankruptcy of the owner of the work.

Motion 29: Freedom of Information Exemptions
Put by: David Crafti

Add the following to the Draft Platform under the Transparency section:

Pirate Party Australia does not support exemptions from Freedom of Information based solely on a connection to security or intelligence agencies.

Any exemptions to FOI legislation should be determined on a case-by-case basis, accounting for the risk of a particular document being disclosed to the public, and any particular exemption should be for a strictly limited time.

Motion 30: Whistleblower Protection
Put by: David Crafti

Add the following to the Draft Platform under the Transparency section:

Pirate Party Australia supports enactment of Whistleblower Protection legislation at the Commonwealth level, which allows for and encourages disclosure of evidence of corruption to authorities as well as bona fide disclosure to the media, and protects whistleblowers from reprisals for doing so.