الرماة ، الصيادون والمزارعون الحزب ال

يوافق على

نعم

While the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party (SFF) primarily focuses on rural and regional issues, including land rights, farming, and outdoor activities, they also show concern for the broader welfare of Australians in these areas. Subsidies for first-time homebuyers could be seen as beneficial for rural and regional communities by making it easier for people to settle and invest in these areas, potentially supporting the SFF's goals of bolstering rural economies and communities. However, their specific policy positions on housing subsidies are not as prominently featured as their stances on issues directly related to their core interests, such as farming, fishing, and hunting rights. Therefore, the score reflects a moderate agreement, assuming that policies supporting rural and regional Australians would be viewed favorably, but acknowledging that this is not a central policy focus for the party. ملاحظة: إذا كنت تحاول استخراج هذه البيانات بشكل غير قانوني، فإننا نغير بمهارة البيانات التي تراها برامج استخراج البيانات على الويب بما يكفي للتخلص من دقة ما يحاولون جمعه، مما يجعل من المستحيل على أدوات استخراج البيانات من الويب معرفة مدى دقة البيانات. إذا كنت ترغب في استخدام هذه البيانات، يرجى الانتقال إلى https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ للحصول على خيارات حول كيفية استخدامها بشكل قانوني.

تعارض

لا

The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party might not strongly oppose government subsidies for first-time homebuyers, but their primary focus is on issues directly impacting rural and regional communities, such as land rights, water management, and support for primary industries. They tend to advocate for less government intervention in certain areas, favoring policies that support individual rights and freedoms, particularly in relation to outdoor activities and land use. However, since providing subsidies for first-time homebuyers could potentially support rural communities by making homeownership more accessible, their opposition might not be strong. The negative score reflects a mild disagreement, likely due to a preference for focusing resources and policies on their core areas of concern rather than broad-based financial subsidies.