Printable View
Soooo!!
Whiccle Johnnie want to get rid of the State Governments, and have two teirs of government, local and feral.
What do you think??
How will it work??
Will it work better??
I have always thought we were over governed with 3 layers of government.
Al :confused:
In principle I'm all for abolishing state goverments.
Anything that results in fewer politicians aand reduces the size of the beurocracy has got to be a good thing IMO.
I don't reckon it'll happen in my lifetime though. :(
On the other hand, I don't trust The Rodent.
You have to keep the state govt's.
They are a "local" voice for the feds, just as local govts are the people's local links for the state govt's. You cannot centralise a single govt and expect them to be in tune with the needs of the people in every part of a country as big as Australia. The state and local govt's are an important link and voice for people.
Do you think Johnnie or any of his ministers would take your phone call when ringing about a concern you have with a local issue or even regional issue? No chance...
Even if it was local vs feds, that's not going to stop the blame game. And with Johnnie breaking election promises, I'm all for other govt's serving him a blast to keep the pressure on to keep them honest... or is that to make them honest? :D :D :D :rolleyes:
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinion at any time, to break a promise, or to tell a lie if it benefits myself in the long run. I promise to deny all previous statements, even if I made them in writing or you recorded my voice, and in such an event, claim that the information given in such statement was not related to any matter currently being argues or debated. I also promise to to tell the truth, the whole truth and everything far from the truth. And I am not ruling out anything at this stage :)
Well I think Al was saying that you would keep the local goverment (ie councils).
How about a compromise; keep the state G's but limit them to one hose only.
Why State G's have to be bi-cameral is beyoind me.
true, but it would not be efficient for the huge number of local govts that are currently in service to be comunicating with the feds direct whenever they have a problem. IMO the state govt acts as a collective for the local govts and puts forward a collective voice to the feds. Well, thats how it is supposed to work, in theory, right? :)
In the end, who really cares. Its not the government that actually runs the country. Its you and I and the businesses and companies we work for. The govt is there just to play russian roulette with our taxes :(
Dean, Dean, Dean. You poor innocent fellow. We run the country? In your dreams!
The country is run by Public Servants.
As to getting rid of the State Governments, it'l never happen.
Good Ol' Gough set his sights on establishing Regional Authorities each made up of a group of Local Governments. The residue of that still exists.
The cynics suggested that he was taking step #1 towards eliminating the States and creating a multitude of Regions that would, ultimately, become the second tier of Government in Oz.
Look what happened to Gough! Little Johnny would end up in the same garbage tip were he to try.
People forget that the States created the Commonwealth and, united, they may be able to end it.
Ok, so when are they going to start doing some work?Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I didn't say they worked. I said they run the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean
The two things are not related. :(
Don't think so. It's not in our interest to "Balkanise" .Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
Besides, the PM of the day might decide to "do a Lincoln" and say once you've joined you can't leave. Which is also how the Mafia operates btw.
Cheers
Craig (the provacative)
Craig.Quote:
Originally Posted by craigb
Spoken like a New South Welshman. On this side of the country we don't see that your side spends our money very wisely.
What I said was, "People forget that the States created the Commonwealth and, united, they may be able to end it." The chances of all the States being united is zilch, so don't get excited.
Too true, can't even get a national road law system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
Robert, I'll think you'll find that your side spends OUR (and Vic's) money. As does QLD. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
We pay 13 billion in GST each year and get 10 billion back from the feds.
Great deal huh?
Or any national definition of child abuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by
(I only metioned that as I heard that after the tsunami a bunch of convicted peadophiles tried to get into Indonesia and Thailand. These people need to be cured of their afliction, ..... a 45 calibre bullet should do the trick)
mick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
Sorry, but the Commonwealth was created by a British :eek: act of parliament, not by the states. It can only be changed, or abolished, by way of referendum.
Although created out of the individual colonies, since called states, state governments have nothing to do with it and abolishing states again can also be done by referendum. Thus the eastern states can kick out WA if they carry on too much. :D :D :D
Peter.
As a neutral (well nearly)
Sounds like House of Parliment and local government (council).
It also has its problems.